WQ0004563_Staff Report_20240829 (2)

State of North Carolina
Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ❑ NPDES Unit ® Non -Discharge Unit
Attn: Zach Mega in Raleigh CO
From: Edward Watson in Regional Offic
Mooresville Regional Office
Application No.: WQ004563
Facility name: Hickory Regional Compost facility
Note: This form has been adapted from the non -discharge fg acili , staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals. Please complete all sections as applicable.
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ❑ Yes or ® No
a. Date of site visit:
b. Site visit conducted by:
c. Inspection report attached? ❑ Yes or X No
d. Person contacted: Phillip Re,, n� and their contact information: (828) 465 - 1401 ext.
e. Driving directions: 3200 20" Avenue Se Newton, NC 28658
2. Discharge Point(s):
Latitude: 35.687455
Latitude:
Longitude:-81.264327
Longitude:
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Clark Creek 440 feet from the composting facility.
Classification: C
River Basin and Subbasin No. 03-08-35
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses:
II. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1. Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
ORC: Phillip Reynolds
Certificate #:1004985 Backup ORC: Certificate
2. Are the design, maintenance and operation of the treatment facilities adequate for the type of waste and disposal
system? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
Description of existing facilities:
Current permitted flow: NA
Explain anything observed during the site visit that needs to be addressed by the permit, or that may be important
for the permit writer to know (i.e., equipment condition, function, maintenance, a change in facility ownership,
etc.)
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Pagel of 3

3. Are the site conditions (e.g., soils, topography, depth to water table, etc) maintained appropriately and adequately
assimilating the waste? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
4. Has the site changed in any way that may affect the permit (e.g., drainage added, new wells inside the compliance
boundary, new development, etc.)? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
6. Are the existing application rates (e.g., hydraulic, nutrient) still acceptable? ❑ Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain: N/A. This is a distribution permit.
7. Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program:
8. Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ® Yes or ❑ No
If no, please explain:
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain: Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
11. Has a review of all self -monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ® Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review: No Compliance issues.
Provide input to help the permit writer evaluate any requests for reduced monitoring, if applicable.
12. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing BIMS violations? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
13. Check all that apply:
® No compliance issues ❑ Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under JOC
❑ Notice(s) of violation ❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under moratorium
Please explain and attach any documents that may help clarify answer/comments (i.e., NOV, NOD, etc.)
If the facility has had compliance problems during the permit cycle, please explain the status. Has the RO been
working with the Permittee? Is a solution underway or in place?
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
14. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
❑ Yes ®No❑N/A
If yes, please explain:
15. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: None, provided materials are managed properly
16. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): N/A
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 3

III. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
2. List specific permit conditions recommended to be removed from the permit when issued:
Condition I Reason
1 Contact the RO for final inspection of the composting treatment vessels to
ensure the system meets the requirements for system closure.
3. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
❑ Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
® Issue
❑ Deny (Please state reasons: )
4. Signature of report preparer: Edward Watson Date: 8/29/2024
DocuSigned by:
H PU4,f ' 8/29/2024
5. Signature of regional supervisor: F161FB69A2D84A3... Date: ADDITIONAL
6. REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
This is a renewal with no changes to the current permit.
This facility is at the end of its life. A new furnace is being constructed at the Henry Fork WWTP in Hickory under
the same permit number (reference the staff report from 20240216). Once the new furnace has been completed and
MRO has been notified regarding pre -startup inspection, the old composting vessels will be shut down and
decommissioned.
Please notify the RO at least two weeks prior to the startup of the new furnace treatment system.
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 3