NC0020354_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_19970207

State of North CarolinaILFPFA
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 1 •-0 _-� • - -
Raleigh Regional Office'
; k
- soft
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor -� E H N R
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 7, 1997
Mr. Kenneth Cornatzer Tit-
Town Manager
Post Office Box 753
Pittsboro, N.C. 27312
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Town of Pittsboro
---'- --- Waste Water Treatment Plant
NPDES Permit No. NCO020354
Chatham County
Dear Mr. Cornatzer: r� r
On February 4,- 1997, Mr. Steve Mitchell of my staff pe,:farmed` a; ,
compliance evaluation inspection of the subject facili,t.,,.„ ;As .,a -
result --the "following comments and/or recommendations arepered_; ;
1. All treatment units appeared to be operating
satisfactorily;-=
2. Mr'. ! John Poteat ( Grade IV) is the certified operator ORC,_)
for this Class 4 facility; u
3. ORC logs and records are complete and current; ;
4. Environment One performs -the- effluent compliance
monitoring and chemical analyses 'for this facility;-
5. Facility appeared well maintained and operated and. -the -z. _•
effluent was clear and relatively free of solids; c=7u -.•
6. There was a slight ashiness to the clarifiers but this, wail•;:
causing no operational difficulty;
7. Screenings and grit are disposed'of in thelandfill,;
8. The flow meter is calibrated annually as required;
9. Sludge generated by this facility is disposed of through,
a contract with Wallace Woodall; .
10. A review of the self-monitoring data submitte'y;;ther.
facility for the period of November 1995 toLEO&tlo" 1.1996, ;",
indicates monthly violations of BODS for the monthpr �;;of:
January, February, April, and September and.? •�nonth,1` r ;1';'`''
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, FAX [phone]`1'8
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 NO C " An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-571-4700 50% recycled/l0% post -consumer paper

Page Two
Pittsboro
violation of Fecal Coliform also in September. Notices ;Of
Violation have been transmitted to the Town by the Central -
-Office for these violations. There have been four weekly
violation of the Fecal Coliform limit and these violation •,
appear to be directly proportional to the flow of wastewater =
received--at-the plant. The explanation offered indicated -that-;
= - - -at--high flows the required retention time is not met -and -,. that,
the ultra violet light system employed for disinfection; ineeds
to be replaced.
This Office -is aware that the Town has just recently•_reftacted a.
grease trap program as a part of the sewer use ordinance-, a.nd,.,is
-continuing-to identify sources of Infiltration and Inf1aw:L._;_,Thjese
two -programs should aid in attaining constant compliancfsq(w4-w4= _::_•.? 1 c'
discharge regulations. In addition, please be sure toyppiyrorY z y ;. ?
and obtain -an Authorization To Construct for the new dLwi;ii£oict-ton
system. Also, please submit an I and I progress -report- f, _.t n work
completed in 1996 and a tentative schedule of the work prx�gQseri:;for_.--
1997 by March 31, 1997. 19, 9 7
If you should have any questions or are, in need of --additiona'l
information; please contact me or Mr. Mitchell - at •
Sincerely,
Judy Garrett
Water Quality Supervisor
cc: Chatham County•Health Department
EPA
Central Files/RRO
L6 8l 033

