WQ0044940_Staff Report_20231212

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources

Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Staff Report

FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 3

To: NPDES Unit Non-Discharge Unit Application No.: WQ0044940
Attn: Erick Saunders Facility name: 3093 Baptist Rd
SFR

From: Chris Smith
Raleigh Regional Office

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:
b. Site visit conducted by:
c. Inspection report attached? Yes or No
d. Person contacted:
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: 360GPD
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/E
If no, please explain:
4. Do the plans and site map represent the actual site (property lines, wells, etc.)? Yes No N/E
If no, please explain:
5. Is the proposed residuals management plan adequate? Yes No N/A
If no, please explain:
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B3945F9-401E-4AA3-9248-3A6FDB7973C1
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 3
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. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? Yes or No
If yes, please explain: See Additional Regional Staff Review Items
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
DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B3945F9-401E-4AA3-9248-3A6FDB7973C1
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 3
Issue
Deny (Please state reasons: )
6. Signature of report preparer:
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date:

IV. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
The following inconsistencies and errors in the submitted soils evaluation need to be addressed:
• The soils evaluation is not signed and sealed by a Licensed Soil Scientist.

• At least one of the values used to calculate the geometric mean of the Ksat measurements is incorrect
resulting in an incorrect geometric mean value being used to calculate maximum vertical drainage for the
site.

• The included narrative states “The loading rate is based on a soil drainage coefficient of 50 percent
maximum.” The DC used in the disposal area calculation is 5% and will need to be adjusted when using a
properly calculated Ksat geometric mean and stated consistently throughout the application.

• The report states the water table on the site is perched. Low chroma colors are described at depths of 3”,
2”, and 7” for Ksat measurement locations 1, 2, and 3 respectively. The low chroma values continue to be
described throughout the soil profile after the initial observance depth at every Ksat nest location. The
continued observance of these low chroma values potentially indicates an extended period of saturation
through the lower parts of the soil profile and does not support the statement that the water table
encountered is perched.

• The site drawing provided indicates that several soil borings were performed in addition to the Ksat nest
locations, but logs for these soil borings were not provided.

• No detailed soils map was provided indicating Ksat nest locations. An aerial image map clearly delineating
soil series polygons, Ksat nest locations, and soil boring locations should be provided to assist DWR staff in
locating these features in the field.

DocuSign Envelope ID: 2B3945F9-401E-4AA3-9248-3A6FDB7973C1
12/12/2023