WQ0013769_Staff Report_20220622

DocuSign Envelope ID: 412CF966-48E2-4753-92F4-8852D76C505C
Environmental
Quality
State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: Leah Parente
From: Molly Nicholson
Raleigh Regional Office
Application No.: WQ0013769
Facility Name: 320 Henderson
Tanyard Rd. SFR
County: Chatham
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: 05/25/2022
b. Site visit conducted by: Molly Nicholson, Jane Bernard, and Jim Westcott
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No
d. Person contacted: Kamsky Kilafwasru and their contact information: (919) 548 - 8288 ext.
e. Driving directions:
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
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? n Yes n No n N/A
If no, please explain:
4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? n Yes n No n N/A
If no, please explain:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? n Yes n No n N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 412CF966-48E2-4753-92F4-8852D76C505C
6. Are the proposed application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) acceptable? n Yes n No n N/A
If no, please explain:
7. Are there any setback conflicts for proposed treatment, storage, and disposal sites? n Yes or n No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
8. Is the proposed or existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? n Yes n 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? n Yes n No n 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 Z N/A
ORC: Certificate #: Backup ORC: Certificate #:
2. Are the design, maintenance, and operation of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal
system? ® Yes or n No
If no, please explain:
Description of existing facilities: 1,000 gallon baffled septic tank; 396 square foot unvented subsurface sand filter;
2,000 gallon storage/pump tank with a submersible pump; tablet chlorinator; 0.31 acre spray irrigation area with 3
full -circle sprinklers; and all associated piping, valves, controls, and appurtenances.
Proposed flow:
Current permitted flow: 360 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 n 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.)? n Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ® Yes or n No
If no, please explain:
6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ® Yes or n No
If no, please explain:
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? n Yes n 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 n No
If no, please explain:
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? n Yes n No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 412CF966-48E2-4753-92F4-8852D76C505C
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
U
I
II
C
I
II
O
I
II
C
I
II
O
I
II
C
I
II
O
I
II
C
I
II
O
I
II
C
I
II
12. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
NA
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review:
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? n Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
14. Check all that apply:
Z No compliance issues n Current enforcement action(s) n Currently under JOC
n Notice(s) of violation n Currently under SOC n 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? n Yes n No Z N/A
If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
n Yes ®No n N/A
If yes, please explain:
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters:
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 412CF966-48E2-4753-92F4-8852D76C505C
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? n 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:
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:
Condition
Reason
5. Recommendation: n Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
n Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
n Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
® Issue
n Deny (Please state reasons: )
.-DocuSigned by:
6. Signature of report preparer:
g4 �D2DD2DCEB8478
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: 6/22/2022
,-DocuSigned by:
�/aan t SSa f. 6ll.anAA.d,
'-B2916E6AB32144F..
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14
Page 4 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 412CF966-48E2-4753-92F4-8852D76C505C
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
Prior to conducting this inspection, there was no correct contact information for the permittees. The new contact
information for Kamsky is [phone] and [e-mail].
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5