NC0023906_Historical information_20041020

Michael F. Easley, Governor
October 15, 2004
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Baker:
days of receipt.
1.
2.
A resolution adopted by the governing body accepting the loan offer and making
the applicable assurances contained therein. (Sample copy attached)
One (1) copy of the original Offer and Acceptance Document executed by the
authorized representative for the project. Retain the other copy for your files.
Alan W. Klimek, P E. Director
Division of Water Quality
The City of Wilson has been approved for loan assistance from the Water Pollution
Control Revolving Fund in the amount of $19,794,886. This loan will assist with construction of
the Hominy Creek WWTP sludge upgrades, new aeration tank and new laboratory building.
Mr. Gordon R. Baker, Finance Director
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
Offer and Acceptance For a
State Loan
Project No. CS370381-06
Wilson, North Carolina
instruction Grants and Loans Section
'3 Mail Service Center Raieign NC 27699-1533
e: 919-733-5900 ' FAX: [phone] Internet: www.nccgi.net
1 Opportunity/Atfirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
NorthCarolina
Naturally
Enclosed are two (2) copies of an Offer and Acceptance Document extending a State
Revolving loan in the amount of $19,794,886. This offer is made subject to the assurances and
conditions set forth in the Offer and Acceptance Document. Upon executing the Offer and
Acceptance Document, please submit the following items to the Construction Grants and Loans
Section, 1633 Mail Service Center, Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1633 within forty-five (45)
1
Sincerely,
AS/sd
Enclosures
cc:
i r
o
cxj
Mr. G'ordon R. Baker
J? age 2
October 15, 2004
Hazen & Sawyer
Raleigh Regional Office
Valerie Lancaster
Jan Bolick
SRF
co
In accordance with G.S. 159-26(b)(6), a capital project fund is required to account for all
In addition, the enclosed pay request form must be used for all reimbursement requests.
You may make additional copies as needed. Also, enclosed is a copy of a memorandum
requesting your Federal Identification Number. Please contact the State Auditors office for the
compliance pertaining to the North Carolina Clean Water Revolving Loan and Grant Program.
On behalf of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, I am pleased to
make this offer of State Revolving Loan funds made available by the North Carolina Clean
Watei Revolving Loan and Grant Act of 1997 and the Federal Clean Water Act Amendments of
1987.
debt instrument proceeds used to finance capital projects. It is required that a capital project
ordinance, in accordance with G.S. 159-13.2, be adopted by the governing board authorizing all
appropriations necessary for the completion of the project. A copy of the approved ordinance
must be submitted to this office before requesting the first reimbursement request.
A A /A
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
Michael F. Easley. Governor
i
Dear Mr. Pittman:
An Equal Opportumty/Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper
1617 Mail Service Center. Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
512 N Salisbury St, Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone [phone] / FAX [phone]/ Internet:: h2o.enr.state.nc.us
On July 22, 2004 a moratorium on the issuance of sewer line permits was placed on the City of
Wilson per the authority of 15A NCAC 2H .0223, which specifies that prior to exceeding 80% of
their hydraulic treatment capacity, facilities must submit an approvable engineering evaluation of
their future wastewater needs before permits for sewer line extensions may be issued.
Monitoring data submitted by the City showed the subject wastewater treatment plant operated at
81.5% of its treatment capacity during 2003.
I have reviewed the City of Wilson’s letter of August 3, 2004, requesting to have the sewer
moratorium lifted. The information provided in the letter has shown the City has complied with
the terms of 15A NCAC 2H .0223(1) through its preparation and implementation of plans to
address future wastewater treatment capacity needs. These plans and active efforts include an
aggressive program to reduce inflow and infiltration within the collection system, an expanding
reuse program, and studies on the potential expansion of the existing wastewater treatment
facility. These actions have demonstrated the City’s commitment to providing wastewater
treatment service that will accommodate future demands within its service area.
In light of these findings. 1 hereby remove the moratorium on the issuance of sewer line permits
placed on the City of Wilson. 1 would like to extend my congratulations to the City for its efforts
to date, and encourage you to maintain this level of commitment as you face the challenges
presented by an increasing population and the demands it may place on wastewater
infrastructure.
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Mr. Charles W. Pittman. Ill
City of Wilson
P. O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
Subject: Lifting of Sewer Line Moratorium
City of Wilson - Hominy Creek WWTP
NPDES Permit NC0023906
Wilson County
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
CERTIFIED MAIL 7003 0500 0002 6814 4516
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
^4. loAcH
NorthCarolina
Naturally
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
NPDES Moratorium Files
Central Files
Collection System & Pretreatment
Sincerely,
■Coleen H. Sullins
Deputy Director
Please be aware that should flow at the wastewater treatment plant exceed the 90% of design
capacity threshold, a moratorium could again be imposed as called for in 15A NCAC 2H .0223.
If you have any questions about this letter, please contact Bob Sledge of our Central Office staff,
at [phone], extension 547 or the Surface Water Protection Section staff of our Raleigh
Regional Office at [phone].
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, Ij^^
City of Wilson Lift Morati^JIn
p.2
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
September 8, 2004
i
Re: City of Wilson’s Water Supply Watershed Protection Ordinance Amendment Approval
Dear Mr. Wyatt:
Sincerely,
Attachment
Cc:
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Mr. Edward A. Wyatt
City Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894
The Water Quality Committee of the Environmental Management Commission, in their September 8,
2004 meeting, reviewed and approved the amendments to the City of Wilson’s Water Supply Watershed
Protection Ordinance. Please be advised that subsequent amendments must meet or exceed the
minimum statewide standards and must be submitted to the Division of Water Quality for approval. The
Water Quality Committee and the Division are pleased with the effort your community has demonstrated
throughout this process.
If you have any questions regarding the Water Quality Committee’s decision or any other questions
regarding the Water Supply Watershed Protection Program, please contact Scott Carpenter at 919-733-
5083, ext. 366. Your interest and cooperation in protecting one of our state’s most vital resources, water
supply watersheds, is greatly appreciated.
Scott Carpenter, DWQ
Ken Schuster, DWQ, RRO
Central Files, Water Supply Watershed Protection, City of Wilson
City of Wilson File
David H. Moreau
Chairman
Charles Peterson
Vice Chairman
Anne Barnes
Daniel V. Besse
Delilah Blanks
Donnie Brewer
Marion E. Deerhake
Tom Ellis
Will B. Fowler
Craig Frazier
John Gessaman
E. Leo Green, Jr.
Freddie Harrell
Thomas K. Jenkins
Larry M. Jordan
Kevin C. Martin
Frank S. Shaw
Frederick B. Starr
Kenny Waldroup
/J-
Dr. Charles H. Peterson
EH
NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
i i V. SEP | 5 2004 p
•v- I
KmLEi^H REGIONAL UFjCEJ
Memo
August 18, 2004Date:
Ken SchusterTo:
From:Barry Herzberg
Subject:
Barry
Please advise if we can begin to process Fast-Track Applications for Wilson. I don’t see
any reason why not.
Utilizing the average daily flow for the past 12 months, the City would show 9.99 mgd as
average flow, equating to only 71.4% of plant capacity. The same time comparison
places the Paper Flow at 88.3% versus 98.4% when using the CY 2003 average flow
value.
The City had an Expansion and Upgrade Study done in March, 2001, projecting
upgrades to 20 mgd. Some of the work suggested by the study has been undertaken
by the City, but this is mostly on the back end of the plant and would not have a
significant impact on the plant’s ability to handle higher influent flow volume. More
importantly, the study discussed the l/l problem and as a result the City has made a
commitment to reducing l/l. The analysis of average annual flows from 1997 through
2004 would support and confirm this information.
It should also be considered that the Wilson flows have never been reconciled. With
over 160 permits outstanding, it is likely that many of these are in need of reconciliation.
In accepting new Fast-Track Applications, I suggest we contact the City and request the
information so that we can reconcile the flows. I also suggest that, for the remainder of
2004, we recalculate P4 each month based on the previous 12 month flow average.
This should give us a better flow growth picture than using an arbitrary 12 month period.
Wilson WWTP - Hominy Creek
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906
80% Flow Comments
The City of Wilson was subjected to the 80% rule based on average daily flow for the
period January 1,2003 through December 31,2003. This value was 11.405 mgd which
equaled 81.5% of their plants 14 mgd capacity. The City responded to the “moratorium”
letter with numerous facts relating to the weather events in late 2002 and early 2003. I
have verified those facts to be true.
P.001/005AUG-12-2004 02:23PM FROM-F-075
P.1
CHYOFWILSON
WASTEWATER MGMT.
919-571-4718Fax:Ken Schuster, DWQ RROTo;
8/12/2004Date:From:
5Re:
CC:
□ Please Recycle□ Please Reply□ Please Commentx For Review□ Urgent
Notes: Please call if you have any questions.
Plan of Action for Demonstration of Pages:
Future Wastewater Treatment
Russell Brice
WWTP Manager
T-744
~ io
Wilson, NC 27893
Phone: [phone]
Fax; [phone]
EmaiErbri [e-mail]
f
AUG-12-2004 02:23PM FR0M-
Re:
Dear Ms. Sullins:
1.
