The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0021156_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20180219Water Resources ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 19 February 2018 Mr. David Johnson, PE, Utility Director City of Mount Holly P.O. Box 406 Mount Holly, NC 28120 ROY COOPER Govemor MICHAEL S REGAN Secretary LINDA CULPEPPER Interim Director RECEIVED/DEMR/DWR FEB 2 8 2018 'Vater Resources Permitting Section Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection Notice of Deficiency NOD -2018 -PC -0025 City of Mount Holly WWTP NPDES Permit No. NCO021156 Gaston County Dear Mr. Johnson: Enclosed is a copy of the Compliance Evaluation Inspection for the inspection conducted at the subject facility on February 13, 2018, by Ori Tuvia and Maria Schutte. Ralph Douglas' cooperation during the site visit was much appreciated. Please advise the staff involved with this NPDES Permit by forwarding a copy of the enclosed report. The main area of concern observed at the time of the inspection was both clarifiers required maintenance. At the time of the inspection, the clarifier weirs had excessive algae growth and small connecting sections were missing allowing for less than optimal clarifier operation. The report should be self-explanatory; however, should you have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact Ori Tuvia at (704) 235-2190, or at ori.tuvia e,ncdenr. og_y. Sincerely, W. Corey Basinger, Regional Supervisor Mooresville Regional Office Division of Water Resources, DEQ Cc: NPDES Unit Gaston County Health Department MRO Files Mooresville Regional Office Location 610 East Center Ave, Suite 301 Mooresville, NC 28115 Phone (704) 663-16991 Fax (704) 663.60401 Customer Service 1-877-623-6748 United States Environmental Protection Agency Form 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 NCO021156 I11 121 16/01/13 I17 18 Ld 19 1 G 1 201 Li 211111 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 166 - Reserved — Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA ---Reserved-- 67 1 0 70 71 itI�, IJ72 I N I 73 I I 174 751 I I I I I I I80 67 L-1 LJ I I I Section B 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) 10 35AM 18/01/13 11/08/01 Mount Holly WWTP Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date 165 Broome St 01 3oPM 18/01/13 15/02/28 Mount Holly NC 28120 Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data H/ Ralph E Douglas/ORCH Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number Contacted David Johnson,PO Box 406 Mt Holly NC 28120/Utility Director(704-951-0074! No Section C Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated) Permit N Flow Measurement Operations & Maintenance Records/Reports Self -Monitoring Program E Sludge Handling Disposal Facility Site Review Effluent/Receiving Waters 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 Mana Schutte Division of Water Quality//704-663-16991 On A Tuvia MRO WO//704-663-1699/ Signature of Management Q A Reviewer Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date W Corey Basinger MRO WQ//704-235-2194/ EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete 15? r Page# 1 NPDES yr/mo/day Inspection Type NCO021156 I11 12I 18/01/13 117 18 ICI Section D Summary of Finding/Comments (Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists as necessary) 1 Page# 2 Permit NCO021156 Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Owner - Facility Mount Holly VW TP Inspection Type- Compliance Evaluation Permit Yes No NA NE (If the present permit expires In 6 months or less) Has the permittee submitted a new E ❑ ❑ ❑ application? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the facility as described In the permit? E ❑ ❑ ❑ # Are there any special conditions for the permit? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the Inspector granted access to all areas for Inspection? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment The subject permit expired on 2/28/2015 The facility had sent a permit renewal application Results of analysis and calibration Record Keeping Yes No NA NE Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is all required Information readily available, complete and current? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all records maintained for 3 years (lab reg required 5 years)? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the chain -of -custody complete? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Dates, times and location of sampling Name of Individual performing the sampling Results of analysis and calibration Dates of analysis Name of person performing analyses Transported COCs Are DMRs complete do they Include all permit parameters? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Has the facility submitted Its annual compliance report to users and DWQ? ❑ ❑ ❑ N (If the facility Is = or > 5 MGD permitted flow) Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator E ❑ ❑ ❑ on each shift? Is the ORC visitation log available and current? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Facility has copy of previous year's Annual Report on file for review? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment For the most part the records reviewed during the Inspection were organized and well maintained DMRs COCs, bench sheets, calibration logs and ORC logs, were reviewed for the period January 2017 through December 2017 During the records review It was discovered the facility has conducted but not reported an annual pollutant scan on January 2017 Facility ORC will resubmit the EDMR for January 2017 to Include this Information Page# 3 Permit. NCO021156 Owner -Facility Mount Holly WVVTP Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation Yes No NA NE Is composite sampling flow proportional' M ❑ Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE # Is composite sampling flow proportional? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is sample collected above side streams' M ❑ ❑ ❑ Is proper volume collected? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6 0 degrees 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Celsius)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is sampling performed according to the permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment The subject permit regLires Influent BOD and TSS composite samples Regular sampler aliquot verifications are performed and documented Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE Is composite sampling flow proportional' M ❑ ❑ ❑ Is sample collected below all treatment units? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is proper volume collected? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the tubing clean? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6 0 degrees N ❑ ❑ ❑ Celsius)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the facility sampling performed as req.1lred by the permit (frequency, sampling type 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ representative)? Comment The subject Dermit requires composite and arab effluent samples Weeklv sampler aliquot verifications are performed and documented Upstream / Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit (frequency, sampling type, and 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ sampling location)? Comment Laboratory Yes No NA NE Are field parameters performed by certifed personnel or laboratory? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters) performed by a certified lab? N ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is the facility using a contract lab? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is proper temperature set for sample storage (kept at less than or equal to 6 0 degrees 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Celsius)? Incubator (Fecal Coliform) set to 44 5 degrees Celsius+/- 0 2 degrees? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Incubator (BOD) set to 20 0 degrees Celsius +/-1 0 degrees? