The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0021873_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20180713 . i P . , Y AC ROY COOPER Governor MICHAEL S.REGAN Secretary Water Resources LINDA CULPEPPER Environmental Quality Interim Director July 13, 2018 Ms. Leese Hopper, Town Manager Town of Mayodan , 210 W. Main Street Mayodan, NC 27027-2019 RECEIVED/DENRIDWR Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection Report JUL %4 2018 , NPDES Permit# NC0021873 Water Resources Mayodan WWTP, Rockingham County Permitting Section Dear Ms. Hopper: On June 11, 2018, Paul DiMatteo and Kelli Park of the Division of Water Resources (Division),Winston- Salem Regional Office, conducted a Compliance Evaluation Inspection of the above referenced wastewater treatment system. Jamie Whitten, Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC), Gary Moore, Backup-ORC, and Nadine Blackwell, Pretreatment Coordinator, were present for the inspection. This type of inspection consists of two basic parts: an on-site inspection of the facility and a review of facility files and self-monitoring data. Observations from each area of the inspection are summarized below. Site Review 1. Permit The current permit became effective on July 12, 2013 and expired on May 31, 2016.The renewed permit will become effective on August 1, 2018. A copy of the current permit was available for review. Permitted components include a mechanical bar screen, aeration basin, secondary clarifiers, liquid chlorination and dechlorination and an effluent flow meter with final disposal to the Mayo River, Class C waters in the Roanoke River Basin. 2. Facility Site Review The facility was as described in the permit. The permit provides for differing requirements based on different flow tiers. The facility is currently operating under the 2.5 million gallons per day (MGD) flow tier, but could discharge as much as 4.5 MGD. Typical daily discharge is about 1.0 MGD. All on- line components appeared to be working properly. An emergency power source is available and the operators reported it can power the entire plant. 3. Operation and Maintenance The plant is operated as required. All operators are properly designated and hold adequate --`' Nothing Compares-,_,_ State of North Carolina I Environmental Quality 450 W.Hanes Mill Road,Suite 300,Winston-Salem,North Carolina 27105 Phone:336-776-98001 FAX:336-776-9797 We appreciate the efforts made to effectively operate and maintain this treatment facility. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Paul DiMatteo at (336) 776-9691 or our office at (336) 776-9800. Sincerely, Sherri V. Knight, P.E., Regional Supervisor Water Quality Regional Operations Section Winston-Salem Regional Office Division of Water Resources, NCDEQ Enclosures—Inspection Report and Summary CC: WQS Winston-Salem Regional Office- Enforcement File NPDES Compliance/Enforcement Unit- Enforcement File Central Files ir 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 L 2 LI 3 NC0021873 111 12 18/06/11 117 - 18 [ j 19 [ j 201 21 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I1 [ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I. I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 166 Inspection Work Days Facility Self-Monitoring Evaluation Rating B1 QA Reserved t 671 I 701 I 71 1 I 72 I N I 73I I 174 7511 1 1 1 1 1 1 180 L 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) 10:00AM 18/06/11 13/08/01 Mayodan WWTP 293 Caldwell Rd Exit Time/Date Permit Expiration Date 12.30PM 18/06/11 17/05/31 Mayodan NC 270272019 Name(s)of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s) Other Facility Data , /// Jamie C Whitten/ORC/336-427-5733/ Name,Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number Contacted Debra E Cardwe11,210 W Main St Mayodan NC 270272019/Town Manager/336-427-0241/3364277592 No Section C Areas Evaluated During Inspection(Check only those areas evaluated) II Permit I Flow Measurement • Operations&Maintenance • Records/Reports II Self-Monitoring Program • Sludge Handling Disposal I 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) J Name(s)and Signature(s)of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date Kelli A ParkWSRO WQ//336-776-9689/ 7/1313pip Paul DiMatteo 6`� WSRO WQ//336-776-9691/ 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# 1 f V Permit: NC0021873 Owner-Facility: Mayodan WWTP Inspection Date: 06/11/2018 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Operations & Maintenance Yes No NA NE Is the plant generally clean with acceptable housekeeping? • 0 0 0 Does the facility analyze process control parameters,for ex: MLSS, MCRT,Settleable • 0 0 0 Solids, pH, DO, Sludge Judge,and other that are applicable? Comment: Process control parameters included mixed liquor occasionally, DO and pH. Permit Yes No NA NE (If the present permit expires in 6 months or less). Has the permittee submitted a new 0 0 • 0 application? Is the facility as described in the permit? • 0 0 0 #Are there any special conditions for the permit? 