Deputy City Manager
Operations & Public Services
Plan of Action for Demonstration of
Future Wastewater Treatment
Capacities
NPDES Permit NC0023906
City of Wilson WWTP, Wilson County
P.O. BOX 10 ♦ WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894-0010 ♦ TELEPHONE [phone]
OPERATIONS CENTER ♦ 1800 HERRING AVENUE ♦ FAX [phone]
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
CITY OF WILSON
eAJo/dh CoAO&na
iNCOAPCRAreo ia<a
27894-0010
August 3, 2004
Ms.Coleen H. Sullins
Division of Water Quality
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Point Source Compliance/Enforcement Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NO 27699-1617
The City of Wilson has developed a Plan of Action to address this issue and is already
implementing the Plan. The Plan addresses increasing flows to the Hominy Creek
WWMF over several fronts as follows:
An analysis of the influent flows to the Hominy Creek WWMF indicates a
relatively low growth rate in base wastewater flow as indicated in the most
recent 201 Amendment approved in 2003. Based on the anticipated growth in
the service area, the current capacity of 14 MGD should be adequate until the
year 2022. These same projections indicate that the flows at the plant will not
reach the 90 percent trigger point until 2011-
It is believed that the higher flows in 2003 are largely attributable to inflow/
infiltration (l/l) not only from Wilson, but from several small communities served
in Wilson County by the City of Wilson Facility. Rainfall across much of North
Carolina was at or near record levels for all of late 2002 and 2003. This
included 159% of normal rainfall amounts at NWS Station Wilson 3SW for
We are writing in response to your letter of July 22, 2004 in reference to NCAC
2H.0223 "Demonstration of Future Wastewater Treatment Capacities". In this letter you
observed that flows at the Hominy Creek Wastewater Management Facility exceeded
80% of the design capacity in the 2003 calendar year. In accordance with the above
Rule, “no permits for sewer line extensions will be issued by the Division of Water
Quality to facilities exceeding 80% of their hydraulic treatment capacity unless specific
evaluations of future wastewater treatment needs have been completed".
T-744 P.002/005 F-075
AUG-12-2004 02:23PM FROM-
Annual l/l Reduction Budget
$ 1,200,000
$ 1,100,000
$ 1,100,000
$ 1,505,000
$ 1,625,000
________$4,371,013
_______$2,927,375
$1.145,000 YTD
February thru May of 2003, the period in which the plant exceeded the
permitted flows. We also reviewed USGS data for this time period. Stream
flows for this area where at record levels for the same months. After completion
of over $ 4 million dollars of additional I /1 work in 2003 and 2004, we reduced
flows during the last physical year (July 1, 2003 thru June 30, 2004) to an
average flow of 9.9 MGD, or 71% of permitted capacity. This year, in May and
June of 2004, 11.27 inches and 5.81 inches of rain fell, or 216% of the normal
rainfall amount. Flows at the plant were only 76% of capacity. This is further
proof that our I /1 reduction efforts are reducing flows. While the 201
Amendment analysis shows that the City of Wilson l/l is not excessive, the City
has been aggressively pursuing l/l reductions as demonstrated by increasing l/l
budgetary expenditures over the past few years. The flow data and l/l
reduction budgets over the past several years are as follows:
Year_______Annual Average Flow (MGD)
1997 _______________8.86______
1998 ______________9.83
1999 10.09_______
2000 _________9.24 ____ _
2001 ' ~ 8.67 ~
2002 _9.72____
2003 11.40
JQQ4___________________9.99 (YTD)
In addition, the City of Wilson currently has over $4.5 million in lining work alone
identified in the current CIP in addition to line replacement. Work is currently
starting on a project on the Hominy Swamp Interceptor including $1.0 million in
line replacement and manhole rehabilitation, and $600,000 in lining work. We
feel confident that very few systems in North Carolina have this level of
commitment to l/l reduction. This is an investment of almost $900 per customer
over this time period, or 28% of our entire revenue. The City is committed to
continuing to pursue l/l reductions through identification and repair of collection
system deficiencies.
2. In 2000, the City of Wilson retained Hazen and Sawyer to undertake a study of
long term expansion alternatives at the Hominy Creek WWMF. That study,
entitled “Hominy Creek Expansion and Upgrade Study, March 2001, identifies
the facility requirements to expand the plant from the 14 MGD capacity to 16
MGD, 18 MGD or 20 MGD. The City implemented the solids handling
improvements recommended in this study along with additional liquid train
facilities to improve reliability of the 14 MGD facility. Construction of these
improvements is now underway at a cost of over $17 million dollars. A copy of
the engineering study for future wastewater treatment needs is enclosed. For the
record, when this study was previously submitted to DWQ and the initial
submittal of the 201 Amendment was made for potential expansion of the
T-744 P.003/005 F-075
AUG-12-2004 02:23PM FROM-
4. The plant is compliant with the NPDES Permit.
Per the terms of NCAC 2H.0223 (3), the Director may, on a case by case basis, allow
permits to be issued to facilities exceeding 80 percent loading rate if: 1) the additional
flow will not cause the facility to exceed its permitted hydraulic capacity, 2) the facility is
in compliance with all other permit limitations and requirements, and 3) it has
demonstrated that adequate progress is being made in developing the required
engineering evaluations or plans and specifications. The City of Wilson has met all the
above requirements.
Therefore, the City of Wilson requests a waiver of the moratorium per this provision of
the rule. The City believes that continued permitting of sewer line extensions will not
result in an exceedance of its permitted capacity for a number of years based on the
most recent 201 Amendment wastewater flow projections. The Hominy Creek WWMF
has an outstanding compliance record since the construction of the 14 MGD expansion
was completed. Based on operating experience and current construction of solids
handling facilities and additional liquid train facilities to improve reliability, the City is
confident that the plant will continue to remain in compliance at its design capacity.
Finally, the City is proactively implementing its Plan of Action for meeting future
wastewater treatment needs by 1) eliminating or reducing extraneous flows through its
l/l reduction program, 2) planning for future expansion of the treatment facilities
including the current $17 million dollar construction project, and 3) encouraging water
treatment capacity of the Hominy Creek WWMF to 16-20 MGD, DWQ strongly
discouraged the City of Wilson from pursuing a capacity increase at Hominy
Creek, we are quite confused as to how DWQ wishes for us to proceed since
you are now sending us opposite opinions on the same issue.
3. The City of Wilson has also instituted a water reuse program to use effluent from
the Hominy Creek WWMF for beneficial purposes in the surrounding areas
rather than discharge that treated flow to the receiving stream. DWQ has
delayed permitting of various parts of the reuse system due to shortages of
review staff and changes in its own policies, (i.e. possible contamination of
groundwater by disinfectant by-products) If this system would have been on line
in 2003 and would have reduced discharges by only 210,000 gallons per day, we
would not have received this letter. The reuse system just went into service in
July 2004 and average use is already more than this amount. Initial users
include the Wedgewood Golf Course with an anticipated maximum daily
irrigation demand of 0.5 MGD and the Hominy Creek WWMF with an anticipated
use of 0.2 MGD. Permits have already been issued and a bid has been awarded
for another re-use line to Happy Valley Golf Course with anticipated demand of
0.3 MGD and for construction of an elevated tank and line to the Wrangler Jeans
facility with an expected demand of 0.5 MGD. The City is investigating other
potential industrial reuse customers to expand the effluent reuse / water
conservation program at the Hominy Creek WWMF. Total demand for re-use
water could be as high as 1.5 MGD within the next year.
T-744 P.004/005 F-075
AUG-12-2004 02:24PM F ROM-
Very truly yours,
cc:Barry Parks
Russell Brice
Don Cordell
Ron Taylor
Charles W. Pittman III
Deputy City Manager / Operations and Public Services
conservation through its effluent reuse / water conservation program.
We trust this information is satisfactory to allow the waiver of the moratorium on
permitting of sewer line extensions to be granted. If you have questions or need
additional information, please contact me.
T-744 P.005/005 F-075
1
Re:
Dear Ms. Sullins:
1.
Deputy City Manager
Operations & Public Services
It is believed that the higher flows in 2003 are largely attributable to inflow/
infiltration (l/l) not only from Wilson, but from several small communities served
in Wilson County by the City of Wilson Facility. Rainfall across much of North
Carolina was at or near record levels for all of late 2002 and 2003. This
included 159% of normal rainfall amounts at NWS Station Wilson 3SW for
Plan of Action for Demonstration of
Future Wastewater Treatment
Capacities
NPDES Permit NC0023906
City of Wilson WWTP, Wilson County
CITY OF WILSON
oMofttk CaAoCma
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
August 3, 2004
An analysis of the influent flows to the Hominy Creek WWMF indicates a
relatively low growth rate in base wastewater flow as indicated in the most
recent 201 Amendment approved in 2003. Based on the anticipated growth in
the service area, the current capacity of 14 MGD should be adequate until the
year 2022. These same projections indicate that the flows at the plant will not
reach the 90 percent trigger point until 2011.
P.O. BOX 10 ♦ WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894-0010 ♦ TELEPHONE [phone]
OPERATIONS CENTER ♦ 1 800 HERRING AVENUE ♦ FAX [phone]
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
The City of Wilson has developed a Plan of Action to address this issue and is already
implementing the Plan. The Plan addresses increasing flows to the Hominy Creek
WWMF over several fronts as follows:
We are writing in response to your letter of July 22, 2004 in reference to NCAC
2H.0223 "Demonstration of Future Wastewater Treatment Capacities”. In this letter you
observed that flows at the Hominy Creek Wastewater Management Facility exceeded
80% of the design capacity in the 2003 calendar year. In accordance with the above
Rule, “no permits for sewer line extensions will be issued by the Division of Water
Quality to facilities exceeding 80% of their hydraulic treatment capacity unless specific
evaluations of future wastewater treatment needs have been completed”.
Ms.Coleen H. Sullins
Division of Water Quality
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Point Source Compliance/Enforcement Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
2. In 2000, the City of Wilson retained Hazen and Sawyer to undertake a study of
long term expansion alternatives at the Hominy Creek WWMF. That study,
entitled “Hominy Creek Expansion and Upgrade Study, March 2001, identifies
the facility requirements to expand the plant from the 14 MGD capacity to 16
MGD, 18 MGD or 20 MGD. The City implemented the solids handling
improvements recommended in this study along with additional liquid train
facilities to improve reliability of the 14 MGD facility. Construction of these
improvements is now underway at a cost of over $17 million dollars. A copy of
the engineering study for future wastewater treatment needs is enclosed. For the
record, when this study was previously submitted to DWQ and the initial
submittal of the 201 Amendment was made for potential expansion of the
In addition, the City of Wilson currently has over $4.5 million in lining work alone
identified in the current CIP in addition to line replacement. Work is currently
starting on a project on the Hominy Swamp Interceptor including $1.0 million in
line replacement and manhole rehabilitation, and $600,000 in lining work. We
feel confident that very few systems in North Carolina have this level of
commitment to l/l reduction. This is an investment of almost $900 per customer
over this time period, or 28% of our entire revenue. The City is committed to
continuing to pursue l/l reductions through identification and repair of collection
system deficiencies.
