WQ0014785_Staff Report_20220201

;s State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0014785
Attn: Chloe Lloyd Facility name: Midway Middle School
From: Tony Honeycutt
Choose an item. Fayetteville Regional Office
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge facilily staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as they are pplicable.
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a. Date of site visit: 01/26/2022
b. Site visit conducted by: Tony Honeycutt
c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No
d. Person contacted: Robert Carroll and their contact information: 910 385 — 6116
e. _Driving Directions: From Fayetteville drive east on Hwy 24 to Roseboro. Turn left onto Hwy 242 and drive to
the intersection with Hwy 421. Turn left and drive approx. 1.50 miles and turn left onto Straw Pond School Rd.
Drive approx. 3.50 miles and the lagoon with drip irrigation field is on the right.
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: 35.167226
Latitude: 35.166275
lagoon)
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
Classification: Sw
River Basin and Subbasin No. 18-68-1-17-4(2)
Longitude:-78.529256 (center of drip Bones)
Longitude:-78.527892 (entrance to pump house and
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Surface water in the area of the spray
field and lagoon flow to Caesar Swamp, which flows to and becomes Little Coharie Creek, which flows to
Great Coharie Creek that connects with Six Runs Creek to form the Black River in southern Sampson
County.
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:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 5

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? ❑ 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: Robert Carroll Certificate #: 26341 Backup ORC: Jason Dickinson Certificate #:1007291
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: Drip Irrigation system with a HDPE lined facultative lagoon.
Proposed flow: 10,000 GPD (.0.01 MGD)
Current permitted flow: 10,000 (0.01 MGD)
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.) n/a
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. The facility utilizes drip irrigation which requires a I00ft.buffer to
residences. The facility design has a 200ft, setback from the residence across Straw Pond School Road.
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit, correct? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain: The zone acreage was corrected last permit cycle.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
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
MW-1
35.166469 °
-78.529318 0
MW-2
35.167715 °
-78.529048 0
o
o
o
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: Review of the GW-59 data indicates no groundwater
violations. The NDMR, NDAR-I, with the floating totals look good. The application rates for the Bermuda are
well below the allowable RYE.
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: n/a
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 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 or Non -Discharge 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:
5.
6
Condition Reason
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
❑7--14A7E697
c(AV ta�tc reasons: )
Signature of report preparer" 4wt �v-�"
- feu igne y:
Signature of regional supervisor: 2/1/2022
Date: 1/28/2022 5189C2D3DD5C42B...
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 5

V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
None
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5