WQ0003281_Staff Report_20210208

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: n NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0003281
Attn: Vivien.Zhong(a,ncdenr.gov Facility name: City of Belmont WWTP
County: Gaston
From: [e-mail]
Mooresville 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: 01-26-2021
b. Site visit conducted by: Maria Schutte
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No
Available in BIMS — no items of concern.
d. Person contacted: Tanya Setzer (WWTP ORC) and their contact information: [phone](WWTP
Office) or [e-mail].
e. Driving directions: Facility address is 298 Parkdale Dr. Belmont: From the MRO travel to I-77S; exit @, 198-
A onto I-1485 S; take exit 12 to Moores Chapel Rd; Follow through loops —1St traffic circle exit 1 to remain on
Moores Chapel Rd. — 2nd traffic circle exit 2 onto Moores Chapel Rd.; turn Right onto Moores Chapel Loop;
then Right onto Hwy 74 W; Left onto Catawba St.; Left onto S. Tenth St'; Left onto Parkdale Dr.; Right onto
Stove Thread Rd to WWTP gate.
2. Discharge Point(s): NA
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: NA
Classification:
River Basin and Sub -basin No.
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
II. PROPOSED FACILITIES: NEW APPLICATIONS
1. Facility Classification: (Please attach completed rating sheet to be attached to issued permit)
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow:
2. Are the new treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal system? n Yes or n 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:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 4

4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? ❑ Yes ❑ No N/A
If no, please explain:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? n Yes n No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain.
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 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:
11. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
III. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
ORC: Dennis Key Certificate #: 15704 Backup ORC: David Key Certificate #: 23629
Backup ORC: Zach Key Certificate #: 27660 MRO staff questions ORC designation, as Dennis Key
has not been on -site during MRO site visits. It is recommended that USBiosolids (former Southern Soil Builders)
designate an appropriate ORC and rename Dennis Key as a Backup.
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: This is a municipality waste residual product stored on -site in above ground
tanks until land applied or hauled for disposal. This is a liquid product with truck loading station located across
driveway from the final storage tank.
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: Historically the City of Belmont land applies a couple times per year on fields under this
permit; however, due to contractor decisions, there was no LA conducted under this permit in 2020. Ms. Setzer
had a copy of the Annual Report for 2020, which show Biosolids were land applied as a source under the
USBiosolids (former Southern Soil Builders) regional class B permit #WQ0037135; And, several truck loads
were hauled by Synagro to a processing facility in South Carolina.
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.)? n Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 4

6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ® No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain: This is a land application permit. Application rates need to be calculated with relevant
sampling results.
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? n Yes or Z 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? n Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? n Yes n No ® N/A
If no, please complete the following (expand table if necessary): I have no records that these MWs exist.
Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
o
I
11
0
l
II
O
I
11
0
l
II
O
I
11
0
l
II
O
I
11
0
l
II
O
I
,,
0
/
II
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: Their residuals records appeared up to date, at the time
of inspection.
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 n 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: ND permit should not result in discharges to surface waters. Typically,
only by spill or run-offfrom over -application (fecal, solids, etc.). There is also a potential that impacted
groundwater could interact with surface water.
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or Z No
If yes, please explain:
2. List any items that you would like the NPDES Unit or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 4

Item
Reason
Potentially an updated
Operator form.
See comments under 111.1. and V.
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
n Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
• Issue
n Deny (Please state reasons: )
6. Signature of report preparer: Maria Schutte February 5th, 2021—DocuSigned by:
Signature of regional supervisor: A4•1 H P+ �
Date: 2.8.21 '- F161 FB69A2D84A3...
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
See item III.1. about proper ORC designation for the residuals contractor so they are meeting 08G requirements. This
is a recurring issue with most residuals contracting companies.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 4