February thru May of 2003, the period in which the plant exceeded the
permitted flows. We also reviewed USGS data for this time period. Stream
flows for this area where at record levels for the same months. After completion
of over $ 4 million dollars of additional I /1 work in 2003 and 2004, we reduced
flows during the last physical year (July 1,2003 thru June 30, 2004) to an
average flow of 9.9 MGD, or 71% of permitted capacity. This year, in May and
June of 2004, 11.27 inches and 5.81 inches of rain fell, or 216% of the normal
rainfall amount. Flows at the plant were only 76% of capacity. This is further
proof that our I /1 reduction efforts are reducing flows. While the 201
Amendment analysis shows that the City of Wilson l/l is not excessive, the City
has been aggressively pursuing l/l reductions as demonstrated by increasing l/l
budgetary expenditures over the past few years. The flow data and l/l
reduction budgets over the past several years are as follows:
Year
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
Annual Average Flow (MGD)
____________8.86_________
____________9.83_________
___________10.09_________
____________9.24_________
____________8.67_________
____________9.72_________
___________11.40_________
9.99 (YTD)
Annual l/l Reduction Budget
________$ 1,200,000_______
________$ 1,100,000_______
________$ 1,100,000_______
________$ 1,505,000_______
________$ 1,625,000_______
________$4,371,013_______
________$2,927,375_______
$1,145,000 YTD
4. The plant is compliant with the NPDES Permit.
Per the terms of NCAC 2H.0223 (3), the Director may, on a case by case basis, allow
permits to be issued to facilities exceeding 80 percent loading rate if: 1) the additional
flow will not cause the facility to exceed its permitted hydraulic capacity, 2) the facility is
in compliance with all other permit limitations and requirements, and 3) it has
demonstrated that adequate progress is being made in developing the required
engineering evaluations or plans and specifications. The City of Wilson has met all the
above requirements.
3. The City of Wilson has also instituted a water reuse program to use effluent from
the Hominy Creek WWMF for beneficial purposes in the surrounding areas
rather than discharge that treated flow to the receiving stream. DWQ has
delayed permitting of various parts of the reuse system due to shortages of
review staff and changes in its own policies, (i.e. possible contamination of
groundwater by disinfectant by-products) If this system would have been on line
in 2003 and would have reduced discharges by only 210,000 gallons per day, we
would not have received this letter. The reuse system just went into service in
July 2004 and average use is already more than this amount. Initial users
include the Wedgewood Golf Course with an anticipated maximum daily
irrigation demand of 0.5 MGD and the Hominy Creek WWMF with an anticipated
use of 0.2 MGD. Permits have already been issued and a bid has been awarded
for another re-use line to Happy Valley Golf Course with anticipated demand of
0.3 MGD and for construction of an elevated tank and line to the Wrangler Jeans
facility with an expected demand of 0.5 MGD. The City is investigating other
potential industrial reuse customers to expand the effluent reuse / water
conservation program at the Hominy Creek WWMF. Total demand for re-use
water could be as high as 1.5 MGD within the next year.
treatment capacity of the Hominy Creek WWMF to 16-20 MGD, DWQ strongly
discouraged the City of Wilson from pursuing a capacity increase at Hominy
Creek. We are quite confused as to how DWQ wishes for us to proceed since
you are now sending us opposite opinions on the same issue.
Therefore, the City of Wilson requests a waiver of the moratorium per this provision of
the rule. The City believes that continued permitting of sewer line extensions will not
result in an exceedance of its permitted capacity for a number of years based on the
most recent 201 Amendment wastewater flow projections. The Hominy Creek WWMF
has an outstanding compliance record since the construction of the 14 MGD expansion
was completed. Based on operating experience and current construction of solids
handling facilities and additional liquid train facilities to improve reliability, the City is
confident that the plant will continue to remain in compliance at its design capacity.
Finally, the City is proactively implementing its Plan of Action for meeting future
wastewater treatment needs by 1) eliminating or reducing extraneous flows through its
l/l reduction program, 2) planning for future expansion of the treatment facilities
including the current $17 million dollar construction project, and 3) encouraging water
Very truly yours,
cc:
Charles W. Pittman III
Deputy City Manager / Operations and Public Services
Barry Parks
Russell Brice
Don Cordell
Ron Taylor
We trust this information is satisfactory to allow the waiver of the moratorium on
permitting of sewer line extensions to be granted. If you have questions or need
additional information, please contact me.
conservation through its effluent reuse / water consen/ation program.
r
Nonh Carolina Depal
July 22, 2004
Dear Mr. Pittman:
Raleigh. NC 27699-1617
15A NCAC 2H .0223. ‘’Demonstration of Future Wastewater Treatment Capacities " was
adopted by the Environmental Management Commission to ensure that wastewater treatment
systems owned or operated by municipalities, counties, sanitary districts or public utilities do not
exceed their hydraulic treatment capacities. This Rule specifies that no permits for sewer line
extensions will be issued by the Division of Water Quality to facilities exceeding 80^ of their
hydraulic treatment capacity unless specific evaluations of future wastewater treatment needs
have been completed.
A review of your self monitoring reports has indicated How at the subject facility exceeded the
80^ threshold for calendar year 2003. The average flow calculated for this period was 11.405
MGD, and represented 81.5% of the current treatment capacity. Therefore, we will be unable to
approve any further sewer line extensions for this facility until such time as you have complied
with the requirements contained in the Rule.
In order to attain compliance with the Rule, you must submit an approvable engineering
evaluation of future wastewater treatment needs. This evaluation must outline specific plans for
system expansion and include the sources of funding for the expansion. If future expansion is
not proposed, a detailed justification must be made based on past growth records and future
growth projections and. as appropriate, shall include conservation plans or other specific
measures to achieve waste flow reductions.
To prevent delays in the processing of your future permit applications for sewer line extensions,
please submit a plan of action containing the information necessary to comply with the
appropriate demonstrations as described above to the following address:
Michael F. Easley. Governor
William G. Ross Jr.. Secretary
of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek. P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
Mr. Charles W. Pittman
City of Wilson
P. 6. BOX 10
WILSON, NC 27893
Division of Water Quality
[phone]
Subject: Demonstration of Future Wastewater Treatment Capacities
NPDES Permit NC0023906
City of Wilson WWTP
Wilson County
1617 Mail Service Center
Fax: [phone]
CERTIFIED MAIL 7()()() 1530 0002 2100 8719
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
> uhi i rfe
Customer Service
1 877 623-7748
Sincerely,
Attachment (15A NCAC 2H .0223)
80% Letter
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, p.2
Per the terms of NCAC 2H. 0223 (3), the Director may. on a case by case basis, allow permits to
be issued to facilities exceeding the 80 percent loading rale if: 1) the additional flow will not
cause the facility to exceed its permitted hydraulic capacity, 2) the facility is in compliance with
all other permit limitations and requirements and 3) it is demonstrated that adequate progress is
being made in developing the required engineering evaluations or plans and specifications. If
you wish to ask for a waiver of the moratorium per this provision of the rule, please send
information in support of your request to the address listed above.
As always, the actual plans and specifications for expansion should be submitted to the NPDES
Unit of the Water Quality Section.
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Non-Discharge Permitting Unit
Compliance/Enforcement Files
Central Files
DENR-DWQ
Point Source Compliance/Enforcement Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1617
^^Coleen H. Sullins
We look forward to working with you on development of plans to meet your future wastewater
treatment needs. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the Water
Quality Section staff of our Raleigh Regional Office at [phone], or Vanessa Manuel of
the Point Source Compliance/Enforcement Unit, at [phone]. extensipn'532.
JUL-01-2004 09:25AM FROM-F-899
.(Date/time)Reported to..
Weather conditions:
^WWTPSanitary Sewer Pump StationSource of spill/bypass (check one):
Level of treatment (check one):
(If Yes, please list the following)Did spill/bypass reach surface waters?
Volume reaching surface waters?
Name of surface water
Please provide the following information:

A
Revision#! 6/11/99
None Primary Treatment
Secondary Treatment Chlorination Only
4. How long did it take to mal
Hours
an initial assessment of the spill/overflow after first knowledge?
Minutes
How long did it take to get a repair crew onsite?
Hours Minutes
Tu&i:
-
33^.
ItujJ a
1. Location of spill/bypass:
Jjed*, ______ 'J
Estimated Duration (Time) /C)
T-695 P.002/003
3. Did you have personnel available to perform initial assessment 24 hours/day (including weekends and
holidays)?Yes^x^ No
'Ti Ic U>(l w
(page 1 of 2)
Permittee (fr/z Permit Number
‘ Incident Ended: (Date/Time) I lilSL
Please explain the time taken to make initial assessment O' -5~<- / c^..
First knowledge of incident: (Date/Time) /r'^j
Estimated volume of spill/bypass 33>gallons. Show rationaljor volume.z
If spill is ongoing, please notify Regional Office on a daily basis until spill can be stopped.
(Date/time) 9-/—^
Name of person
f?/Z
ft
2. Cause of spill/bypass: c cP o>c^
<3
Did spill/bypass result in a fish kill?Yes ___N^ // c '/
If Yes, what is the estimated number of fish killed? IX Z^z^/
County,.
JUL-01-2004 09:25AM FROM-P.003/003T-695 F-899
(Page 2 of 2)
County.Permit NumberPermittee
7

10. Comments:

Other agencies notifed:,
Date: ^ —^6 ^rC f
:==ssaBS8s==:
NoYes
Revision#! 6/11/99
J
For DWQ Use Only:
DWQ requested additional written report?
If yes. what additional information is needed?
