NC0089435_Site Visit_20170707

N,Division
State of North Carolina
of Water Resources
" Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Environmental Staff Report
Quality
To: ® NPDES Unit ❑ Non -Discharge Application No.: NCO089435
Attn: Derek Denard Facility name: Martin County WTP
From: Scott Vinson
Washington Regional Office
Note- This form has been adapted from the non -discharge f�ty staff report to document the review of both non -
discharge and NPDES permit applications and/or renewals Please complete all sections as they are applicable
I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION
1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No
a Date of site visit: 6/22/2017 RECEIVEMCDENWR
b. Site visit conducted by: Robbie Bullock & Scott Vinson JUL O
c. Inspection report attached9 ® Yes or F-1No2��%
d. Person contacted: Joe Thaxton, ORC and their contact information: 252 - 43 Water Quality
(—) 789 --�J@rt#ir►g-Section
e. Driving directions: Located off Hwy. 17 in Williamston, Martin County. Turn east off 17 onto Park Street and
site is at the end located behind the local Roses shopping center
2 Discharge Point(s):
Latitude. 3.58481 Longitude -77.0442
3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: UT to Sweetwater Creek
Classification: C
River Basin and Subbasin No.- Roanoke River, 03-02-09
Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: Index No.- 23-50, This receiving
stream/unnamed tributary is classified and is used for or has the potential to be used for secondary
recreation, fishing, wildlife, fish consumption, aquatic life including propagation, survival and maintenance
of biological integrity, and agriculture. Although the stream is primarily surrounded by woods and wetlands
from the discharge point until it joins (approximately 3 25 miles) with the Roanoke River, it has the
potential for wading, boating and other uses involving human body contact with water in an infrequent,
unorganized, or incidental manner.
II. PROPOSED FACILITIES: NEW APPLICATIONS - n/a
III. EXISTING FACILITIES: MODIFICATION AND RENEWAL APPLICATIONS
1 Are there appropriately certified Operators in Charge (ORCs) for the facility? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ N/A
ORC- Joe Thaxton Certificate #. PC -2/ 1001711 Backup ORC: Certificate #:
• The facility has a current staff member Eddie Bristow, ready to sit for the September 14 2017 certification
exam. If the employee does not pass the ORC was directed to acquire a certified backup operator immediately.
(see attached inspection report)
FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 1 of 3

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: A conventional water treatment plant generating filter -backwash wastewater and
sludge potentially containing the treatment additives: Alum/ aluminum sulfate, sodium permanganate, powdered
activated carbon, sodium hydroxide, polymer, chlorine, AND Phosphoric acid (as a corrosion inhibitor for
potable water lines) which has been used since startup of March 2016 and apparently was not included by
engineer in original application process AND a new additive Copper Sulfate proposed to start using in July
2017 (it has Oust been approved by DWR-Public Water) for help with controlling algae in the holding basin
where water is pumped from the river to the plant overnight to be treated next day.
Proposed flow: 0.7 MGD
Current permitted flow: n/a
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.)
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 ® N/A
If no, please explain:
7 Is the existing groundwater monitoring program adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, explain and recommend any changes to the groundwater monitoring program.
8. Are there any setback conflicts for existing treatment, storage and disposal sites? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, attach a map showing conflict areas.
9. Is the description of the facilities as written in the existing permit correct? ❑ Yes or ® No
If no, please explain: The "treatment additives" list on page 2 of 6 need to include Phosphoric acid & Copper
Sulfate.
10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located9 ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please explain:
11. Are the monitoring well coordinates correct in BIMS? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® N/A
If no, please complete the following (expand table if necessary).
12. Has a review of all self-monitoring data been conducted (e.g., DMR, NDMR, NDAR, GW)? ® Yes or ❑ No
Please summarize any findings resulting from this review: No current problems. There was a NOD dated 3/5/15
for failure to submit eDMRs and a NOV (NOV-2015-PC-0211) dated 8/20/15 for failure to submit eDMRs The
plant did not start start up testing until November 2015 and full time production until March of 2016
Provide input to help the permit writer evaluate any requests for reduced monitoring, if applicable.
13. Are there any permit changes needed in order to address ongoing BIMS violations? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
14. Check all that apply:
® No compliance issues
❑ Notice(s) of violation
❑ Current enforcement action(s) ❑ Currently under JOC
❑ Currently under SOC ❑ Currently under moratorium
FORM. WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 3