0 • 0 0 Is access to the plant site restricted to the general public? • 0 0 0 • Is the inspector granted access to all areas for inspection? • 0 0 0 Comment: Permit renewal is currently under review. Record Keeping Yes No NA NE Are records kept and maintained as required by the permit? • 0 0 0 Is all required information readily available,complete and current? • 0 0 0 Are all records maintained for 3 years(lab.reg. required 5 years)? • 0 0 0 Are analytical results consistent with data reported on DMRs? • 0 0 0 Is the chain-of-custody complete? • 0 0 0 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 _ III Are DMRs complete: do they include all permit parameters? • 0 0 0 Has the facility submitted its annual compliance report to users and DWQ? - • 0 0 0 (If the facility is=or>5 MGD permitted flow)Do they operate 24/7 with a certified operator 0 0 • 0 on each shift? Is the ORC visitation log available and current? . • 0 0 0 Is the ORC certified at grade equal to or higher than the facility classification? • ❑ 0 0 Is the backup operator certified at one grade less or greater than the facility classification? • 0 0 0 Is a copy of the current NPDES permit available on site? • 0 0 0 Page# 3 1/' Permit: NC0021873 Owner-Facility: Mayodan WWTP Inspection Date: 06/11/2018 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Secondary Clarifier Yes No NA NE Are weirs level? 0 • 0 0 Is the site free of weir blockage? • 0 0 0 Is the site free of evidence of short-circuiting'? • 0 0 0 Is scum removal adequate? • 0 0 0 Is the site free of excessive floating sludge? • 0 0 0 Is the drive unit operational? . • 0 0 0 Is the return rate acceptable(low turbulence)? • 0 0 0 Is the overflow clear of excessive solids/pin floc? • 0 0 0 Is the sludge blanket level acceptable? (Approximately'/ of the sidewall depth) • 0 0 0 Comment: Sludge blanket was measured at-4 ft deep in one clarifier(12 ft total).The operators said that they acquired the necessary funding to level the weirs and repair the concrete, so they planned to have this done near the end of this fiscal year.They also said that the weirs were washed down once per week. Disinfection-Liquid Yes No NA NE Is there adequate reserve supply of disinfectant? • 0 0 0 (Sodium Hypochlorite) Is pump feed system operational? • 0 0 0 Is bulk storage tank containment area adequate? (free of leaks/open drains) • 0 0 0 Is the level of chlorine residual acceptable? 0 0 0 • Is the contact chamber free of growth, or sludge buildup? • 0 0 0 Is there chlorine residual prior to de-chlorination? 0 0 0 • Comment: De-chlorination Yes.No NA NE Type of system? Liquid Is the feed ratio proportional to chlorine amount(1 to 1)? 0 0 I 0 Is storage appropriate for cylinders? • 0 0 0 #Is de-chlorination substance stored away from chlorine containers? • 0 0 0 Comment: Are the tablets the proper size and type? 0 0 • 0 Are tablet de-chlorinators operational? 0 0 • 0 Number of tubes in use? Comment: Dechlorination is after effluent flow measurement, lust before effluent sampling. Page# 5 Y i v Permit: NC0021873 Owner-Facility: Mayodan WWTP Inspection Date: 06/11/2018 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Upstream/ Downstream Sampling Yes No NA NE Comment: Influent Sampling Yes No NA NE #Is composite sampling flow proportional? 0 IN 0 0 Is sample collected above side streams? • 0 0 0 Is proper volume collected? 0 0 0 • Is the tubing clean? • 0 0 0 #Is proper temperature set for sample storage(kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees 0 0 0 • Celsius)? Is sampling performed according to the permit? • 0 0 0 Comment: The main influent composite sampler was down for repair. They were using an iced, portable sampler. They said the main sampler should be repaired in the next few weeks. Compositinq method at the influent was 200 ml per hour. Effluent Sampling Yes No NA NE Is,composite sampling flow proportional? • 0 0 0 Is sample collected below all treatment units? • 0 0 0 Is proper volume collected? • 0 0 0 Is the tubing clean? • 0 0 0 #Is proper temperature set for sample storage(kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees 0 0 0 II Celsius)? Is the facility sampling performed as required by the permit(frequency,sampling type • 0 0 0 representative)? Comment: We couldn't get a good read on the temperature because the thermometer heated up before it could be read (operator took it out of the stabilizing solution). However, the refrigerator appeared to be working. Operators said that the compositinq method was 500 ml per 33 pulses, but did not know how many gallons a pulse was.An aliquot produced approximately 300 ml. The operators said they would look into the discrepancy, but did not note having any issue with collecting an appropriate total sample volume. Laboratory Yes No NA NE Are field parameters performed by certified personnel or laboratory? • 0 0 0 Are all other parameters(excluding field parameters)performed by a certified lab? • 0 0 0 #Is the facility using a contract lab? • 0 0 0 #Is proper temperature set for sample storage(kept at less than or equal to 6.0 degrees 0 0 0 III Celsius)? Incubator(Fecal Coliform)set to 44.5 degrees Celsius+/-0.2 degrees? 0 0 0 Page# 7