NCG120038_Inspection Report_20210901

Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG120038 Effective: 07/01/21 Expiration: 06/30/26 Owner : Davidson County
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Davidson Co. Solid Waste Fac
County: Davidson 1242 Old Hwy 29
Region: Winston-Salem
Thomasville NC 27360
Contact Person: Steven Sink Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications: SWNC,
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 09/01/2021 Entry Time 09:OOAM
Primary Inspector: Levi Hiatt
Secondary Inspector(s):
Blane Houck
Reason for Inspection: Routine
Permit Inspection Type: Landfill Stormwater Discharge COC
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Exit Time: 11:OOAM
Phone: [phone]
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Page 1 of 5

Permit: NCG120038 Owner - Facility: Davidson County
Inspection Date: 09/01/2021 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
This facility was inspected for compliance on September 1, 2021, by Levi Hiatt and Blane Houck.
Documentation for this facility was reviewed before the inspection. Upon reviewing the documentation, the following was
noted:
The drainage areas for each outfall were not delineated on the map included with the SWPPP and the percentage of
impervious area per drainage area was not shown. Sampling points (possibly outfalls) were shown with a solid black triangle,
but not specifically labeled.
There have been no significant spills within the past three years.
The feasibility study in the SWPPP was a restatement of the permit. A feasibility study should be conducted each year
by analyzing the discharge monitoring data and determining if the current practices are effective. If not, alternate solutions
need to be sought out.
The BMP summary should include a brief description of each BMP implemented throughout the site.
The SPRP should include an inventory and specific locations of spill response materials and equipment The current
locations are too general. There needs to be a description of proper disposal methods for each possible type of spill related
to this facility.
The secondary containment areas need to be added to the inspection list for Good Housekeeping.
The Employee Training section of the SWPPP was a restatement of the permit and there was no evidence to suggest
that facility employees were trained on good housekeeping, how to respond to spills, and how to identify and report illicit
discharges. Training documents were provided from a training session in 2009. It was unclear if this training is provided
annually, and it appeared to have only been applied to a few employees. A training plan needs to be developed so that all
employees are properly trained on good housekeeping, and how to respond to spills and illicit discharges. Furthermore,
annual training for each employee needs to be logged in a master log that is kept with the SWPPP. If there is a need for
specialized training for employees whose duties are specific to the NCG12 Permit for this facility, a program should be kept
on file and those trainings logged as well.
The facility inspection program should include a list of items that need to be inspected and list the time and date of the
inspections next to each item. A schedule should also be developed to ensure that all items are inspected when an
inspection is due.
Some Analytical and Qualitative Monitoring Data were not provided from the 5-year period starting from the current date.
Monitoring records should be kept on file for at least 5-years from the current date.
It should be noted there was not a SWPPP requirement for the NCG12 permit until July 1, 2021. The compliance status for
this facility was not based on current permit requirements, but on the requirements of the previous permit. However, the
above issues in the documentation should be addressed immediately in order to be compliant with the new, current permit.
During the site inspection, all outfalls at the facility were observed. The following issues were noted:
There was dense vegetation in Sediment Basins 1, 2, 3, and 4. The vegetation in these basins should either be removed
or mowed so that it does not greatly affect the capacity of the basins.
The riser in Sediment Basin 2 was clogged with vegetation. This should be removed immediately.
The sparse vegetation around and along the banks of Sediment Basin 5 should be mowed, and the basin reseeded.
Page 2 of 5

Permit: NCG120038 Owner - Facility: Davidson County
Inspection Date: 09/01/2021 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
The top portion of the outfall pipe for Sediment Basin 1 was broken. This pipe should be immediately repaired or
replaced.
Furthermore, riprap should be added around the discharge pipes for Sediment Basins 2, 3, 4, and 5. The outfall for
Sediment Basin 3 was also covered in dense vegetation, which should be removed. Additionally, a stone check dam should
be installed directly downstream of the outfall for Sediment Basin 3 to ensure sediment is not lost off site.
It was also noted that none of the outfalls were labeled. Please install a sign at all outfalls that lists the outfall name and
number.
Please address the above issues within 60-days of receiving this report: a follow-up inspection will need to be conducted. If
the above issues are fixed before the 60-day period is up, please contact us for an inspection.
Additionally, all area draining to the C&D Pond and the C&D New Pond had been stabilized and contained no industrial
activity. The fecal exceedances that seem to be persistent with these basins does not appear to be caused by industrial
activity. There have been at least 3 consecutive non-exceedances of COD and TSS for the outfall associated with the C&D
New Pond. Therefore, the sampling point associated with the C&D New Pond may be removed from the permit. The
sampling point associated with the C&D Pond may be removed in the future, provided there are at least 3 consecutive
non-exceedances of COD and TSS. Contact this office as soon as 3 consecutive non-exceedances have been obtained from
this sampling point. Additionally, both basins must remain functional as part of the erosion control permit and other permits
associated with the landfill. Please continue to maintain both basins.
Page 3 of 5

Permit: NCG120038 Owner - Facility: Davidson County
Inspection Date: 09/01/2021 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
❑
❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
❑ ❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
❑ ❑ ❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
❑
❑ ❑
Comment: Please see the Summary section for comments.
Qualitative Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Comment: Qualitative Monitoring Records provided only go back to October 2018.
Analytical Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Analytical monitoring data was missing from March and September, 2020, as well as January,
February, and July 2021.
Permit and Outfalls Yes No NA NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? ❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division? ❑ ❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑
Comment: A hard coon of the permit and COC was not on site. Permit documentation was not organzied
and kept together.
All outfalls were not observed due to the facilty operatiing under a Representative Outfall
status. However, DEMLR, nor the facility could verify that the facility was granted
Representative Outfall Status. Furthermore, some issues need to be addressed from the
outfalls that were observed. Please see the inspection summary for details.
Page 4 of 5

Permit: NCG120038 Owner - Facility: Davidson County
Inspection Date: 09/01/2021 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Page 5 of 5