•United States Envi—ronmental Protection Agency - -
A Washington, D. C. 20460 - --
Form Approved
OMB No. 2040-0003
\-1E PA NPDES Compliance Inspection Report__=_-=_,
;,pprova, Exp;res7-3,-85
Section A: National Data System Coding
Transaction Code NPDES yr/mo/da Inspection Type,, Y.,-, Inspector..-, Fac Type
10 � I IC -1A Ix1013l�lyl„ ,�1�117 -, ...:
Remarks -
66
Reserved Facility Evaluation Rating BI OA --------------- --Reserved-------------------- -° -,
67 J 69 7CLY] 71 i/�i 72 /� 7�� 74 17 80 - `1
Section B: Facility Data
Name ander Location ofFa/c�ili-t\y I^nspyiected -
Ent%ry T.iime ❑ AItA;�"f'IFA'
' FVe friit ffE r//veeeDate_
rn ��� 0 1 p b4M �L��`� iJ
Exit Time/Date ,
Permit Expiration Date
of On -Site Representative(s)
Titles) c•; ;,>;,;t ;�", rj
�= ,1 �[te,Nors) •.* r'ro
�Name(s)
r
Name, Address of Responsible Official
�Lf/v�- Cc�R N'I�jJ� fi'�
Title \ r ?Jdine, Address
�(�%-J N � �_Yl3 �j L'�s'- - , •_ ,_. _ r % .' iT'%- ,.. , _ _ _ =
_ _
r` �%• ��rJ -
Phone No_
Contacte
l 3
❑ Yes !
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection sY
_ (S =Satisfactory, M =Marginal, U =Unsatisfactory, N =Not Evaluated)
S
Permit
Records/Reports
Facility Site Review
S
Flow Measurement
Laboratory
Effluent/Receiving Waters
YJ
Pretreatment
Compliance Schedules;,$(V5ge,Pisposaj
Self -Monitoring Program -
-IIpe�atuins & Nfairitetiance T
Other:_-
S
/J
s
g
•
` Section D: Summary of Findings/Comments (Attach additiona/sheets ifecessary)- -v
♦1���
�///-I}—� / ,��j`r�/—j �� _ _—_ I � 0 ,/c/`✓✓L � - y
��'V///ppp���[[[,',,yIII/"""V���.....lrrr��n.._�``V��) ,� .,_ `'/, l _ • 4, - ,'. i
I
_ P
i 8
E
e and Sigilatur (s) oI pector(s)
Agency/Offige/T lephoneLY
-
•mai fc i`Z- N �
- ----� _ ;__` -
` _- _ _'.. _.._ - -
Signature of Reviewer
Agency/Office
Cl � •,yn�t,r� ,
RegtAatory Office Use Only, ,, I I1' xz
"; 'a t� '"
Action Taken d � `�
Date -- -
_, � � �•• . _
-cotnpliance Status "
�❑—*ncompliance
lianee
LJ Com
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev. 3-85) Previous editions are obsolete.

FACILITY COMPLIANCE INSPECTION CHECKLIST
A. PERMIT
1.1 verify -name of permittee, address, & name of responsible
oficial.
Compare facility description in permit with actual- -
If cility.
3 -Determine if all process units are being operated.-- *3..
✓✓ Determine if ail waste streams `are covered in permit.:
5 -Determine if permitted discharge point(s),are correct.
_Question whether permit accurately characterizes
epent .
e'7. Determine if facility is correctly classified.
8.-.I =permit expiration is close, advise permittee of
al request requirements.
ermine if certification of ORC is adequate. ---
4.e.-Determine
.-Determine if ORC is visiting facility as per new ':
regulations .
B. RECORDS/REPORTS
1 —Are site visitation logs adequate to document 1._
vi ation? Gcyc��—
- Are self-monitoring records, including --
analytical/laboratory, documentation, maintained on site:;or---. _
readily available? -
3.__: a _discrepancies noted in random "gaper train" - iC�
review? _ AI
4 -Are process control records maintained? If not, why':
not?
5._ Do records clearly identify the "who, what, when, where"= =_
of sampling or of required on-site physical/chemical. Z�C =�
measurements? [tit •. -1,:
6. Are instrument calibration records maintained?
7. /ire sampling equipment records maintained?3�_' 1 7: _r-" ,• Y
Are maintenance records kept?
C., FACILITY SITE REVIEW
1 : --Evaluate process units from influent to effluent:-. u- t :•�
(a) Are units operating properly or satisfactor
(b) Are any units in obvious need of repair?
(c) Do any symptoms exist that suggest problems? aAQ; -+-w uan
2. Is site well maintained?' 'his can include informati„vn =
on access to end of outfall, whether grass is mowed or
access road is maintained.'�r _
3. Discuss sludge wasting. (�.Pt -
4. -Are any chemicals/operating procedures used as "band-•
aid” solutions or to enhance treatment?
5. --Are screening/grit properly contained and disposed,df•?
6. Is routine maintenanceLOPRTreSt? � � - „ • -�' •'
D. FLOW MEASUREMENT �� 't

