HomeMy WebLinkAboutWQ0004967_Response to corrective action plan_20190305
March 5, 2019
CERTIFIED MAIL - 7017 2620 0000 9759 2137
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Kristina Ambrust – Managing Member
AllJuice Realty, LLC
2001 Butterfield Road – Suite 600
Downers Grove, Illinois 60515
Subject: Review of the Notice of Violation and Notice of Intent to Enforce Response Report
and Required Corrective Action Measures
AllJuice Realty, LLC
Permit Number: WQ0004967
NOV-2017-LV-0672, NOV-2017-LV-0673, NOV-2017-LV-0674, & NOV-2017-LV-0675
Henderson County, NC
Dear Ms. Ambrust,
On October 10, 2017, the North Carolina Division of Water Resources (DWR) issued multiple Notice
of Violations (NOV) to AllJuice Realty, LLC (AllJuice) for exceedances of 15A NCAC 02L .0202
(groundwater standards) for iron, manganese, and ammonia at monitoring well MW2. In response
to the NOVs, AllJuice was required to assess and report the cause(s) of the groundwater violations.
A site assessment report (report) titled Notice of Violation and Notice of Intent to Enforce Response
was submitted to the DWR on June 1, 2018 to address the groundwater standard violations at
MW2. The report contends that an on-site septic system located immediately east and upgradient
of the process wastewater lagoon (lagoon) was identified as the most likely source for the
groundwater violations at MW2.
DWR is providing the following technical review comments and additional regulatory requirements
in response to the findings in the report. The review comments and requirements are arranged by
topic for ease of reference. Figures and tables referenced in the following comments may be found
in the Appendix.
Process Wastewater Quality
Based on the available information (see Table 1), wastewater quality within the lagoon can be
characterized as high-strength biochemical oxygen demand (BOD), chemical oxygen demand (COD),
and total suspended solids (TSS). Total nitrogen concentrations range from 9 mg/l to 81 mg/l and is
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 2 of 11
comprised mainly of organically-bound nitrogen. Ammonia is largely non-detect within the
wastewater influent and irrigated effluent. Fecal coliform bacteria concentrations range from non-
detect to 12,000 CFU/100 ml.
Spray Irrigation Field
Anchor QEA evaluated the lagoon and the irrigated effluent on December 21, 2017. Analytical
results indicate BOD, COD, phosphorus, and total nitrogen concentrations were higher in the
irrigated effluent as compared to the lagoon, which does not support assertions that the lagoon is
treating wastewater to levels acceptable for land application. Furthermore, the total nitrogen
concentration in the irrigated effluent is comprised entirely of organic nitrogen. So consequently,
the lack of detectable ammonia and inorganic nitrogen in the irrigated effluent should not be
misconstrued as a measure of treatment efficiency. Rather, it simply reflects the influent quality
and the lagoon’s inability to breakdown the organic nitrogen.
Alljuice spray irrigates roughly 2 million to 2.5 million gallons of process wastewater annually (see
Table 2). Groundwater monitoring on the compliance boundary is required as a means of evaluating
the performance of the spray irrigation field and its ability to treat and assimilate wastewater. A
review of the compliance monitoring data for nitrogen is given below:
Ammonia has not been detected at any monitoring well associated with the spray irrigation
field.
Background nitrate concentrations at monitoring well MW5 range from 0.08 mg/l to 0.98
mg/l.
Nitrate concentrations at monitoring well MW1 range from 0.1 mg/l to 39 mg/l with a
geomean of 1.2 mg/l.
Nitrate concentrations at monitoring well MW3 range from 0.03 mg/l to 14.5 mg/l with a
geomean of 1.5 mg/l.
Nitrate concentrations at former monitoring well MW4 range from 13.9 mg/l to 40.1 mg/l
with a geomean of 22.3 mg/l.
Before organic nitrogen can be taken up by a cover crop, it must first be converted to inorganic
forms by soil microbes. Soil particles do not retain nitrate very well because both are negatively
charged, which can result in leaching as water moves through the soil. The rate of leaching depends
on soil drainage, rainfall, amount of nitrate present in the soil, and crop uptake. Regarding the spray
irrigation field, the presence of nitrate in groundwater is an indication that organic nitrogen is
undergoing ammonification and nitrification. The presence of nitrate in groundwater quality
samples is also an indication that leaching is occurring on parts of the spray irrigation field.