Requested by ____ _
9. What a^pns^a'

x>
e^ft-rA 7
6. Were the equipment and parts needed to make repairs readily available?
Yes No If no, please explain why:
5. Action taken to contain spill, clean up waste, and/or rei

7. If the spill/overflow occurred at a pump station, or was the result of a pump station failure,
was the alarm system functional at the time of the spill? Yes------- No-------- If the alarm
system did not function, please explain why:
Person reporting soill/bypass:Phone Number._^<5v^ «3.
Signature f
mediate the site: S/cu-rri
8. Repairs made are: Permanent _ Temporary
Please describe what repairs were made. If the repairs are temporary, please indicate a date by
which permanent repairs will be completed, and notify the Regional Office within 7 days of the
permanent repair:.
ive been made to prevenUhis dlschargejrom occurring again in the future?
May 27, 2004
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Wyatt:
Sincerely.
RB/dr
cc:
’633 MaH Service Center °a;ea- NC 27699-1633 '9'9,' 733-69
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Mr. Edward A. Wyatt, City Manager
City of Wilson
Post Office Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mr. Larry Horton, P.E.
of our staff at [phone].
The subject Engineering Amendment to the city of Wilson 201 Facilities Plan is hereby
approved.
Leo Green III, P.E., Green Engineering
Barry Parks, City of Wilson
Charles Pittman, City of Wilson
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Robert Brown
Hannah Stallings
PMB/DMU/FEU/SRF
\CDLVf
Customer Service
The Construction Grants and Loans Section of the Division ol Water Quality has
completed its review of the May 14, 2004 Engineering Amendment to the city of Wilson 201
Facilities Plan. The project includes the retrofitting of an existing abandoned fine solids settling
basin to serve as a storage facility for treated reuse water and also includes the connection of a
potable water source to serve as a standby source of water for reuse recipients.
Approval
City of Wilson
201 Facilities Plan Engineering Amendment
(May 14, 2004)
Project No. CS370381-04
IDOe
A Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E, Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins. Deputy Director
______________________________Div|siorLef-Water Quality
—;_____________—
A\
\
3
-A
Construct or’ Grab's =rd Loans Section
Wee S•te a ? nccgi net
May 3, 2004
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Baker:
1.
2.
Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-16331633 Mail Service CenterConstruction Grants and Loans Section
Web Site: www.nccgl.net
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Gordon R. Baker. Finance Director
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
As you were notified by letter from Governor Easley, the City of Wilson has been
approved for loan assistance from the Water Pollution Control Revolving Fund in the amount of
$17.1 19,343. This loan will assist with construction of the Hominy Creek WWTP sludge
upgrades, new aeration tank and new laboratory building.
Enclosed are two (2) copies of an Offer and Acceptance Document extending a State
Revolving loan in the amount of $17,1 19.343. This offer is made subject to the assurances and
conditions set forth in the Offer and Acceptance Document. Upon executing the Offer and
Acceptance Document, please submit the following items to the Construction Grants and Loans
Section, 1633 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1633 within forty-five (45)
days of receipt.
A resolution adopted by the governing body accepting the loan offer and making
the applicable assurances contained therein. (Sample copy attached)
One (1) copy of the original Offer and Acceptance Document executed by the
authorized representative for the project. Retain the other copy for your files.
\
Michael F. Easley. Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek. P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins. Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
Offer and Acceptance For a
State Loan
Project No. CS370381-06
Wilson. North Carolina
[phone]
FAX [phone]
XQ,
T r
-i
_ nCdENt:
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
- ---------------------------
Sincerely,
MH
Enclosures
cc:
Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-16331633 Mail Service CenterConstruction Grants and Loans Section
Web Site: www.nccgl.net
Mr. Gordon R. Baker
Page 2
May 3, 2004
In accordance with G.S. 159-26(b)(6), a capital project fund is required to account tor all
debt instillment proceeds used to finance capital projects. It is required that a capital project
ordinance, in accordance with G.S. 159-13.2, be adopted by the governing board authorizing all
appropriations necessary for the completion of the project. A copy of the approved ordinance
must be submitted to this office before requesting the first reimbursement request.
[phone]
FAX [phone]
On behalf of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, I am pleased to
make this offer of State Revolving Loan funds made available by the North Carolina Clean
Water Revolving Loan and Grant Act of 1997 and the Federal Clean Water Act Amendments of
1987.
Hazen & Sawyer
uzKaleigh Regional Office
Valerie Lancaster
Jan Bolick
SRF
John R. Bloyrc, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
In addition, the enclosed pay request form must be used for all reimbursement requests.
You may make additional copies as needed. Also, enclosed is a copy of a memorandum
requesting your Federal Identification Number. Please contact the State Auditors office for the
compliance pertaining to the North Carolina Clean Water Revolving Loan and Grant Program.
_ NCL'L\A
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
May 3, 2004
SUBJECT: Laboratory Certification Maintenance Inspection
Dear Mr. Priest:
Sincerely,
Laboratory Section
Enclosure
cc:
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-16231623 Mail Service CenterN. C. Division of Water Quality-Laboratory Section
FAX: [phone]
/
Edith Henderson
Raleigh Regional Office
342
Mr. Ethan Allen Priest
Merck Manufacturing Division EH&S
4633 Merck Road
Wilson, NC 27893
Enclosed is a report for the inspection performed on April 6, 2004 by Ms. Edith
Henderson. Where deficiencies are cited in this report, a response is required as well as
for all lettered comments and/or recommendations. Within thirty days of receipt, please
supply this office with a written item for item description of how these deficiencies,
comments and/or recommendations were corrected. If the deficiencies cited in the
enclosed report are not corrected, enforcement actions will be recommended. For
certification maintenance, your laboratory must continue to carry out the requirements set
forth in 15A NCAC 2H .0800.
Copies of the checklists completed during the inspection may be requested from this
office. Thank you for your cooperation during the inspection. If you wish to obtain an
electronic copy of this report by email, or if you have questions or need additional
information please contact us at 919-733-3908.
ACo/1
or"
----------- NCDENR
[phone]
MIK w r
Michael F. Easley, Governor
• wMliam G. Ross Jr., Secretary-
North Carolina Departmenrof Environmenl and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek. P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
On-Site Inspection Report
Merck Manufacturing Division EH&SLABORATORY NAME:
ADDRESS:
CERTIFICATE NO:342
April 6, 2004DATE OF INSPECTION:
MaintenanceTYPE OF INSPECTION:
Ms. Edith M. HendersonEVALUATOR:
LOCAL PERSON (S) CONTACTED:Mr. Ethan Allen Priest
I. INTRODUCTION:
II. GENERAL COMMENTS:
III. DEFICIENCIES, RECOMMENDATIONS, REQUIREMENTS, AND COMMENTS:
General:
COD:
B. COMMENT: The laboratory does not apply a correction to recorded temperature readings for COD analysis
based on the NIST comparison.
This report reflects findings related to on-site inspection, application information and DMR review. Laboratory
personnel were cooperative throughout the audit and provided the inspectors with all materials and information
requested for examination. Some further quality control procedures need to be implemented.
This laboratory was inspected to verify its compliance with the requirements of 15A NCAC 2H .0800 for the
analysis of environmental samples.
A. COMMENT: The laboratory does not qualify analysis results on DMR’s if all quality control requirements
are not met. Analytical results must be flagged, anytime any quality control requirements are not met. The
qualification should appear on the back of the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). The qualifying statement
should indicate that not all QC requirements were met.
REQUIREMENT: Any time quality control results indicate an analytical problem, the problem must be resolved
and any samples involved must be rerun if the holding time has not expired. Ref: 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (f).
4633 Merck Road
Wilson, NC 27893
REQUIREMENT: The laboratory must qualify all data that does not meet the quality control criteria established
by either laboratory controls or by criteria given in each individual method. For example if the GGA is not within
the control limits for a given day, the data should be reported and the results qualified with a note that indicates
the laboratory recognizes that the GGA is out of range, but that in the technicians professional opinion that the
data is valid. Any variation in data quality should be explained by qualifying the data.
REQUIREMENT: All thermometers must meet National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
specifications for accuracy or be checked, at a minimum annually, against a NIST traceable thermometer and
proper corrections made. Reference: 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (O).
Page 2
BOD:
REQUIREMENT: It is the desire of the State of North Carolina that all data generated for any permitted
location under NPDES requirements is to be reported. “ Every person subject to [15A NCAC 2B .0506] shall
file certified monitoring reports setting forth the results of tests and measurements conducted pursuant to
NPDES permit monitoring requirements.” Reference: 15A NCAC 2B .0506 (a) (1). Additionally, “ the results of
all tests of the characteristics of the effluent, including but not limited to NPDES Permit Monitoring
Requirements, shall be reported on monthly report forms." Reference: 15A NCAC 2B .0506 (b) (3) (J).
E. COMMENT: The laboratory does not record the time setup and the time out of the incubator on bench
sheets.
REQUIREMENT: The date and time BOD and coliform samples are removed from the incubator must be
included in the laboratory worksheet. Ref: 15A NCAC 2H .0805 (a) (7) (h).
1. The DO depletion of the dilution water blank must not be more than 0.2 mg/L.
2. The seed controls must deplete at least 2.0 mg/L DO and have at least 1.0 mg/LDO remaining.
3. The samples must also deplete at least 2.0 mg/L DO and have at least 1.0 mg/L DO remaining.
4. No evidence of toxicity should be present. This can only be evident when at least three dilutions are
analyzed. This is characterized by an increasing BOD value as the sample concentration decreases.
5. The glucose - glutamic acid standard must be in the acceptable range of 198 ± 30.5 mg/L.
6. The seed correction, calculated from the seed controls, must be between 0.6 and 1.0 mg/L.
COMMENT: The data must be flagged, anytime any of the above quality control requirements are not met.
The qualification should appear on the back of the Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR). The qualifying
statement should indicate that not all QC requirements were met. However, the data must always be reported.