1. Is flow measurement method consistent with permifl
requirement?
2.- If -non -calibrated flow measuring device is used, -- -
evaluate whether it accurately reflects flow, and whether
operator is using it correctly.
3. If recording flow meter is used, is recorder /
working/recording?
4: Determine frequency of calibration, if relevant.1
5. Flow meter calibration date (minimum of onper yearjj. -- -
'Perform instantaneous reading if possible an compare to'
meter. Must be less than 10% variation., IT_ 1U
6. Compare flow reading to capacity of facility for the
average of the last calendar year. Greater than 80 to 9.0,%•?, :-
Include new regulation language if applicable.
F - T.ABORATORY
1. Is there an in-house laboratory?'�37%, �•
2. Are any analytical tests performed which require 2=1 'y
certification? - -
3. Are any parame ers contracted out to commercial
laboratory?
4. If so, are samples properly prepared and shipped?,-
5. Conduct a general and cursory -evaluation of laboratory -<< -
facility, including spot check of instrument/equipment T,._,;_ ;
calibration. = - _-
6. Are calibration records kept?, Are -they adequate? Com%✓_�
7. Are there new additions to staff? --,Have they had access
to --adequate training? ,
F. EFFLUENT/RECEIVING WATERS
1. Subjectively evaluate impact of effluent on receivirxg "i
stream.
2. Does effluent have visible s fids? Is it foamy? vJ
3. Is effluent highly colored?Is upstream,clear? --;_
4. Subjective how does discharge impact receivin2.
stream?
5. Subjectively, if effluent is highly colored, how fail. c
downstream does complete mixing occur?
G. PRETREATMENT
1. If POTW has no pretreatment program, probe for
information on influent sources and characteristics.
2. If the POTW does have a pretreatment program, review.the-.
program with the operator and discuss ways to improve the­.�
program.
H. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES J
1. Note if facility is operating under SOC/ �, x
2. Note which parameters are affected byL n rim limitsr and—
any compliance problems.

3. Discuss any violations of SOC/JOC scheduled activities.
I. SELF MONITORING PROGRAM
1. Review current 12 -months of self-monitoring data.
2. Identify noncompliance with permit/SOC/JOC limits."1 `
3. Determine if Notices of Violation were iss -(may want
CEI/CSI to be issued as NOV) for violations
4. Are monitoring frequencies maintained?�
5. Are stream �
nitoring location consistent with permit?--
6. Are re ed self-monitoring report forms correctly
completed. I
7. Review sample collection, preservation, transportation,
etc. ,
8. Are sample holding time requirements being adhered
In particular, stress the 6 -hour coliform sample holdingi-: ,.
time requirement. 4_ -
9. If_monitoring is performed at a_greater than required.
frequency, is all data reported?;
J. OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE ? j. i;.".'
q
1. Is staffingade uate?; -
2. Is there an established process control program? ,
Discuss process control program or lack of program.
3. Is there an established preventive/corrective /
maintenance program?
4. Is there an inventory of spare parts? it it adequate?
_ V
K. SLUDGE UTILIZATION/DISPOSAL
1. Does the facility have an -approved sludge management-,_:,
plan? Is the plan being followed?
2. Investigate sludge handling -and utilization/disposal;
including site of ultimate utilization/disposal.---
3. Are any permits required? Does facility have them?
4. Is any monitoring required?
5. Are any annual reports required? Is the Division
receiving them on time?
6. Is-utilization/disposal�at dedicated site consisten
with permit?
7. Are any nuisances created as a result of'sludge
disposal? 1
L6 81 03A