Monitoring Well MW2
The groundwater quality at MW2 was assessed by Anchor QEA on December 14, 2017 and April 5,
2018. Concentrations for BOD, COD, total nitrogen, ammonia, iron, manganese, sodium, and total
dissolved solids were, in some instances, several orders of magnitude higher as compared with the
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 3 of 11
background monitoring well MW5. To date, ammonia concentrations at MW2 range between 27
mg/l and 42 mg/l.
Anchor QEA identified the on-site septic system as the most likely source of ammonia at MW2.
According to the report, ammonia in the [on-site] wastewater is likely passing through the
unsaturated zone and impacting the underlying water table upgradient of MW2. It is important to
note that the ammonia concentration at MW6 is an order of magnitude smaller than the ammonia
concentrations at MW2. Furthermore, most of the nitrogen at MW6 has fully converted to nitrate
upgradient of the wastewater lagoon. Nitrate is typically non-detect at MW2.
The report also suggests that process wastewater and/or on-site wastewater is discharging to the
upper boundary ditch where it infiltrates and contributes to the ammonia impacts at MW2. It is
important to note that total nitrogen concentrations in the upper boundary ditch are highly variable
and is comprised of both organic and inorganic forms of nitrogen (see Table 3). Furthermore,
ammonia concentrations in the boundary ditch are between one and two orders of magnitude
smaller than the ammonia concentrations detected at MW2.
DWR does not dispute that the on-site septic system may be contributing to groundwater impacts
but it does disagree that it constitutes the sole source of ammonia at MW2. DWR contends that
process wastewater is infiltrating beneath the lagoon and the breakdown (ammonification) of
organic nitrogen is the main source of ammonia at MW2. Nitrification is a microbial process by
which reduced nitrogen compounds (primarily ammonia) are sequentially oxidized to nitrite and
nitrate. For every pound of ammonia oxidized to nitrate, 4.18 pounds of oxygen are consumed. The
infiltration of high-strength process wastewater is lowering dissolved oxygen levels beneath the
lagoon and inhibiting ammonia-oxidizing bacteria thus limiting the further nitrification of ammonia.
These reducing conditions are also responsible for solubilizing iron and manganese oxyhydroxide
minerals in the shallow regolith.
On January 27, 1989, the Asheville Regional Office (ARO) sent a Notice of Violation (NOV) to the
former owners of the AllJuice facility for exceedances of the groundwater standards at MW-2 (see
attached). The required corrective action was to install a low-conductivity liner at the bottom of the
wastewater lagoon to abate the infiltrating process wastewater. The liner was never installed due
to financial hardships and eventual bankruptcy proceedings involving the previous owners. A fiscal
compromise was reached in 1993 that required the installation of a groundwater recovery system
that would limit the offsite migration of groundwater contamination. There is no evidence to
indicate the groundwater recovery system was ever operational.
Boundary Ditch
The boundary ditch (ditch) is approximately 700-feet long and discharges to Wolfpen Creek; a Class
C stream and tributary to Clear Creek in the French Broad River Watershed. The report indicates
potential wastewater impacts to the boundary ditch from the spray irrigation field and/or the
domestic septic system. The boundary ditch was assessed by Anchor QEA in December 2017 and
April 2018 and by DWR in July 2018 and October 2018.
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 4 of 11
The upper part of the ditch is connected to the spray irrigation field via a galvanized stormwater
pipe. According to the report, the possibility exists that stormwater runoff may be mixing with the
irrigated effluent and discharging wastewater constituents to the ditch. Sample site D1 represents
the water quality in the ditch downgradient of the spray irrigation field and upgradient of the
domestic septic system. The four sampling events noted the following water quality trends at
sample site D1 (See Table 3):
BOD concentrations ranged from 83 mg/l to 391 mg/l.
COD concentrations ranged from 1,260 mg/l to 1,510 mg/l.
Total nitrogen concentrations ranged from 2.6 mg/l to 34.7 mg/l.
Ammonia concentrations ranged from non-detect (< 0.05 mg/l) to 0.08 mg/l.
The majority of the nitrogen is organically-bound.