Note: After the initial air calibration of the meter, draw a BOD bottle of dilution water as the reference bottle for
the drift check, read and document the DO as the day 1 initial calibration check. Read the DO of the reference
bottle every 10 samples and at the end of the run and document as the day 1 continuing and day 1 final
calibration checks. Stopper the bottle between readings and discard the dilution water in this bottle after the final
calibration check is finished. Repeat this process with another BOD bottle of dilution water on day five after initial
calibration of the meter and document the readings as day 5 initial, continuing and final calibration checks. If the
meter drifts more than 0.20 mg/L then recalibrate meter, wait 15 min and reanalyze all samples since the last drift
check.
D. COMMENT: The laboratory does not have an established procedure to qualify data that does not meet
quality control criteria. The Quality Control requirements of the method are outlined below:
C. COMMENT: The laboratory does not check calibration of the DO Meter during, (every ten samples), and at
the end of the sample set.
F. COMMENT: The laboratory is not verifying the automatic temperature compensation for all DO meters on an
annual basis. Thermistors may not compensate fully over a wide temperature range or can gradually change due
to age. Standard Methods 18th Edition recommends for validation of temperature effect the frequent check of one
'or two points to verify temperature correction data. Ref.: Standard Methods - 18th Edition 45000 G (1) (a) and (3)
(c).
Note: If certified thermometers have an expiration date from the manufacturer, the lab should have them
recalibrated and retain an updated certification of the thermometer. Many manufacturers are now placing a
one year expiration date on these thermometers.
REQUIREMENT: Check one or two points frequently to confirm original calibration. If calibration changes, the
new calibration should be parallel to the original, provided that the same membrane material is used. Ref:
Standard Methods, 18th Edition - Method 4500-0 G 1a. p4-104.
Page 3
Ammonia:
G. COMMENT: The laboratory uses a five standard calibration ranging from 0.1 to 1000 mg/l each analysis day.
IV. PAPER TRAIL INVESTIGATION:
No paper trail was completed at this time.
V. CONCLUSIONS:
Please respond to all lettered Comments cited in this report.
Report prepared by: Edith M. Henderson Date: April 8, 2004
Correcting the above comments and implementing the recommendations should help this laboratory to
produce quality data and meet certification requirements.
RECOMMENDATION: The laboratory should evaluate the necessity to calibrate to a higher limit of 1000 mg/l.
The samples for environmental analysis are normally in the range of 1 to 10 mg/l. It is recommended that the
laboratory perform a low level calibration (1.0 - 10.0 mg/l) each analysis day if permit limits allow. A mid-range
standard must be analyzed with group of samples. In addition, ammonia free water should be used for blank
analysis and must have a value below the lowest calibration standard. Ref: Standard Methods, 20th Edition -
Method 5210B.6.b. p5-6.
RECOMMENDATION: The Automatic Temperature Compensation of all DO meters should be verified at
least annually to ensure accurate and reproducible results.
March 22, 2004
Subject:
Dear Mr. Stafford:
♦ FAX: [phone]
Wastewater Management
Facility
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
The following comments are submitted in response to the comments listed on
page five of the report under Drying Beds. I met with personnel from Synagro after the
inspection and they immediately began working on the areas we discussed. On March
18, 2004 I met with Synagro personnel including Mr. Jeff' Spivey, Sr. Operations
Manager to discuss improving daily housekeeping practices and taking steps to contain
all spills. A berm has been built inside the belt press operation tents to contain any spills
that occur during operation of the press, also continuous monitoring of the area around
the drying beds will keep any spillage contained to the drying beds. Please refer to the
letter to me from Mr. Jeff Spivey of Synagro for actions taken to improve housekeeping
conditions at there operation.
The location for the discharge of hauled waste has been moved from the area at
the storm drain to the area with the drain system that drains back into the influent of the
treatment plant. Please refer to the enclosed letter dated March 17, 2004 that was mailed
to all hauled waste operators that discharge at the Hominy Creek facility.
Mr. Kirk Stafford
Raleigh Regional Office
Water Quality Section
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1628
This responds to the Division of Water Quality Water Compliance Inspection
Report to the City of Wilson WWMF dated March 9, 2004.
Response to Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Hominy Creek WWMF
City of Wilson
NPDES Permit NC0023906
CITY OF WILSON
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
F.....■
. MAR 2 2 2004
■ i
P.O. BOX 10 ♦ WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894-0010 ♦ TELEPHONE [phone]
EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
If you have any questions concerning this letter please call me at 252-399-2491
Sincerely,
Cc:
Russell P. Brice
Plant Manager
Mr. Kirk Stafford
CEI Response
Page 2
Charles W. Pittman
Barry Parks
Al Hinnant
Jim Cauley
Jeff Spivey, Synagro
ACA
SYNAGRQ
MAR 22 2uu.
A Residuals Management Company
March 19, 2004
Subject: City of Wilson meeting concerning state inspection
Dear Mr. Brice:
6220-A Hackers Bend Court, Winston-Salem, NC 27103 • Ph: [phone] • Fax: [phone] • Toll Free: [phone]
Mr. Russell Brice, WWMF Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894
4) Synagro will seek to eliminate spills from the drying beds and conveyors. Should any
spills occur they will be dealt with immediately. Drying bed material will not remain
outside of the drying beds for any period should spills happen during loading. Spills
from hoses will be dealt with by draining those hoses into the proper areas before
uncoupling happens.
r - . -y
Pw'ne.' :■>
It is Synagro's intention to provide you with a high level of service while maintaining
compliance with federal and state regulations. Your comments concerning the
inspection performed by Mr. Kirk Stafford were clear, concise and well received.
Following our meeting with you and your staff; Bill Teffeau, James Walker and I had a
lengthy discussion to address the issues you broached. We will take action to correct
the issues of concern for both the City of Wilson and the Division of Water Quality and
we will address the following issues in a rapid fashion:
1) The dropping of sludge material from trucks to the land filled will be dealt with in a
prompt manner. The truck drivers will receive direction from Synagro personnel to
properly clean their trucks before they leave the loading area. The back gate of the
Synagro dump truck, as well as the back axles, will be cleaned so that sludge can not
drop on the ground during transport from the press to the drying beds.
2) Bill Teffeau and James Walker will be determining the best possible means to
produce effective erosion control for the storm drains near our operation. Once they
have developed a reasonable set of controls, those controls will be implemented.
Please be in communication with all of the Synagro parties involved concerning this
issue and if you are pleased with our actions.
3) Continued leaks and spills will be addressed by Bill Teffeau and his staff, he has
indicated that he will take the lead to correct these issues.
Synagro, South, Inc.
Roy Whitaker, Synagro South, Inc.cc:
Bill Teffeau, Synagro, South, Inc.
James Walker, Synagro, South, Inc.
Because our spill control plans usually deal specifically with the land application aspect
of the biosolids issue, using it verbatim might not fully address your concerns. As spills
happen, Synagro will use many of the control procedures set forth by the spill control
plan. To stem possible spills, Synagro will be pro-active in maintaining a safe, compliant
flow of sludge from our presses to the drying beds. We will also address your points
concerning parking issues and utilizing curbs.
The City of Wilson is valued customer to Synagro and we hope to provide significant
progress on the above stated issues in a very short time. We appreciate your patience
with these issues and we look forward to developing a remedy for these issues.
Sincerely,
Sr. Operations Manager )
Wilson, NC
I
1972 * 2003
March 17. 2004
SUBJECT:Change in receiving location for hauled waste at the City of Wilson Wastewater Management Facility
Dear Mr. Parks:
Sincerely.
cc:
★ ★***
AU-America City
1
George Flowers ’ Beef & Pork Slaughter & Processing
Parks' Portable Toilets
Reach lite & Barricade
Effective immediately, all discharges of hauled waste will be received at the headw orks of the plant near the bar screen area.
The new location is approximately 15 to 20 feet from the area currently being used. The new discharge site is located directly
across from the back gate entrance near the “Waste Industries” dumpster. The area where the dumpster is located has a
drainage system that flows back into the wastewater treatment process. Spills occurring in this area will be contained, and will
be prevented from entering the stormwater drainage system.
Sent to: Down East Rent-A-John
Mitchell "s Septic Tank Cleaning Service
Parks Septic Tank Cleaning Service
During a recent facility inspection, it was noted that the current discharge location that is being utilized for the receiving of
hauled waste is located very' near a stormwater drainage basin. In an effort to prevent an accidental discharge to stormwater,
the City of Wilson is moving the receiving point for hauled waste to an alternative location.
As in the past, all visitors (this includes hauled waste dischargers) are still required to report to the office prior to proceeding
to the discharge location. An operator w ill be notified to meet you at the discharge location. If there is no one available in the
office, please find someone in the inunediate area and ask him or her to assist you.
All discharge vehicles must be equipped w ith the necessary equipment that will allow them to discharge into the receiving
point. A discharge hose of at least 15 feet in length should be sufficient to reach the discharge point from tlie parking area. If
you do not have the necessary equipment, then you will not be allow ed to discharge.
As always, an “On-Site Wastewater Discharge” form must be filled out and submitted with each discharge. It is the
responsibility of the driver to provide the following information on the form: Signature of Discharger (Driver), Date. Time,
Company Name, Person in Charge (First & Last Name). Address (Street, City, State. Zip Code). Phone #, Location of Waste
Origin (County'), T^-pe of Waste, and Volume Discharged (gallons). Prior to leaving the facility, the driver must also obtain the
signature of the person accepting the waste. Please note that only wastewater that originates in Wilson County is allowed to
be discharged at the City of Wilson Water Reclamation Facility.
Failure to properly comply with these procedures, or with the City of Wilson’s Sewer Use Ordinance could result in the
tennination of your Authorization to Discharge at this facility. The City of Wilson thanks you for your understanding and
support of these new procedures. If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone].