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? A backup ORC does need to be named soon. Is a solution underway or in place?
Yes, an employee is going to sit for his PC certification the next testing date September 14, 2017.
Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
If no, please explain:
15. Are there any issues related to compliance/enforcement that should be resolved before issuing this permit?
❑ Yes ®No❑N/A
If yes, please explain:
16. Possible toxic impacts to surface waters: None that WaRO is aware of.
17. Pretreatment Program (POTWs only): n/a
IV. REGIONAL OFFICE RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Do you foresee any problems with issuance/renewal of this permit? ❑ Yes or ® No
If yes, please explain:
2. List any items that you would like the NPDES Unit or Non -Discharge Unit Central Office to obtain through an
additional information request: None.
3. List specific permit conditions recommended to be removed from the permit when issued: None.
4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued -
Condition
Reason
A conventional water treatment plant generating filter -backwash wastewater
and sludge potentially containing the treatment additives: Alum/ aluminum
sulfate, sodium permanganate, powdered activated carbon, sodium hydroxide,
polymer, chlorine, AND Phosphoric acid (as a corrosion inhibitor for
Site Description Update
potable water lines which has been used since startup of March 2016 and
apparently was not included by engineer in original application process)
AND a new additive Copper Sulfate (proposed to start using in July 2017,
which has just been approved by DWR-Public Water, for help with
controlling algae in the holding basin where water is pumped from the
river to the plant overnight to be treated next day).
5. Recommendation: ❑ Hold, pending receipt and review of additional information by regional office
® Hold, pending review of draft permit by regional office
❑ Issue upon receipt of needed additional information
❑ Issue
❑ Deny (Please state reasons: )
6. Signature of report preparer: —
Signature of regional supervisor:
Date: &-20,/7-
V.
-20`/7
V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS
None.
FORM- WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 3

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Fofm Approved
EPA Washington, D C 20460
OMB No 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires 8-31-98
Section A National Data System Coding (I e , PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 IN 1 2 15 I 3 I NCO089435 I11 121 17/06/22 I17 18 LCI 19 L G j 201 I
21111111 1111111 II II 1111111 1111111 1111111 II I I �6
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ------------Reserved
67 70 71 I I 72 n, � L 73 I I 174 751 III I I I 180
LJ I I L_LJ
Section 8 Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected (For Industrial Users discharging to POTW, also include
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
POTW name and NPDES permit Number)
09 30AM 17/06/22
14/04/01
Martin County WTP
1001 Park St
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
Williamston NC 27892
11 15AM 17/06/22
17/05/31
Name(s) of Onsite Representabve(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
///
Joseph R Thaxton/ORC//
Name, Address of Responsible Officiairritle/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
David Bone,PO Box 668 Williamston NC 278920668//252-789-4300/2527894309
No
Section C Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Permit 0 Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports 0 Self -Monitoring Program
Sludge Handling Disposal 0 Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters E Laboratory
Section D Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
Scott A Vinson WARD WQ//252-946-6481 Ext 208/
Robert E Bullock WARO WQ//252-948-3924/
Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete
Page#

NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type
31 NCo089435 111 121 17/06/22 117 18 ICI
Section D Summary of Find ing/Commerts (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary)
The review period for this Inspection was November 2015 through April 2017 No violations were noted
over the review period
A renewal application has been submitted The current permit which Is set to expire on May 31, 2017
will remain effective until a new permit is issued
Joe Thaxton is the ORC with no backup ORC for the facility The permittee has 120 days to fill the
vacancy of the backup ORC
The facility is considered to be Compliant with NPDES permit NC0089435
Page#

Permit NCO089435
Inspection Date 06/22/2017
Operations & Maintenance
Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping?
Owner -Facility Martin County WTP
Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation
Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex MLSS, MCRT, Settleable
Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable?
Comment
Permit
(If the present permit expires in 6 months or less) Has the permittee submitted a new
application?
Is the facility as described in the permit?
# Are there any special conditions for the permit?
Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public?
Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ E ❑
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
M ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment A renewal application has been submitted The current permit which is set to expire on May
31, 2017 will remain effective until a new permit is issued
Record Keeping
Yes No NA NE
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)?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is the chain -of -custody complete?
❑
0
❑
❑
Dates, times and location of sampling
0
Name of individual performing the sampling
❑
Results of analysis and calibration
Dates of analysis
Name of person performing analyses
Transported CDCs
Are DMRs complete do they include all permit parameters?
E
❑
❑
❑
Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ?
❑
❑
0
❑
(If the facility is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator
❑
❑
M
❑
on each shift?
Is the ORC visitation log available and current?
❑
0
❑
❑
Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification?
❑
M
❑
❑
Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site?
M
❑
❑
❑
Page#
3

Permit NCO089435
Inspection Date 06/22/2017
Record Keeping
Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Repot on file for review?
Owner - Facility Martin County WrP
Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ N ❑
Comment Joe Thaxton Is the ORC with nc backup ORC for the facility The permittee has 120 days to
fill the vacancy of the backup ORC
Printed name of Individual sampling and sample type needs to be filled out on the sampling
chain of custody
Laboratory
Yes No NA NE
Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab?
E
❑
❑
❑
# Is the facility using a contract lab?
E
❑
❑
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6 0 degrees
E
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44 5 degrees Celsius+/- 0 2 degrees?
Incubator (BOD) set to 20 0 degrees Celsius +/- 1 0 degrees?
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Comment The WTP Is field parameter certified for Total Residual Chlorine and PH All other samples
are sent to Environment 1 for analysis
Secondary Clarifier
Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater?
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?
Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)?
Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc?
Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately % of the sidewall depth)
Comment The "secondary clarifier" is a settling basin for solids to settle before discharge
Granville Farms land applies solids unser permit WQ0035595
Pump Station - Effluent
Is the pump wet well free of bypass Imes or structures?
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ N ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
N ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ■ ❑
E ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ N ❑
❑ ❑ N ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page# 4

Permit NCO089435
Owner -Facility Martin County WTP
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
❑
❑
Inspection Date 06/22/2017
Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
M
❑
Pump Station - Effluent
Yes No NA NE
Are all pumps present?
0
❑
❑
❑
Are all pumps operable?
M
❑
❑
❑
Are float controls operable?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is SCADA telemetry available and operational?
0
❑
❑
❑
Is audible and visual alarm available and operational?
❑
❑
❑
N
Comment
Effluent Sampling
Yes No NA NE
Is composite sampling flow proportional?
❑
❑
M
❑
Is sample collected below all treatment units?
M
❑
❑
❑
Is proper volume collected?
N
❑
❑
❑
Is the tubing clean?
❑
❑
0
❑
# Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6 0 degrees
M
❑
❑
❑
Celsius)?
Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type
0
❑
❑
❑
representative)?
Comment Samples are grab as stated In the NPDES permit
Effluent Pipe Yes No NA NE
Is right of way to the outfall properly maintained? M ❑ ❑ ❑
Are the receiving water free of foam other than trace amounts and other debris? M ❑ ❑ ❑
If effluent (diffuser pipes are required) are they operating properly? ❑ ❑ N ❑
Comment
Page# 5