WQ0007103_Staff Report_20210212

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
,s State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: Vivien Zhong
From: Holley Snider & Helen Perez
Wilmington Regional Office
Application No.: WQ0007103
Facility name: Sound of the Sea Condominiums
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 gpplicable.
L GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a. Date of site visit: 02/10/2021
b. Site visit conducted by: Holey Snider & Helen Perez
c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No
d. Person contacted: Don O'Mara and their contact information: 252) 725 - 2129 ext.
e. Driving directions: From the intersection of Highway 24 and Highway 58, proceed south on Highway 58 across
the Bogue Banks bridge to Emerald Isle, At the round -about exit right onto Mallard Drive. At the stop sign
turn left onto Reed Drive. The gated entrance is located approximately 300 feet on the right side of the road.
2. Discharge Point(s): N/A
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: 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. 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? ❑ 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:
4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ 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/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: Stanley E. Buck III Certificate #: 993396 Backup ORC: Don O'Mara Certificate 9:7904
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:
a 40,000 gallon per day (GPD) wastewater collection, treatment and high -rate infiltration facility consisting
of:
approximately 1,810 linear feet (LF) of 8-inch gravity sewer; approximately 90 LF of 10-inch gravity
sewer; a pump station with dual 80 gallon per minute (GPM) pumps, high water alarms and standby power
provided by facility generator; approximately 30 LF of 6-inch force main; and all associated piping, valves,
controls and appurtenances;
a 10,098 gallon aerated flow equalization basin with two 30 GPM pumps and served by a 22 cubic foot per
minute (CFM) blower; a steel flow splitter box diverting flow to the existing Fluidyne SBR plant or to; a
2,693 gallon anoxic basin with a 1.5 horsepower (hp) mixer; a 20,196 gallon aeration basin with a 25 GPM
recycle pump and served by (2) two 100 CFM blowers; a clarifier; a 1,466 gallon pre- filter tank receiving
flow from the aforementioned clarifier and the Fluidyne SBR effluent; two muni-disk fabric tertiary filter
systems; a tablet chlorinator; a 1,907 gallon chlorine contact basin; an ultrasonic effluent flow meter; a 6,283
gallon effluent dosing tank with two 76 GPM dosing pumps; a 5,026 gallon digester tank with a 1.5 hp
mixer; and all associated piping, valves, controls and appurtenances; and
a 40,000 GPD Fluidyne ISAMTM sequencing batch reactor (SBR) treatment plant consisting of: a
,10,5 00gallon covered trash trap/sludge disposal anaerobic chamber; a 10,500-gallon SAMTM reactor with
two 690 GPMjet motive pumps and a 1 hp mixer; a 21,000 gallon SBR chamber with a 1 hp mixer; a 5,600
gallon post-SBR equalization/effluent tank with two 1 hp effluent pumps; an automatically activated
facility emergency power generator; two 62 foot diameter high rate infiltration units; and all associated
piping, valves, controls and appurtenances;
to serve the Sound of the Sea Condominiums WWTF,
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
Proposed flow: N/A
Current permitted flow: 40,000 GPD
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: MW #5 and MW 96 are
both located within the compliance boundary. MW#5 is located near the property boundary and the adjacent
SFR septic system. MW#6 is located within the review boundary and adjacent to distribution field.
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: See highlighted changes in description above
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain: Well information was not located. Abandonment of MW#1 has not been completed.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please complete the followina (expand table if necessarv):
Monitoring Well
Latitude
Longitude
C „
C rr
C „
C rr
C „
C rr
C „
C rr
C „
C rr
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:
NDMR/NDAR Monitoring:
10-12/2016 Enforcement for Nitrate exceedance, 2/2016 Enforcement for Nitrate exceedance, 6/2017 NOV for
Nitrate exceedance.
GW59 Monitoring:
MW#2 - 2018 one Nitrate, one TDS exceedance.
MW#4 — 2016 one TDS, 2017 one Nitrate exceedance.
MW#5 — 2016 thru 2018 six Nitrate exceedances.
MW#6 — 2017 one Nitrate and one TDs exceedance, 2018 one Chloride and one TDS exceedance, 2020 one
Nitrate exceedance.
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.)
See #12
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: N/A
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
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 or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request:
Item
Reason
Updated facility map
Submitted site plan does not properly identify the location of the existing
digester tank. The spray fields should be identified and labeled.
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
Ensured compliance with
MW#6 is located within the review boundary and is located immediately
Condition #10 — relocate
adjacent to the existing spray field 91 which has the potential to influence the
MW#6
MW 96.
The existing location of MW#5 has the potential for offsite influence from the
Relocate MW#5
adjacent septic systems and likely is not representative of the groundwater
influenced by the WWTP operations.
MW #1 is no longer active
MW#1 was removed from the permit monitoring requirements on or about 2010
nor part of the reporting
and has yet to be abandoned. Abandonment should be completed by a certified
requirements.
well driller.
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: 100 I efE SNI�W- _QacuSinned by'
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: 02/11 /2021
E3ABA14AC7DC434...
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 6

DocuSign Envelope ID: 444BBBE4-052D-4EDC-87F3-21481485758A
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
A facili . compliance inspection of the Sound of the Sea Condominiums WWTF was conducted on February 10, 2021
in response to a request to renew the permit. The purpose of the evaluation was to verify that the facili . is operating
in compliance with the conditions and limitations specified in Permit W00007103. Don Omara and Karrie Omara
were present duringthe he inspection.
This facility consists of two separate treatment systems, an older 40,000 gpd Fluidyne Integrated Surge Anoxic Mix
SBR and a newer (2010-2011) 20,000gpd BNR extended aeration plant. The effluent from the SBR mixes with the
flow from the 20,000gpd BNR plant clarifier in a prefilter tank located at the 20,000 gpd BNR plant. From this tank,
it continues to the tertiary filters, chlorinator, contact chamber and then to effluent dosing tank. The 20,000 gpd BNR
plant clarifier is wasted to the SBR anerobic chamber. From this chamber, the sludge moves through a subterranean 4-
inch pipe to the lime stabilization tank with mixer located near the entrance gate to the facility. Barnes Environmental
applies lime and removes the sludge —3 times in summer and every few months in the winter. Processed wastewater
is applied to two (2) high -rate infiltration spray fields located onsite.
Staff indicated that there are design issues with the 20,000gpd BNR extended aeration plant. The aeration tank
diffuser drop valves are located on the exterior chamber wall and cannot be accessed from the plant walkway
additionally the anoxic basin appears to be small in size. Design flaws have resulted in the Operator taking initiative
and voluntary corrective action to make functional adjustments onsite such as, moving the flow splitter box for
accessibility and maintenance from the BNR plant walkway, relocation of the pump station shutoff valves for
accessibly and maintenance, installation of DO control for aeration, replacement of the aging pump station and
installation of a pump to move sludge into the lime stabilization tank. The Sound of Sea HOA has recently
established a capital improvement plan and fund source for maintenance and improvements.
DWR staff have reviewed the monitoring reports and existing locations of MW 95 and #6. DWR staff inspection staff
have recommended that MW#6 be abandoned and relocated outside of the review boundary. DWR staff have also
recommended that MW#5 be abandoned and relocated to an area that minimizes the potential for offsite influence
from adjacent septic systems. These recommendations are based on the proximity and potential for the wells to be
influenced by sources that are not representative of the existing WWTP operations.
The facili . is compliant with non-dischargepermit W00007103.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 6 of 6