Jimmy Pridgen
Pretreatment Coordinator
W a s' a w a t e r Management
Facility
Barry' Parks. Water Resources Manager
Russell P. Brice. Water Reclamation Manager
Al Hiimant. Operations & Maintenance Supervisor
Kirk Stafford. Environmental Chemist (NCDENR-DWQ)
CITY OF WILSON
cAio/itli Cn/ioftna
INCORPORATED 1849
27894-0010
P.O. BOX 10 ♦ WILSON, NORTH CAROLINA 27894-0010 ♦ TELEPHONE [phone] TAX: [phone]
EOriAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER
— V
March 19, 2004
9 7^'*
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brice:
Eligible
Non Eligible
1633 Mail Service CenterConstruction Grants & Loans Section
Web Address www.nccql.net
Mr. Russell Brice, Water Reclamation Manager
City of Wilson
Post Office Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894
The review for completeness and adequacy of the project construction plans and specifications
has been concluded by the Construction Grants & Loans Section of the North Carolina Division of
Water Quality. Therefore, said plan documents are hereby approved. Eligibility for Revolving Loan
funding is determined as follows:
Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF Improvements
Approval of the Plans and Specifications
Project No. CS 370381-06
Issuance of this approval letter does not imply availability of funding. In the event that
received bids exceed the amount established through the funding offer, and local funds are not
adequate to award contract(s), it will be necessary to consider all alternatives including redesign,
re-advertising, and rebidding.
NEDENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
PT
^11 \ tMIL Qi C
One additional 780,000 gallon aeration tank, the upgrade of four existing anaerobic digesters,
construction of a new sludge thickening and dewatering building, with two new gravity belt thickeners,
two belt filter presses, a new waste activated sludge pump station with three 900 gpm pumps, a new ten
ton per day alkaline sludge stabilization facility, three new 50,000 gallon sludge holding tanks, a new
septage receiving station, replacement of the existing primary sludge pumping system, a new drain
pump station, and a new 4,633 square foot administration/laboratory building.
Any administration/laboratory building costs in excess of $648,620 ($140 per square foot) arc not
eligible for funding. Any additional costs associated with choosing a preferred alternate will not be
eligible for funding, unless it can be demonstrated through an acceptable cost effective analysis that the
preferred alternate is more cost effective than the base bid. Any such justification for eligibility must be
presented and approved after receipt of bids and prior to our issuance of an Authorization to Award.
> |L
While rejection of all bids is possible, such action may be taken only with prior State
concurrence, and only for good cause.
Mr. Russell Brice
Page 2
March 19, 2004
If the recipient does not maintain the court sanctioned schedules which extended the
compliance date for complying with the final effluent limits established in the NPDES Permit,
then project costs incurred will not be eligible for Revolving Loan payments.
Your project is subject to the one-year performance certification requirements. By this,
you are required on the date one year after the completion of construction and initial operation of
the subject treatment facilities, to certify, based on your consultant engineer's advisement,
whether or not such treatment works meet the design performance, specifications and the permit
conditions and effluent limitations.
In accordance with the Federal Regulations, the recipient is required to assure compliance
with the OSHA safety regulations on the subject project. In complying with this regulatory
responsibility, the recipient should, by letter, invite the Training Officer, Education Training and
Technical Assistance Unit, NC OSHA Division, 4 W. Edenton Street, Raleigh, NC 27601
(telephone [phone]), to participate in the Preconstruction Conference to assure that proper
emphasis is given on understanding and adhering to the OSHA regulations.
It is the responsibility of the recipient and the Consulting Engineer to insure that the
project plan documents are in compliance with amended N. C. G. S. 133-3 (ratified July 13,
1993). The administrative review and approval of these plans and specifications, and any
subsequent addenda or change order, do not imply approval of a restrictive specification for
bidding purposes; nor is it an authorization for noncompetitive procurement actions.
Any addenda to be issued for subject project plans and specifications must be submitted by
the recipient such that adequate time is allowed for review/approval action by the State, and for
subsequent bidder action prior to receipt of bids.
It is mandatory for project facilities to be constructed in accordance with the North
Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, and, where applicable, the North Carolina Dam
Safety Act. In addition, the specifications must clearly state what the contractors' responsibilities
shall be in complying with these Acts.
Neither the State nor Federal Government, nor any of its departments, agencies or
employees is or will be a party to the invitation to bids, addenda, any resulting contracts or
contract negotiations/changes.
Prior to entering into any contract(s) for construction, the recipient must have obtained all
applicable project Permits from the State, including an Authorization to Construct and/or Non­
Discharge Permit.
Mr. Russell Brice
Page 3
March 19, 2004
The recipient shall comply with the provisions of 40 CFR Part 7, Subpart C -
Discrimination Prohibited on the Basis of Handicap.
Attached is one (1) copy of the Project Review and Cost Summary (Authority to Award)
which is to be completed within 21 days after bids have been received, and submitted to the State
for review. Upon review and approval of this information, the State will authorize the recipient
to make the proposed award.
Do not proceed with construction until the Authorization-to-Award package and the EEO
and MBE documentation/certification have been reviewed, and you are in receipt of our
approval, if a Federal loan is desired for project construction.
One (1) set of the final approved plans and specifications will be forwarded to you. One
(1) set of plans and specifications identical to the approved set must be available at the project
site at all times.
Two (2) copies of any change order must be promptly submitted by the recipient to the
State. If additional information is requested by the State, a response is required within two (2)
weeks, or the change order will be returned without further or final action.
Upon completion of the project construction, the recipient shall submit a letter confirming
that the project has been constructed in accordance with the plans and specifications approved by
the State. "As-built" plans will need to be submitted with any changes clearly documented on
the plans if the above confirmation cannot be made.
A goal of 8% of the contract price is established for Minority Business Enterprise (MBE)
participation in this project, and a goal of 5% of the contract price is established for Women's
Business Enterprise (WBE) participation in this project. The Recipient and Bidders shall make a
good faith effort to assure that MBE's and WBE's are utilized, when possible, as sources of
goods and services. The good faith effort must include the following affirmative steps: (a)
including small, minority, and women's businesses on solicitation lists; (b) assuring that small,
minority, and women's businesses are solicited whenever they are potential sources; (c) dividing
total requirements, when economically feasible, into small tasks or quantities to permit
maximum participation by small, minority, and women's businesses; (d) establishing delivery
schedules, and (e) using the services of the Small Business Administration and the Minority
Business Development Agency of the U.S. Department of Commerce. Please note that the
solicitation efforts should include documentable follow-up phone calls.
*
Sincerely,
Attachment
GTV: cgm
John R. Blowe, P.E., Chief
Construction Grants & Loans Section
If there are any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact
Mr. Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P. E. at [phone].
Mr. Russell Brice
Page 4
March 19, 2004
cc: Ron Taylor, P.E., Hazen and Sawyer
Raleigh Regional Office
Amy Simes, P.E.
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Valerie Lancaster
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.
Gil Vinzani, P.E.
OSHA Training Officer, Les Kafel
CIG
SRF
i
March 19, 2004
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brice:
(919) 733-70151617 Mail Service Center Raleigh. NC 27699-1617N. C. Division of Water Quality
Mr. Russell Brice, Water Reclamation Manager
City of Wilson
Post Office Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894
This authorization results in no increase in design or pennitted capacity and is awarded
for the construction of the following specific modifications:
This Authorization to Construct is issued in accordance with Part III, Paragraph A of
NPDES Permit No. NC0023906 issued November 1,2001, and shall be subject to revocation
unless the wastewater treatment facilities are constructed in accordance with the conditions and
limitations specified in Permit No. NC0023906.
In the event that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of
nuisance conditions, the Permittee shall take immediate corrective action, including those as may
be required by this Division, such as the construction of additional or replacement wastewater
treatment or disposal facilities.
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
t of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
A to C No. 023906A01
Authorization to Construct
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
Wilson County
Project No. CS 370381-06
nCdenr
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748
A letter of request for Authorization to Construct was received October 15, 2003, by the
Division, and final plans and specifications for the subject project have been reviewed and found
to be satisfactory. Authorization is hereby granted for the construction of modifications to the
existing 14 MGD Hominy Creek Wastewater Management Facility, with discharge of treated
wastewater into Contentnea Creek in the Neuse River Basin.
One additional 780,000 gallon aeration tank, the upgrade of four existing anaerobic
digesters, construction of a new sludge thickening and dewatering building, with two new
gravity belt thickeners, two belt filter presses, a new waste activated sludge pump station
with three 900 gpm pumps, a new ten ton per day alkaline sludge stabilization facility,
three new 50,000 gallon sludge holding tanks, a new septage receiving station,
replacement of the existing primary sludge pumping system, a new drain pump station,
and a new 4,633 square foot administration/laboratory building.
co . |\| I If—— J ■ fl
1
t
Mr. Russell Brice
Page 2
March 19, 2004
The Raleigh Regional Office, telephone number (919 571-4700, shall be notified at least
forty-eight (48) hours in advance of operation of the installed facilities so that an on site
inspection can be made. Such notification to the regional supervisor shall be made during the
normal office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. on Monday through Friday, excluding State
Holidays.
Upon classification of the facility by the Certification Commission, the Permittee shall
employ a certified wastewater treatment plant operator to be in responsible charge (ORC) of the
wastewater treatment facilities. The operator must hold a certificate of the type and grade at
least equivalent to or greater than the classification assigned to the wastewater treatment
facilities by the Certification Commission.
The Permittee must also employ a certified back-up operator of the appropriate type and
grade to comply with the conditions of T15A:8G.0202. The ORC of the facility must visit each
Class I facility at least weekly and each Class II, III and IV facility at least daily, excluding
weekends and holidays, must properly manage the facility, must document daily operation and
maintenance of the facility, and must comply with all other conditions of T15A:8G.O2O2.
A copy of the approved plans and specifications shall be maintained on file by the
Permittee for the life of the facility.
During the construction of the proposed additions/modifications, the permittee shall
continue to properly maintain and operate the existing wastewater treatment facilities at all times,
and in such a manner, as necessary to comply with the effluent limits specified in the NPDES
Permit.
You are reminded that it is mandatory for the project to be constructed in accordance
with the North Carolina Sedimentation Pollution Control Act, and, when applicable, the North
Carolina Dam Safety Act. In addition, the specifications must clearly state what the contractor’s
responsibilities shall be in complying with these Acts.
Failure to abide by the requirements contained in this Authorization to Construct may
subject the Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division of Water Quality in accordance
with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A to 143-215.6C.
