WQ0029945_Staff Report_20231024

DocuSign Envelope ID: 05DB6058-B46C-42F1-AE00-15D007A7ED70
State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
October 23, 2023
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0029945
Attn: Zachary Mega Facility name: Summerhouse WWTF
From: Geoff Kegley
Wilmington Regional Office
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge fg acili , 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: 09/28/2023
b. Site visit conducted by: Geoff Kegley
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or ® No
d. Person contacted: Kart' Herndon and their contact information: (910) 650 - 7883 ext.
e. Driving directions:
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: Longitude:
Latitude: Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters:
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:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Pagel of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 05DB6058-B46C-42F1-AE00-15D007A7ED70
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: Kart' Herndon Certificate #:1012918 Backup ORC: Mark Young Certificate #:1001105
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: Same as current permit.
Proposed flow: No additional disposal capaci . is proposed
Current permitted flow: 341,409 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.): See narrative below.
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.
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:
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 05DB6058-B46C-42F1-AE00-15D007A7ED70
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
O l 11
O I //
O / //
O I It
O / I/
O I /I
O / //
O I it
O l lI
O I II
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: In 2022 and 2023, the facility had 5 limit exceedance
violations for total nitrogen and 2 limit exceedance violations of phosphorus.
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:
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only):
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 05DB6058-B46C-42F1-AE00-15D007A7ED70
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
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: ,—Docu3igned by:
0
Signature of report preparer:
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: 10/24/2023
14AC7DC434...
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 5

DocuSign Envelope ID: 05DB6058-B46C-42F1-AE00-15D007A7ED70
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
This review was conducted for a proposed permit modification for ONWASA's Summerhouse WWTF. The
proposed modifications are being made to the treatment side of the plant only, with no modifications proposed on the
disposal side of the plant (high -rate infiltration basins). The modifications would be completed in two phases and include:
• Three new fine screens
• New EQ pumps
• Two new 200,000 GPD membrane treatment systems
• Two 200,000 GPD UV disinfections units
• two new side -stream filters.
While the facility has the total disposal capacity of 341,409 GPD, the flow is limited by the functionality of the current
membranes and only two units are in operation, while the other units are scavenged for spare parts. During the recent
inspection, the freeboard in the 5-day upset pond was less than 2 feet due to the recent heavy rainfalls/tropical events.
They have been having to utilize a pump and haul permit to manage these high levels. Upon installation of proposed
modifications, the plant should be able to handle higher flows through the membranes and this issue should be alleviated.
After review of the submitted permit application, the WiRO has no objection to the proposed modifications.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 5 of 5