The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0002071_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20200903ROY COOPER r(Nernor MICHAEL S. REGAN Secretary S. DANIEL SMITH Dirxfor Kevin Wesley Mullineaux Pamlico Packing Company Inc PO Box 317 Havelock, NC 28532 NORTH CAROLINA Environmental Quality September 08, 2020 SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection Report Pamlico Packing Company NPDES WW Permit No. NC0002071 Pamlico County Dear Mr. Mullineaux The North Carolina Division of Water Resources conducted an inspection of the Pamlico Packing Company on 9/03/2020. This inspection was conducted to verify that the facility is operating in compliance with the conditions and limitations specified in NPDES WW Permit No. NC0002071. The findings and comments noted during this inspection are provided in the enclosed copy of the inspection report entitled "Compliance Inspection Report". There were no significant issues or findings noted during the inspection and therefore, a response to this inspection report is not required. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Paul Mays with the Water Quality Regional Operations Section in the Washington Regional Office at 252-948-3940 or via email at pau1.mays@ncdenr.gov. Sincerely, ra "S Paul Mays, Environmental Specialist I Water Quality Regional Operations Section Washington Regional Office Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ ATTACHMENTS Cc: Laserfiche ww.e.nD E� \I , n 3 F'2^`¢ i f ^l3 v v ' { \3- f1= 5 �.ff¢ .3., 153v ^t $ 3�_�'.3� et.�e. NJ I, <.4ha United States Environmental Protection Agency Form Approved. EPAWashington, D C 20460 OMB No. 2040-0057 Water Compliance Inspection Report Approval expires 8-31-98 Section A. National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS) Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type 1 E 2 IF I 3 I N00002071 11 121 20/09/03 117 18 L 19L G I 201 I 211 I I 1 I I I I I I II U I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II I lJ 166 Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 CA ---------------------- Reserved — ------ — -- 671 I 701 71 I LLJ I 72 nl 731 174 7 I I I I I I I80 L I L� I I Section B: Facility Data Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include Entry Time/Dale Permit Effective Date POTW name and NPDES oermit Number) 09:15AM 20/09/03 19/05/01 Pamlico Packing Company 28 N tat St Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date Vandemere NC 28587 09:45AM 20/09/03 23/05/31 Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number Contacted Kevin Wesley Mullineaux,PO Box 317 Havelock INC 28532//252-222-3828/2522223665 No Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated) Permit 0 Records/Reports 0 Facility Site Review 0 Effluent/Receiving Wate Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary) (See attachment summary) Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date Robert E Bullock DWR/Division of Water Quality/252-948-3924/ Paul M Mays DWRANARO WQ/252-948-3940/ Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Dale EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete. Page# NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type NC0002071 Ill 12I 20/09/03 117 18 ICI Section DSummary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary) Page# Permit: NC0002071 Owner - Facility: Inspection Date: 09/03/2020 Inspection Type: Pamlico Packing Company Compliance Evaluation Permit Yes No NA NE (If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ application? Is the facility as described in the permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ # Are there any special conditions for the permit? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment: Record Keeping Yes No NA NE Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is all required information readily available, complete and current? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Is the chain -of -custody complete? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Dates, times and location of sampling ❑ Name of individual performing the sampling ❑ Results of analysis and calibration ❑ Dates of analysis ❑ Name of person performing analyses ❑ Transported COCs ❑ Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ? ❑ ❑ M ❑ (If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operatc ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ on each shift? Is the ORC visitation log available and current? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification' ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Comment: The facilitv has not discharged since beino damaoed during hurricane Irene in Auaust 2011 eDMR reports continued to be submitted with "no -flow" entered since the last inspection in 2014. The ORC also stated there has been no flow from the facility for 6-8 years at a minimum. The facility has been repaired and is not used to process seafood. Because of its waterfront location it is used only to unload seafood that is trucked off and processed at a different facility. Page# 3 Permit: NC0002071 Owner -Facility: Inspection Date: 09/03/2020 Inspection Type: Pamlico Packing Company Compliance Evaluation Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ IN ❑ Comment: All outfalls were inspected and there were no signs they were being used for anything other than storage. Page# 4