Upon completion of construction and prior to operation of this permitted facility, a
certification must be received from a professional engineer certifying that the permitted facility
has been installed in accordance with the NPDES Permit, this Authorization to Construct and the
approved plans and specifications. Mail the Certification to Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.,
Construction Grants & Loans, DWQ / DENR, 1633 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-
1633.
CGM/gv
cc:
Mr. Russell Brice
Page 3
March 19, 2004
The issuance of this Authorization to Construct does not preclude the Permittee from
complying with any and all statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances which may be imposed by
other government agencies (local, state, and federal) which have jurisdiction.
One (1) set of approved plans and specifications is being forwarded to you. If you have
any questions or need additional information, please contact Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E. at
telephone number [phone].
Ron Taylor, P.E., Hazen and Sawyer
Wilson County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Dave Goodrich, NPDES Permitting Unit
Gil Vinzani, P.E.
Cecil G. Madden, Jr., P.E.
SRF
Sincerely,
Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Engineer’s Certification
We understand that the new NPDES limits for ammonia nitrogen now apply.
Registration No. Signature
Date
Send to:
One additional 780,000 gallon aeration tank, the upgrade of four existing anaerobic digesters,
construction of a new sludge thickening and dewatering building, with two new gravity belt
thickeners, two belt filter presses, a new waste activated sludge pump station with three 900 gpm
pumps, a new ten ton per day alkaline sludge stabilization facility, three new 50,000 gallon
sludge holding tanks, a new septagc receiving station, replacement of the existing primary sludge
pumping system, a new drain pump station, and a new 4,633 square foot
administration/laboratory building.
I certify that the construction of the above referenced project was observed to be built within
substantial compliance and intent of the approved plans and specifications.
City of Wilson
Authorization to Construct
A to C No. 023906A01
Construction Grants & Loans
DENR/DWQ
1633 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1633
I,, as a duly registered Professional Engineer in the
State of North Carolina, having been authorized to observe (periodically/weekly/full time) the
construction of the modifications and improvements to the Hominy Creek WWTP, located on
Old Stantonsburg Road in Wilson County for the City of Wilson, hereby state that, to the best of
my abilities, due care and diligence was used in the observation of the following construction:
North Carolina Department
O
March 9, 2004
Subject:
Dear Mr. Brice:
Cc: Lisa Uhl-EPA
On March 5, 2004. Mr. Kirk Stafford of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a
Compliance Evaluation Inspection (CEI) of the subject facility accompanied by yourself.
Your help and cooperation during that inspection was helpful and appreciated. The
checklist used during that inspection is enclosed. Please note the comments sections in
the checklist and respond as requested.
In addition, it was noted that the septage disposal site is located above a storm
drain that leads off site. As per our discussions, please relocate that disposal site so that
any spillage would discharge to the drain that is tributary to the wastewater treatment
system.
Raleigh Regional Office
Water Quality Section
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Byironment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Colleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
Mr. Russel Brice, WWMF Manager
City of Wilson
P.O. Box 10
Wilson, NC 27894-0010
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Wilson Hominy Creek WWMF
NPDES Permit NC0023906
Wilson County
1628 Mail Service Center
Raleigh. NC 27699-1628
phone[phone]
facsimile [phone]
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
It also appears that the facility is not covered under an NCG11000 storm water
permit. Please ensure that this permit is obtained as soon as possible. That application is
enclosed for your convenience.
” X-
Sincerely,
Kirk Stafford
Environmental Chemist
NCDENR
2? /im I
1
EPA
NPDES
3l 12L J 17NC0023906
21| I I I I I I | | I | | | | | I I I I I66
Entry Time/Date Permit Effective Date
04/02/0109:30 AM 04/03/05
Wilson WWTP
Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration DateOld Stantonsburg Road
Wilson NC 27893 08/05/3112:45 PM 04/03/05
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)Other Facility Data
Russell
Self-Monitoring Program
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s)Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
RRO WQ//919 - 571 - 4700/919 - 571-4718
Signature of Management Review,Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Dal
n gQ
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Operations & Maintenance
Facility Site Review
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
yr/mo/day
04/03/05
QA
72 LJ
Form Approved.
OMB No. 2040-0057
Approval expires 8-31-98
Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating70 u
j11
Inspection Type
18|£j
Inspector
19LSJ
Fac Type
20
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
Records/Reports
Effluent/Receiving Waters
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
Kirk M Stafford /
Inspection Work Days
671 3.0 | 69
Remarks
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
Bl71 u —Reserved------------------------
75l I I I I I I I8073 LU 74
Transaction Code
1 N 2 N
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Brice, PO Box 10 Wilson NC 27893/Plant Manager/252-399-249
Flow Measurement
■-/■ Sludge Handling Disposal
NPDES 1
NC00239C6
Section D: Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
yr/mo/day
04/03/05 J17J11
Inspection Type
18 [c]3l 12 I
NC0023906Permit:
Inspection Date: 03/05/04
Comment:
NENARnr Screens
Type of bar screen
a.Manual
b.Mechanical
Are the bars adequately screening debris?
Is the screen free of excessive debris?
Comment:
No NA NEYes
b.Mechanical
Is the site free of excessive organic content in the grit chamber?
Is the site free of excessive odor?
Is disposal of grit in compliance?
Comment:
NA NE
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
NEYesNoNA
Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids in center well of circular clarifier?
Are weirs level?
Is the site free of weir blockage?
Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting?
Is scum removal adequate?
Page# 1
Is disposal of screening in compliance?
Is the unit in good condition?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable?
CommentThe primary clarifiers have black odorous wastewater and this is typical of this type of unit. There was some
floating sludge present also.
Is the site free of excessive floating sludge?
Is the drive unit operational?
Owner - Facility: City of Wilson - Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Operations & Maintenance
Does the plant have general safety structures in place such as rails around or covers over tanks, pits, or wells?
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Secondary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Primary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
Grit Removal
Type of grit removal
a.Manual
Yes No
Yes No
Yes No NA bT
Permit:NC0023906
Inspection Date: 03/05/04
NA NE
Are the diffusers operational?
Is the DO level acceptable?
NoYes NA NE
NA NF
Page# 2
Mode of operation
Are tablet chlorinators operational?
Are the tablets the proper size and type?
Number of tubes in use?
(Sodium Hypochlorite) Is pump feed system operational?
Is bulk storage tank containment area adequate? (free of leaks/open drains)
Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable?
Is SCBA equipment operational?
Is staff trained is operating SCBA equipment?
Is staff trained in emergency procedures?
Is an evacuation plan in place?
Is ventilation equipment properly located?
Is SCBA equipment available on site?
Type of aeration system
Is the basin free of dead spots?
Are surface aerators and mixers operational?
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the surface free of bulking ?
CommenLThe weirs are coverd and can not be inspected visually.
Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process?
Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin’ s surface?
Owner - Facility: City of Wilson - Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■

■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Are settleometer results acceptable?
CommentFoam covers 100% of all basins. The plant manager stated this could be due to the change of season.
Nutrient Removal
Is total nitrogen removal required?
Is total phosphorous removal required?
Type
Is chemical feed required to sustain process?
Is nutrient removal process operating properly?
Comment:
Secondary Clarifier
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable?
Disinfection
Type of system ?
Are cylinders secured adequately?
Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight?
Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant?
Is ventilation equipment operational?
■
■
NA NEYes No
Yes No
Yes No
1
Permit:NC0023906
Inspection Date: 03/05/04
NA NE
Comment:
Yes No NA NE
Yes No NA NE
As built Engineering drawings
Page# 3
Schedules and dates of equipment maintenance and repairs
Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters?
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users?
Plant records are adequate, available and include
O&M Manual
Is there an emergency agreement with a fuel vendor for extended run on back-up power?
Comment:Generators are managed by the Public Utilities Dept.
Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup?
Comment:
Are the tablets the proper size and type?
Are tablet de-chlorinators operational?
Number of tubes in use?
Name of person performing analyses
Transported COCs
Owner - Facility: City of Wilson - Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Record Keeping
Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit?
Is all required information readily available, complete and current?
Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab. reg. required 5 years)?
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
Are sampling and analysis data adequate and include:
Dates, times and location of sampling
Name of individual performing the sampling
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Standby Power
is automatically activated standby power available?
Is generator tested weekly by interrupting primary power source?
Is generator tested under load at least quarterly?
Was generator tested & operational during the inspection?
Do the generator(s) have adequate capacity to operate the entire wastewater site?
Does generator have adequate fuel?
De-chlorination
Type of system ?
Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)?
Is storage appropriate for cylinders?
Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers?
Is ventilation operational?
Comment:
Disinfection
Is there adequate detention time
NA NE
Yes No
■
■
■
■
■
■
Yes No
NC0023906Permit:
Inspection Date: 03/05/04
■
NENA
Comment:
NA NE
Comment:
YesAnaerobic, Digester
NA NF
Page# 4
J
Is the tubing clean?
Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at 1.0 to 4.4 degrees Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type representative)?
Type of operation:
Is the capacity adequate?
Is gas stored on site?
Is the digester(s) free of tilting covers?
Is the gas burner operational?
Is the digester heated?
Is the temperature maintained constantly?
Comment:See comments under "Record Keeping"
Is the sludge land applied?
(Vacuum filters) Is polymer mixing adequate?
Owner - Facility: City of Wilson - Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
■
Effluent Sampling
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
Is proper volume collected?
Upstream / Downstream Sampling
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, and sampling location)?
Drying Reds
Is there adequate drying bed space?
Is the sludge distribution on drying beds appropriate?
Are the drying beds free of vegetation?
Is the site free of dry sludge remaining in beds?
Is the site free of stockpiled sludge?
Is the filtrate from sludge drying beds returned to the front of the plant?
Is the sludge disposed of through county landfill?
Record Keeping
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
Is the facility description verified as contained in the NPDES permit?
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for example: MLSS, MCRT, Settleable Solids, DO, Sludge
Judge. pH, and others that are applicable?
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review?
CommentThe current permit indicates anaerobic digesters. The 4 digesters are used for storage only. All sludge is
lime stableized and land applied or taken to Bertie County landfill.