Fecal coliform bacteria concentration was 2,600 CFU/100 ml on October 10, 2018.
Approximately 100 feet downstream of sample site D1, the ditch passes by the failing on-site septic
system. According to the report, untreated septage is seeping into the ditch. Sample site D4
represents the water quality in the ditch downgradient of the spray irrigation field and the on-site
septic system. The four sampling events noted the following water quality trends at sample site D4
(See Table 3):
BOD concentrations ranged from 120 mg/l to 1,800 mg/l.
COD concentrations ranged from 1,440 mg/l to 4,400 mg/l.
Total nitrogen concentrations ranged from 3.4 mg/l to 110 mg/l.
Ammonia concentrations ranged from 0.04 mg/l to 15 mg/l.
The majority of the nitrogen is organically-bound.
Fecal coliform bacteria concentrations ranged from 4,100 CFU/100 ml to 100,000 CFU/100
ml.
Sample site D3 represents the confluence of the boundary ditch with Wolfpen Creek. The four
sampling events noted the following water quality trends at sample site D3 (See Table 3):
BOD concentrations ranged from 7.3 mg/l to 563 mg/l.
COD concentrations ranged from 31 mg/l to 105 mg/l.
Total nitrogen concentrations ranged from 1.2 mg/l to 1.9 mg/l.
Ammonia concentrations ranged from non-detect (< 0.05 mg/l) to 0.04 mg/l.
The majority of the nitrogen is organically-bound.
Fecal coliform bacteria concentration ranged from 1,100 CFU/100 ml to 9,000 CFU/100 ml.
Based on the available data, the upper portion of the boundary ditch appears to be receiving
wastewater inputs from spray irrigation field and/or the failing domestic septic system. Impacts to
lower ditch and the receiving stream (Wolfpen Creek) are not well understood because the upper
ditch is ephemeral and discharges intermittently. The presence of process wastewater in the
boundary ditch violates the Section II.1 of your non-discharge permit. The presence of fecal coliform
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 5 of 11
bacteria greater than 200 CFU/100 ml may indicate a violation of the State’s surface water
standards.
Corrective Action
According to Section II.1 of your permit, the non-discharge facilities shall be effectively maintained
and operated at all times so there is no discharge to surface waters, nor any contravention of
groundwater or surface water standards. In the event the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily,
including the creation of nuisance conditions due to the improper operation and maintenance, or
failure of the irrigation area to adequately assimilate the effluent, the Permittee shall take
immediate corrective actions including Division required actions, such as the construction of
additional or replacement wastewater treatment or irrigation facilities.
You are required to complete a Corrective Action Plan (CAP) for the restoration of ground and
surface waters impacted by the unauthorized discharge of process and domestic wastewater. You
will be required to submit a proposed CAP no later than 60 (sixty) days after receipt of this letter.
The CAP should include, but is not limited by, the following components:
1) You are required to assess the process wastewater lagoon and determine a course of action
to permanently abate the wastewater discharges responsible for exceedances of the
groundwater standards at MW2.
2) You are required to submit a plan to assess the extent of groundwater impacts on an
adjoining private parcel immediately west of the lagoon. You will be required to determine
whether these groundwater impacts pose a risk to nearby Wolfpen Creek.
3) You are required to install 4 additional groundwater monitoring wells in support of the
compliance monitoring surrounding the lagoon and the spray irrigation field. The attached
Figure 4 shows the approximate locations of each new monitoring well, which include the
east and the west sides of the spray irrigation field, the top of the boundary ditch, and the
northwest side of the wastewater lagoon. You will be required to sample each well in the
months of March, July, and November for the groundwater parameters listed in your
permit. Groundwater monitoring at these new locations will continue until further notice.
4) You are required to submit a plan to assess the boundary ditch. The focus of the assessment
is to evaluate the relative contributions of process and/or domestic wastewater entering
the ditch and determine a course of action to permanently abate all wastewater discharges.
The plan should include a regular monitoring schedule at the confluence of the boundary
ditch with Wolfpen Creek with a goal of assessing both baseflow conditions and periods of
storm runoff. Monitoring parameters will include fecal coliform bacteria, boron, chloride,
BOD, COD, TSS, total nitrogen, ammonia, nitrate, nitrite, TKN, and phosphorus.
