WQ0000485_Staff Report_20220930

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report
September 29, 2022
To: NPDESUnitNon-Discharge UnitApplication No.: WQ0000485
Attn: Anthony Cord Facility name: Darling Ingredients
(Formerly Valley Proteins)

From: Geoff KegleyWilmingtonRegional Office
Note: This form has been adapted from the non-discharge facilitystaff reportto 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: 9/27/22
b.Site visit conducted by: Geoff Kegley
c.Inspection report attached? Yes or No
d.Person contacted: Corey Lanierand their contact information: (910) 289 -2083 ext. 25114
e.Driving directions: From Rose Hill take Hwy 117 north approx. 0.8 miles to Yellow Road, left to end of
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: N/A
III.EXISTING FACILITIES:MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1.Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs)for the facility? Yes NoN/A
ORC: Corey LanierCertificate #:1010055Backup ORC: Luis Fernadez-Vasquez
Certificate #:1011970
2.Arethe design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilitiesadequate for the type of waste and disposal
system? Yes or No
If no, please explain:
Description of existing facilities:0.084MG process wastewater equalization tank, 1.5MG anaerobic reactor tank
(constructed, but not in use), dissolved air flotation unit (DAF), 3.5 MG aeration basin with surface aerators, 1.72
MG complete mixed activated sludge (CMAS) basin with jet aerators, DAF clarifier cell, 0.01 MG DAF clarifier
cell effluent tank which pumps to cooling towers or three irrigation storage lagoons (two 2.9 acre and one 4.65
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14Page 1of 4

acre), which also receive blowdown from cooling towers, scrubbers, and boilers, a 0.35 MGD reverse osmosis
system for internal process wastewater recycle, sodium hypochlorite feed system at irrigation pump station, spray
fields 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 totaling 79 acres, and all associated air supply systems, pumps, and chemical feed
systems.
Proposed flow: N/A
Current permitted flow: 350,000 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.) 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: Residuals are sent to McGill environmental or Sampson County landfill.
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.
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? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain: MW 10A, 11A and 14A appear to be located in the spray field according to the map
provided from the last modification.
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
!!!!!! -!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!! -!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!! -!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!! -!!!!!!
!!!!!
!!!!!! -!!!!!!
!!!!!
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: Sampling results have indicated consistent exceedances
of TDS and chloride limits in samples obtained from monitoring wells MW-10A and MW-14A. Newer site map
indicates these wells are located within the designed sprayfields. Site inspection confirmed that these wells are in
very close proximity to several spray heads. Due to landscape position, property lines, and ditches, it seems
impractical to relocate these wells further away from the sprayfield. Therefore, it was recommended to limit or
discontinue use of several spray irrigation heads that are immediately adjacent to these wells. Please note that this
slightly reduces the designed acreage available for irrigation and associated nutrient/hydraulic loading.
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:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 4

14. Check all that apply:
No compliance issues Current enforcement action(s) Currently under JOC
Notice(s) of violationCurrently under SOCCurrently 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? Recommended limiting or discontinuing
spraying from several irrigation heads immediately adjacent to MWs.
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
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:
Condition Reason

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 4

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:
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date:
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
This review was conducted for a request by the permittee for an ownership/name change. A compliance inspection was
conducted on September 27, 2022, please see BIMS for inspection report and findings. The WiRO has no objections to the
request for this name/ownership change from Valley Proteins, Inc. to Darling Ingredients, Inc.

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 4