Yes No
No NA NE
NA NFYes No
Yes No
Yes No
■
Permit:NC0023906
Inspection Date: 03/05/04
Yes No NA NE
Is the chemical feed equipment operational?
Is the site free of sludge buildup on belts and/or rollers of filter press?
Is the site free of excessive moisture in belt filter press sludge cake?
Comment:See comments under "Drying Beds"
Page# 5
Is storage adequate?
Is the site free of high level of solids in filtrate from filter presses or vacuum filters?
Owner - Facility: City of Wilson - Wilson WWTP
Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
■
■
■
■
■
■
Solids Handling Enuipment
Is the equipment operational?
Drying Beds Yfis.
CommentThe drying beds are used for sludge storage only. It was noted during the inspection that treated sludge was
spilling out of the beds and that sludge filtrate was running out from under the belt press enclosures onto the ground. In
addition, treated sludge was falling off the conveyor belts and onto the ground. Please respond within 10 working days
detailing what the facility plans to do to address these concers.
No NA NF
North Carolina
O
October 14, 2003
SUBJECT:
Dear Mr. Pittman:
TR/dr
cc:
1633 Mail Service CenterConstruction Grants & Loans Section
Web Address www.nccql.net
A review of the plans and specifications for the City of Wilson’s improvements project has been
completed by the Construction Grants and Loans Section. The comments resulting from this review are
being transmitted directly to your engineer for clarification and resolution; a copy is attached for your
reference. Our goal is to approve the plans and specifications as soon as possible. A thorough and timely
response is necessary in order to accomplish this goal.
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, III
City of Wilson
Post Office Box 10
Wilson, North Carolina 27894-0010
City of Wilson
Hominy Creek WWMF
Project No. CS370381-06
Raleigh, NC 27699-1633 Phone [phone]
FAX [phone]
Upon receipt of satisfactory responses from your engineer to our comments, the review of the plan
documents will be completed. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact Ms. Teresa Rodriguez, P.E., State Project Review Engineer, at [phone].
Attachment
David Nailor, P.E., Hazen and Sawyer
DWQ Raleigh Regional Office
Daniel Blaisdell, P.E.
Amy Simes, P.E.
Salam Murtada, P.E.
Teresa Rodriguez, P.E.
SRF
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
IJ^^Bient of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
__ SfA
NCDENR
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748
Cecil G./Madden, Jr., P.E., Supervisor /
Construction Grants and Loans Section
Design Management Unit
General:
1.Provide a letter from the city requesting an Authorization to Construct.
2.
3.Provide signatures for all professional engineers’ seals.
4.The calculations should be sealed and signed by a professional engineer.
Calculations:
Plans:
1. It appears that the proposed WAS pumps are in series with the RAS pumps. Please
explain how this was taken into consideration in the design of the WAS pumps, and
explain the operation of the system in series.
Provide a completed Non-Discharge Permit application for the Distribution of Residual
Solids with the $1090 application fee. A blank application is attached.
CONSTRUCTION GRANTS AND LOANS SECTION
DESIGN MANAGEMENT UNIT
Review Comments
City of Wilson
Project No. CS370381-06
Sheet G1
1. The Biological Phosphorus Removal Tank is labeled as, Final Clarifier 1.
Sheet M260
1. The 6-inch line from the primary clarifier is identified as a 10-inch line in Sheet M1.
Sheet M303
1. Provide an engineering justification for the modifications to the existing tanks. Support
justification with calculations.
Sheet M280
1. The 6-inch lines from the primary clarifiers are identified as 8-inch lines in Sheet Ml.
The 6-inch line to the digesters is identified as an 8-inch line in Sheet Ml.
4. The diameter of the mixer impeller is 5’ 4”, while the dimension of the access hatch is
4 feet. Confirm if the size of the access hatch is appropriate for installing and removing
the impellers for maintenance or replacement.
2. The bottom plan has a section designation that refers to sheet M831. This sheet does not
appear to exist.
3. Section M830 appears to be a section that combines some of the information from the
above two-mentioned sections.
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, III
Page 2 of 5
October 14, 2003
Sheet M830
1. The top plan has a section designation that refers to sheets M831 and M861. It appears
that neither is correct.
Sheet M807
1. The ADS line inside the digester is identified as a 6-inch line. Please clarify if this
section of line should be 8-inch.
Sheet M850
1. It appears that the sludge truck will have to back up into the truck-loading bay of the
sludge storage building. Advise if there is enough space in the access road for a truck to
turn and back up into the loading bay.
Sheet M823
1. Confirm if the specifications for the hot water pumps are included in the specifications;
and, if so, under what section.
Sheet M802
1. Clarify the location of the digester gas flow meter. The drawings show the flow meter in
the 6-inch WAS line.
Sheets M801 to M804
1. Identify the section numbers referred to in the notes.
Sheet M58O
1. Bottom Plan - The arrow indicating flow for the 10-inch WAS line is pointing in the
wrong direction.
2. The boiler schematic detail appears to sole source the backflow preventer and the turbine
flow meter. Revise detail and explain how it complies with NCOS 133-3.
2. Explain how the material accumulated in the bar rack will be disposed of.
Specifications:
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, III
Page 3 of 5
October 14, 2003
General:
1. When specifying product manufacturers, at least three manufacturers should be listed,
along with the phrase, “or approved equal.” If this cannot be done, please advise how
competition is offered so that the recommended units are not construed to be of a sole
source nature. The performance specifications are often written in a restrictive manner.
When a performance specification is used we ask the engineer to provide a list of
manufacturers that make equipment, which complies with the proposed performance
specification. Some sections in the specifications where the three manufacturers are not
listed include: Section 11485, Part 2.02, Section 11486, Parts 2.02, 2.03, 2.04, 2.10, 2.11,
2.12, 2.13, 2.14, 2.15, and 2.16, Section 11900, Part 2.03, Section 15100, Part 2.02,
Section 15105, Section 15108, Section 15114, Section 15290, Section 15604, Section
15512, Section 15522, Section 15606, Parts 2.02 and 2.04, Section 16500, Parts 2.02 and
2.03, Section 17240, Part 2.05, Section 17760, Part 2.03, and Section 17802.
Sheet S853
1. This page does not have the engineer’s seal and signature.
Sheets S905 and S906
1. Identify the correct detail numbers for the details identified as X/XXX.
Sheet M856
1. Advise if the belt-filter press will have a drainage pipe to route the filter drainage to the
floor drain.
2. When specifying experience required, in lieu of the contractor’s years of experience, the
contractor should be allowed to provide a cash bond equivalent to the value of the
installed work, with the duration equal to the number of years experience that are
missing. Some instances in the specifications where the experience requirements do not
Sheet M920
1. Identify the number referred to as FE/FIT for the mag meter in the top plan.
Sheet M852
1. This sheet seems to imply that the contractor is to provide conveyor “A” that also reaches
under future belt press number 3. Please correct.
or
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, HI
Page 4 of 5
October 14, 2003
meet this requirement are: Section 11141, Part 2.01, Section 11481, Part 1.06.F,
Section 15101, Section 15400, Part 2.06.Q, and Section 16495.
2. Please explain what is the difference between the chopper-type digester transfer pumps
listed in the table for the Alternate Bid Items, and the chopper pumps listed in the table
for Equipment Alternative Bid Items.
3. Indicate the section where the performance specifications are listed for the “Rotomix”
Digester Mixing System.
Section 00300
1. Please note that in accordance with N.C.G.S. 133-3 and the policy of the Construction
Grants and Loans Section, the engineer can identify three manufacturers that can meet the
performance requirements, or establish a base bid with three manufacturers, and identify a
preferred piece of equipment as an alternate bid item. The Owner can then select the least
cost of the base bids, or the least cost of the alternate bids, even if the alternate bid is
more expensive than the base bid. There are times when an owner or engineer has a
preference for a specific manufacturer. State law allows you to establish a base bid and
identify the preferred product as an alternative bid item. This allows the Owner to award
the contract to the lowest of the base bids or the lowest of the alternative bids even if the
alternative bid is more expensive than the base bid. Typically, our participation will be
limited to the least cost of all alternatives. As a result of a revision to GS 133-3, there are
additional requirements that must be met in order to bid proprietary alternates for projects
advertised for bid after January 1, 2003. An excerpt from the revised law states:
"... Specifications may list one or more preferred brands as an alternate to the base
bid in limited circumstances. Specifications containing a preferred brand alternate
under this section must identify the performance standards that support the
preference. Performance standards for the preference must be approved in advance
by the owner in an open meeting. Any alternate approved by the owner shall be
approved only where (i) the preferred alternate will provide cost savings, maintain
improve the functioning of any process or system affected by the preferred item or
items, or both, and (ii) a justification identifying these criteria is made available in
writing to the public. ..."
For funded projects advertised after January 1, 2003, the Construction Grants and Loans
Section must receive confirmation, in writing, that the recipient has complied with these
additional requirements before approving and pennitting the project and its subsequent
advertisement.
Section 15012
1. Part 2.09 - Complete the table with the steel casing pipe information.
Section 11701
1. Please provide an engineering justification for limiting the polymer requirement to $15.00
worth of polymer per dry ton of sludge solids.
Section 11706
1. Please provide an engineering justification for limiting the polymer requirement to $25.00
worth of polymer per dry ton of sludge solids.
Section 11141
1. The vertical re-circulator chopper pumps are not listed in the pump schedule on
Page 11100-4.
Section 01520
1. Part 1.02 General Constraints - The Regional Office shall be the DENR Raleigh Regional
Office. Please add the phone number for the Regional Office - [phone].
Mr. Charles W. Pittman, III
Page 5 of 5
October 14, 2003
Section 00800
1. The certification on Page 00800-19 references Contract No. 1, which is not part of this
project.
Section 11439
1. Please provide a complete engineering basis for sole-sourcing the diffusers. Please read
the attached article.
Sections 11710 and 11711
1. Part 2.02.E - Provide the name of the manufacturer for the programmable logic controller.
Please identify at least three manufacturers.