5) You are required to conduct an agronomic study of the spray irrigation field and evaluate its
capacity to assimilate process wastewater. More specifically, you are to evaluate the field’s
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 6 of 11
capacity to treat and assimilate nitrogen and determine why elevated concentrations of
nitrate are present in some downgradient wells. You are also required to evaluate the cover
crop and submit a plan to control weed growth as noted in your past inspection letters.
Thank you for your attention to these matters. This Office requires the violations, as detailed
above, be abated immediately and properly resolved. This Office is considering sending a
recommendation for enforcement to the Director of the Division of Water Resources regarding
these issues and any future/continued violations that may be encountered. These violations
and any future violations are subject to civil penalties up to $25,000.00 per day for each
violation as per G.S. 143-215.6A. Should you have any questions regarding these matters, please
contact me at (828) 296-4500 or at brett.laverty@ncdenr.gov.
Sincerely,
Brett Laverty
Water Quality Regional Operations
Asheville Regional Office
cc: ARO File
ec: Kristina Armbrust – AllJuice Realty, LLC
Bob Barr – RPB Systems, Inc
Chuck Pippin – Anchor QEA
Table 1: Analytical results for the process wastewater influent and effluent from various sources.
Sa
m
p
l
e
S
i
t
e
Da
t
e
So
u
r
c
e
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
rog
e
n
Am
m
o
n
i
a
TK
N
Ni
t
r
a
t
e
Ni
t
r
i
t
e
NO
2
+
N
O
3
Ph
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
Ir
o
n
Ma
n
g
a
n
e
s
e
So
d
i
u
m
TS
S
BO
D
CO
D
Fe
c
a
l
C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m
B
a
c
t
e
r
i
a
pH
mg/l CFU/100
ml SU
Wastewater
Influent
12/21/2017 Anchor 1.30 < 0.05 1.10 0.22 < 0.05 0.22 0.45 0.50 0.008 16.10 10 1,060 1,080 NR 6.53
10/10/2018 DWR NR 0.02 2.10 NR NR 0.12 0.52 NR NR NR NR NR NR 210 4.35
Wastewater
Lagoon
6/26/2016 James & James NR < 0.1 12.30 < 0.05 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 328 NR 5,800 7.60
9/8/2016 James & James NR 0.10 25.60 < 0.05 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR < 391 NR 67 7.10
9/22/2016 James & James NR < 0.1 25.60 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 214 NR 270 7.10
12/5/2016 James & James NR 0.10 4.90 0.10 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR > 427 NR < 4 NR
12/21/2016 James & James NR 0.10 NR < 0.05 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 1,030 NR NR NR
3/16/2017 James & James NR NR 7.70 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 1,218 NR 410 7.60
6/29/2017 James & James NR 0.10 26.90 < 0.05 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 1,034 NR > 6,000 7.50
7/20/2017 James & James 17.80 < 0.1 17.70 0.10 NR NR 1.44 NR NR NR NR 483 NR < 10 7.50
9/20/2017 James & James NR 6.99 - 0.19 NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR NR 2.0 - 2.7
9/21/2017 James & James 81.80 0.30 16.20 3.20 NR NR 3.56 NR NR NR NR 797 NR 5,700 7.30
11/16/2017 James & James 22.90 < 0.1 22.60 0.30 NR NR 4.02 NR NR NR NR 987 NR 5,900 NR
12/21/2017 Anchor 32.60 < 0.05 32.60 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.90 4.24 0.059 73.90 920 1,660 2,950 NR 3.94
12/21/2017 Anchor 30.90 < 0.05 30.90 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.60 4.86 0.064 78.30 1,540 1,580 3,160 NR 3.91
12/21/2017 Anchor 28.80 < 0.05 28.80 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.90 4.25 0.060 76.80 1,580 1,560 4,130 NR 3.88
12/21/2017 Anchor 36.00 < 0.05 36.00 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.90 4.06 0.059 72.20 1,220 1,470 4,130 NR 3.86
12/21/2017 Anchor 30.60 < 0.05 30.60 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.60 3.77 0.061 77.90 1,160 1,530 4,300 NR 3.87
12/21/2017 Anchor 30.80 < 0.05 30.80 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 3.60 4.64 0.062 75.90 1,100 1,640 4,280 NR 3.85
12/21/2017 Anchor 41.40 < 0.05 41.40 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 4.40 6.96 0.089 77.10 890 1,650 4,860 NR 3.95
3/8/2018 James & James 9.90 < 0.1 9.90 < 0.05 NR NR 3.56 NR NR NR NR 778 NR NR NR
4/5/2018 Anchor 16.61 < 0.05 16.40 < 0.01 0.21 0.04 2.00 2.66 0.036 69.80 NR 614 2,340 NR 7.78
7/25/2018 DWR NR < 0.02 26.00 NR NR 0.17 1.60 NR NR NR NR 480 1,200 12,000 7.29
7/25/2018 DWR NR 0.14 48.00 NR NR 0.20 3.20 NR NR NR NR 940 2,100 12,000 6.84
10/10/2018 DWR NR < 0.1 31.00 NR NR 1.30 2.60 NR NR NR NR 275 NR 1,500 7.29
NR - Not reported
Kristina Ambrust
March 5, 2019
Page 8 of 11
Table 2: Reported cumulative monthly wastewater discharges (NDMR) to the spray irrigation field for the period 2016 – 2018.