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Page# 4 Permit NCO021156 Owner - Facility Mount Holly WWTP Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Inspection Type- Compliance Evaluation Laboratory Yes No NA NE Comment Influent and effluent analyses (Including field parameters) are performed under the City's laboratory certification #215 Shealy Environmental Services, Inc (LTMP, low level mercury, metals nutrients) and ETS Labs (toxicity) have also been contracted to provide analytical support The laboratory Instrumentation used for field analyses appeared to be properly calibrated/verified and documented Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Does the facility analyze process control parameters, for ex MLSS, MCRT, Settleable 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge, and other that are applicable? Comment The facility had a major failure to one of Its three aeration basins The basin will be out of service permanently At the time of the Inspection, the facility appeared to be properly operated and well maintained The ORC and staff Incorporate a comprehensive process control program with all measurements being properly documented and maintained on-site Bar Screens Type of bar screen Yes No NA NE a Manual Yes No NA NE Is the basin aerated? ❑ ❑ b Mechanical ❑ Is the basin free of bypass lines or structures to the natural environment? 0 ❑ Are the bars adequately screening debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the screen free of excessive debris? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is disposal of screening in compliance? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the unit in good condition? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment Two manual bar screens One for the influent from the city of Mount Holly and the second for Are audible and visual alarms operable? the influent of A&E industry Screenings are disposed at the County Landfill ❑ 0 ❑ Equalization Basins Yes No NA NE Is the basin aerated? ❑ ❑ N ❑ Is the basin free of bypass lines or structures to the natural environment? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the basin free of excessive grease? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all pumps present? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are all pumps operable? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are float controls operable? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are audible and visual alarms operable? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ # Is basin size/volume adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment The equalization basin is equipped with three operational pumps Page# 5 Permit. NCO021156 Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Aeration Basins Mode of operation Type of aeration system Is the basin free of dead spots? Are surface aerators and mixers operational? Are the diffusers operational? Is the foam the proper color for the treatment process? Does the foam cover less than 25% of the basin's surface? Is the DO level acceptable? Is the DO level acceptable?(1 0 to 3 0 mg/1) Owner - Facility Mount Holly WWTP Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation Yes No NA NE Ext Air Surface Yes No NA NE Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ E ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ N ❑ ❑ ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment The facility had a major failure to one of Its three aeration basins The basin will be out of service permanently Aeration Basin calculations by Willis Engineers Indicate the facility will be able to operate under it's normal load, 4 MGD Lime is added on an as -needed basis to maintain appropriate alkalinity/pH levels Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE Is the clarifier free of black and odorous wastewater? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site free of excessive buildup of solids In center well of circular clarifier? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are weirs level? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site free of weir blockage? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Is scum removal adequate? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site free of excessive floating sludge? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the drive unit operational? ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the return rate acceptable (low turbulence)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/4 of the sidewall depth) 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment Both secondary clarifiers were operational_ and In service Both clarifiers required maintenance At the time of the Inspection the clarifier weir had excessive algae growth and small conecting sections were missing allowing for less than optimal clarfier operation/ Pumps -RAS -WAS Yes No NA NE Are pumps in place? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Are pumps operational? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are there adequate spare parts and supplies on site? ❑ ❑ ❑ N Comment Page# 6 Ll Permit NCO021156 Owner - Facility Mount Holly WWTP Yes No NA NE # Is flow meter used for reporting? 0 ❑ Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Inspection Type Compliance Evaluation ❑ Is flow meter calibrated annually? 0 ❑ Pumas -RAS -WAS Yes No NA NE Disinfection -Gas Yes No NA NE Are cylinders secured adequately? E ❑ ❑ ❑ Are cylinders protected from direct sunlight? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is there chlorine residual prior to de -chlorination? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Does the Stationary Source have more than 2500 lbs of Chlorine (CAS No 7782-50-5)? E ❑ ❑ ❑ If yes, then Is there a Risk Management Plan on site? N ❑ ❑ ❑ If yes, then what is the EPA twelve digit ID Number? (1000- -___) 1000-0016-6562 If yes, then when was the RMP last updated? Comment De -chlorination Yes No NA NE Type of system ? Gas Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount (1 to 1)? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is storage appropriate for cylinders? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is de -chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment Are the tablets the proper size and type? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Are tablet de-chlonnators operational? ❑ ❑ M ❑ Number of tubes in use? Comment Flow Measurement - Effluent Yes No NA NE # Is flow meter used for reporting? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is flow meter calibrated annually? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the flow meter operational? E ❑ ❑ ❑ (If units are separated) Does the chart recorder match the flow meter? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Comment The flow meter Is calibrated annually and was last calibrated on 8/15/2017 by Clearwater, Inc 1 Page# 7 Permit N00021156 Owner - Facility Inspection Date 01/13/2018 Inspection Type Mount Holly WWTP Compliance Evaluation Is the capacity adequate? 0 ❑ 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? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ Comment The effluent appeared clear with trace suspended solids and no foam The receiving stream did not appear to be negatively Impacted by solids Aerobic Digester Yes No NA NE Is the capacity adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the mixing adequate? N ❑ ❑ ❑ Is the site free of excessive foaming In the tank? M ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is the odor acceptable? ❑ ❑ ❑ # Is tankage available for properly waste sludge? ❑ ❑ ❑ Comment Waste activated sludge is pumped Into two (2) 750,000 gallon holding tanks equipped for storage and aeration Bio -solids are land applied by a contracted company (Synagro) under the authority of Permit No WQ0001863 Page# 8