The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNC0003174_Staff Report_20190726State of North Carolina Division of Water Resources Water Quality Regional Operations Section Environmental Staff Report Quality To: ® NPDES Unit ❑ Non -Discharge Unit Application No.: NC0003174 Attn: Joe Corporon Facility name: Fulcher's Point Pride Seafood From: Scott Vinson Washington Regional Office 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 they are applicable. I. GENERAL AND SITE VISIT INFORMATION 1. Was a site visit conducted? ® Yes or ❑ No a. Date of site visit: May 23, 2019 b. Site visit conducted by: Scott Vinson c. Inspection report attached? ® Yes or ❑ No d. Person contacted: Chris Fulcher and their contact information: (252) 249 - 0123 ext. e. Driving directions: Take Hwy.55 into Oriental, NC and turn east onto Hodges St. to the end and turn right onto South Ave. and the facility will be located at the end of drive. 2. Discharge Point(s): Latitude: 35.02354 Longitude:-76.69618 3. Receiving stream or affected surface waters: Raccoon Creek Classification: SC; HQW; NSW River Basin and Subbasin No.: Neuse River Basin / 03-04-10 Describe receiving stream features and pertinent downstream uses: The receiving stream is located within a nutrient sensitive watershed and is a tidal salt water used for secondary recreational activities involving human body contact, fishing, boating and supports aquatic life propagation and survival and is also classified as a High Quality Waters. 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 - PCNC ORC: Certificate #: 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: This is a seafood processing facility for the rinsing, packaging and processing of fish, shrimp and crab. Current permitted flow: 0.002 MGD for crab and 0.0026 MGD for shrimp & fish FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page I of 4 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: There is really only one Outfall pipe that wastewater may discharge from and depending on the particular day, it could be fish, shrimp or crab processing. The Effluent Limitations section of the permit may need to broken out into four (4) individual "Outfalls" (including_ just one for rinse & packaging) in order to make clear the different parameter limits assigned for each species of seafood being processed. There is second pipe discharge for the ice melt from the freezer and one for the broken down and unused boiler which has not been used in many years. 5. Is the residuals management plan adequate? ® Yes or ❑ No If no, please explain: Solids are disposed of through solid waste trash to landfill. 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: 10. Were monitoring wells properly constructed and located? ❑ 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: The facility has had issues getting the eDMRs submitted on a timely basis. The facility does not dischargery month and in some cases may not discharge for 3-4 months at a time, but in the past two years the facility has missed sampling for parameters 3 times on the few days per those months that they did process seafood and discharge. The facility has been issued 8+ NOVs for late submittal of their eDMRs. 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 BUMS violations? ❑ Yes or ® No If yes, please explain: 14. 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? Yes Is a solution underway or in place? The owner and his secretary who enters the eDMR data have been given technical assistance on entering the data, but it seems not to have helped remembering to completed the eDMR every month. FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 2 of 4 Have all compliance dates/conditions in the existing permit been satisfied? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A If no, please explain: The facility has not steadily completed the eDMR entries on a regular basis, but they caught up to now. 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: Item Reason None 3. List specific permit conditions recommended to be removed from the permit when issued: Condition Reason None 4. List specific special conditions or compliance schedules recommended to be included in the permit when issued: Condition Reason Effluent Limitations & Although there may be only one actual pipe outfall for the processing area, for Monitoring Requirement ease of understanding, it is recommended that four (4) Outfall tables be created Tables in the new permit listing each seafood species, Crab, Shrimp, Fish & the fourth table for when just rinsing/packaging of seafood occurs with no processing. 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: 7/26/2019 Plow T"6Cku( V. ADDITIONAL REGIONAL STAFF REVIEW ITEMS None. FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 3 of 4 FORM: WQROSSR 04-14 Page 4 of 4