Cumulative Monthly Discharge
Date Gallons Date Gallons Date Gallons
Jan-16 170,000 Jan-17 370,000 Jan-18 320,000
Feb-16 310,000 Feb-17 140,000 Feb-18 50,000
Mar-16 420,000 Mar-17 140,000 Mar-18 200,000
Apr-16 110,000 Apr-17 120,000 Apr-18 170,000
May-16 130,000 May-17 260,000 May-18 130,000
Jun-16 50,000 Jun-17 100,000 Jun-18 128,000
Jul-16 140,000 Jul-17 260,000 Jul-18 300,000
Aug-16 0 Aug-17 30,000 Aug-18 320,000
Sep-16 150,000 Sep-17 210,000 Sep-18 180,000
Oct-16 350,000 Oct-17 230,000 Oct-18 330,000
Nov-16 320,000 Nov-17 320,000 Nov-18
Dec-16 370,000 Dec-17 0 Dec-18
Total Discharge 2016 2,520,000 Total Discharge 2017 2,180,000 Total Discharge 2018 2,128,000
Table 3: Analytical results for surface water monitoring along the boundary ditch.
Sa
m
p
l
e
S
i
t
e
Da
t
e
So
u
r
c
e
To
t
a
l
N
i
t
rog
e
n
Am
m
o
n
i
a
TK
N
Ni
t
r
a
t
e
Ni
t
r
i
t
e
NO
2
+
N
O
3
Ph
o
s
p
h
o
r
u
s
So
d
i
u
m
BO
D
CO
D
Fe
c
a
l
C
o
l
i
f
o
r
m
B
a
c
t
e
r
i
a
pH
Di
s
s
o
l
v
e
d
O
x
y
g
e
n
mg/l CFU/100
ml SU mg/l
D1
12/21/2017 Anchor 34.70 < 0.05 34.70 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0.05 4.60 30.00 333 1,510 NR 5.58 3.14
4/26/2018 Anchor 13.70 0.06 13.70 < 0.01 0.13 0.03 1.70 52.90 391 1,260 NR 6.55 3.77
7/25/2018 DWR site is dry
10/10/2018 DWR NR 0.08 2.40 NR NR 0.20 0.46 NR 83 NR 2,600 NR NR
D3
4/26/2018 Anchor 1.20 < 0.05 1.20 < 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.33 12.50 563 105 NR 6.36 6.01
7/25/2018 DWR NR 0.14 1.90 NR NR < 0.02 0.34 NR 7 31 9,000 NR NR
10/10/2018 DWR NR 0.04 1.10 NR NR 0.27 0.20 NR 25 NR 1,100 NR NR
D4
4/26/2018 Anchor 28.70 0.11 28.70 < 0.01 0.14 0.05 3.10 53.90 654 1,440 NR 6.87 3.00
7/25/2018 DWR NR 15.00 110.00 NR NR < 0.2 13.00 NR 1,800 4,400 100,000 NR NR
10/10/2018 DWR NR 0.04 3.20 NR NR 0.19 0.74 NR 120 NR 4,100 NR NR
NR = Not Reported
Proposed Locations of Groundwater Monitoring Wells