NCG110091_COMPLETE FILE - HISTORICAL_20121220

STORMWATER DIVISION CODING SHEET
NCG PERMITS
PERMIT NO.
DOC TYPE
HISTORICAL FILE
❑ MONITORING REPORTS
DOC DATE
❑ a0 1,3 I a 0
YYYYMMDD

Ale, jwq.
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Mr, R. Danieley Brown, CEO
PO Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Dear Mr. Brown:
Division of Water Quality
Charles Wakild, PE
Director
December 20, 2012
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspections
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District Wastewater Treatment Plant
NPDES Wastewater Permit NCO024201 &
NPDES Stormwater Permit NCGI 10091f
Halifax County
Dee Freeman
Secretary
I, Dave Parnell of the Raleigh Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality conducted two compliance
evaluation inspections (CEI) on December 17, 2012, consisting of the NPDES wastewater inspection and the
NPDES stormwater inspection. The assistance of Greta Glover, Back-up Operator in Responsible Charge
(BORC), and Laboratory Supervisor, was appreciated. Please review the attached Basinwide Information
Management System (BIMS) inspection checklists summarizing the inspections.
Below is a list of findings and recommendations developed from the inspections:
I. NPDES Wastewater Inspection:
1. The current permit re -issuance is pending. The application timeframe was adhered to by the facility.
The 8.34 MGD wastewater treatment plant consists of the following units: bar screens and grit
chamber, dual primary clarifiers, dual trickling filters, three aeration basins, dual final clarifiers,
chlorination, de -chlorination, dual secondary sludge thickener, three anaerobic digesters, lime
stabilization, sludge storage and sludge drying beds. The plant discharges into the Roanoke River, a
Class C waterbody within the Roanoke River Basin. The 1-lypochloride System Building was added
to the facility during the last permit cycle.
NooiihCarolina
,/vaturallil
- 1 -North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer service
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org 1628 Nail service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone].623.6748
An Equal OpportunitylAHirmative Action Employer — 50% Recyciedlt 0% Post Consumer Paper

Roanoke Rapids sanitary District Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDE5 Wastewater CEI
The inspection began in the treatment plant office. All paperwork was well organized and easily
accessible. Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) were reviewed for compliance with permit limits
and monitoring requirements and found to be in order. Chain of custody records were also found to
be in order. ORC logs were reviewed and were well documented. The laboratory is state certified
and performs the majority of permit required parameters. A contract lab, Meritech, performs the
remainder of the parameters required by the permit. The revised "Regional Field inspectors Check
List for Field Parameters" was reviewed, discussed and completed by Ms. Glover and me. The lab
was well maintained and all temperature measurements were within acceptable limits.
4. Overall plant maintenance was found to be good. The mechanical bar screen was in acceptable
condition and functioning properly. Debris goes to a dumpster and is removed to the landfill
5. Grit removal was free of excessive organic matter and odor. Debris is contained in a dumpster,
removed as needed and taken to the landfill.
6. The primary and secondary clarifiers were observed and appeared to be functioning properly. They
were free of weir blockages and showed no sign of short-circuiting. The effluent weirs in secondary
clarifier #2 are set to be replaced.
7. Trickling filter 42 appeared to be functioning properly, with no sign of ponding. 41 was in use but
with very little flow. The distribution arms were observed and appeared to be distributing the flow
evenly and were free of clogging. The media had healthy well distributed growth.
8. The three aeration basins are functioning properly.
9. The anaerobic digesters were inspected, as was the control room. They appear to have adequate
capacity with no objectionable odor, and are functioning properly.
10. Standby power is available and is tested as required. The generator has the capacity to run the entire
wastewater treatment site.
11. The effluent pipe is located adjacent to the treatment plant and discharges directly to the Roanoke
River. The effluent appeared to be clear with no odor noted. The receiving water is free of foam
and other debris.
if. NPDES Stormwater Inspection:
1. The stormwater pollution prevention plan (SPPP) was reviewed and found to be compliant with the
permit. All qualitative monitoring of the three outfalls and stormwater program duties; including
annual staff training, listing of significant spills, annual review, knowledge and inspections of
secondary containment, are being accomplished as required by the stormwater permit.
,NorthCarolina
.lValurall!1
- 2 -North Curol'uia Division of Water Qual ity R�deigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterqualizy.org 1628 Mail service Center Raleigh, Nv'C 27699.1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledli 0% Post Consumer Paper

Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District Wastewater Treatment Plant NPDES Wastewater CEI
The Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District Wastewater Treatment Plant is considered to be in compliance with
the NPDES wastewater permit, as well as the NPDES stormwater permit, at the time of this inspection. I
appreciate Ms. Glover making time to accompany me during the CEI, as Greg Camp, ORC, was on
vacation. Please continue your diligence in the proper operation and maintenance of this facility. If you
have questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact me at 919-791-4200.
Sincerely,
Dave Parnell
Environmental Specialist
Raleigh Regional Office
Attachment: December 17, 2012 NPDES Wastewater & Stormwater CEI BIMS inspection checklists.
cc: Central Files
SWP/RRO files
Unc
N )rthCaroGna
.1vatim,711 f
- 3 -North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surtaee Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX (919) ?71-4718 1-877-623-67,18
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledfl0% Post Consumer Paper

Permit: NCG110091
SOC:
County: Halifax
Region: Raleigh
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: 06/01/08 Expiration: 05/31/13 Owner: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Effective: Expiration: Facility: Roanoke Rapids WWTP
135 Aqueduct Rd
Contact Person: Gregg Camp
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 12/1712012
Primary Inspector: David R Parnell
Secondary Inspector(s):'
Title:
Entry Time: 01:00 PM
Weldon NC 27890
Phone: [phone]
Certification:
Exit Time: 03A5 PM
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
E Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

Permit: NCG110091 Owner - Facility: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Inspection Date: 12/17/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Rnuline
Inspection Summary:
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No
NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a General location (USGS) map?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Pfan (SPRP)?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑
❑ ❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
❑
❑ ❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑
❑ ❑
Comment: SPPP was scanned and e-mailed to DWQ - received on 12.18.12
Qualitative Monitoring Yes No NA NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Comment: Qualitative Monitoring reports received by e-mail on 12.18.12
Permit and Outfalls Yes No NA NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non Stormwater) discharges? WOOD
Comment: Permit on hand, outfall locations observed during CEI
Page: 2

.r
12yA
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
October 25, 2010
Mr. R. Danieley Brown, CEO
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
P.O. Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspections
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District WWTP
NPDES Permit No. NCO024201
and Stormwater Permit No. NCG110091
Halifax County
Dear Mr. Brown:
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On October 19, 2010 Myrl Nisely of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance
inspection of the Sanitary District WWTP. Along with that inspection, a stormwater
compliance inspection was also carried out. The assistance of Gregg Camp was
appreciated. The inspection checklists are attached. The plant was in compliance with
both permits. Comments are as follows:
NCO024201
1. The description of the WWTP will be changing. When the process of renewing the
WWTP permit is undertaken at least 180 days before the permit expires in March,
2012, be sure to include a description of the new hypochlorite disinfection and
dechlor system. Include the bermed unloading pad with a drain to the drying bed
return line. The system is expected to go online in about a month. Delivery delays
have caused the startup to be late.
2. Two drying beds were in use, holding anaerobic digester solids. They will remain
until early in 2011 in order to meet 503 regulations before being land applied.
3. The secondary effluent discharge system that involves a diesel driven pump for
times when high river flow covers the gravity discharge structure is exercised
regularly. The engine is run monthly, and is put under a load quarterly when the
effluent is discharged during the day shift via that release point.
4. The effluent flow meter is officially calibrated more often than the annual
requirement. It is calibrated quarterly and checked against a staff gage weekly by
the staff of operators.
5. Both primary clarifiers have received overhauls of the rake mechanism in recent
weeks.
One
NorthCarolina
,lVat1t,rall f
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper

Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District WWTP CEI, October 2010 Page 2 (: 2
,„6,.,Gregg, maintains two ORC logs - an operation log and a DMR review log. These
provide evidence a good level of awareness of plant performance on a daily basis.
NCG110091
The stormwater program is being followed. See the attached checklist. There is a pump
station near the influent pump house that is used to transfer stormwater from that area to
Chockyotte Creek when the Roanoke River is high.
Employee training for 2010 has not been completed.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 919-791-4255.
Sincerely,
Myrl A. Nisely
Environmental Chemist
cc: RRO/SWP files
Central Files

Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCGI10091 Effective: 06/01/08 Expiration: 05/31/13 Owner: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Roanoke Rapids WWTP
County: Halifax 135 Aqueduct Rd
Region: Raleigh
Weldon NC 27890
Contact Person: Gregg Camp Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 10119/2010 Entry Time: 12:45 PM Exit Time: 02:20 PM
Primary Inspector: Myrl Nisely Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspector(s):
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
E Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

J
Permit: NCG110091 Owner - Facility: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Inspection Date: 10119/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Yes No NA NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
Cl
❑
Cl
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑
Cl
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
Cl
❑
❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment: A lesson plan has been created for the 2010 employee training, to be
completed by the end of the year.
Qualitative Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment: One round has been completed. One to do yet.
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment:
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
❑
❑
❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
■
❑
❑
❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
■
❑
❑
❑
Comment:
Page: 3

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Mr. R. Danieley Brown, CEO
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
P.O. Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Division of Water Quality
Coleen H, Sullins Dee Freeman
Director Secretary
June 5, 2009
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspections
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
NPDES Permit No. NCO024201
and Stormwater Permit No. NCG 110091
Halifax County
On May 19, 2009, Myrl Nisely and Mandy Hall of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a Compliance
Evaluation Inspection of the Subject facility. The cooperation and assistance of Gregg Camp, ORC and
Greta Glover, BORC were greatly appreciated.
The Roanoke Rapids WWTP is a Class IV Facility, located at 135 Aqueduct Road near Weldon in
Halifax County, North Carolina and discharges to the Roanoke River, a class C water in the Roanoke
River Basin. The Facility's process includes the following components: bar screen, grit chamber, dual
primary clarifiers, dual trickling filters, three (3) aeration basins, dual secondary clarifiers, three (3)
anaerobic digesters, sludge thickener, lime stabilization, sludge drying beds, gas chlorination and de -
chlorination and related contact chamber.
Please find the summarized results of the Inspection in the attached Inspection Report, The Subject
Facility is in compliance and well -maintained.
The Facility's Stormwater program is implemented and compliant. Please see the attached checklist.
Continued efforts by the Facility to construct and maintain observation platforms are commendable.
If you should have questions, please contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
r 0�
Myrl A. Nisely
Environmental Chemist
cc: RRO-SWP File;
Central Files NOrthCarolina
Nakrallty
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office Surface Water Protection Phone [phone] Customer Service
Intemet: www.nowaterquality.org 1628 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycled/i0% Post Consumer Paper
c�

A
Compliance Inspection Report
Permit: NCG110091 Effective: 06/01/08 Expiration: 05/31/13 Owner: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
SOC: Effective: Expiration: Facility: Roanoke Rapids WWTP
County: Halifax 135 Aqueduct Rd
'Region: Raleigh
Weldon NC 27890
Contact Person: Gregg Camp Title: Phone: [phone]
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC: Certification: Phone:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 05/19/2009 Entry Time: 10:00 AM Exit Time: 12:10 PM
Primary Inspector: Myrl Nisely Phone: [phone]
Secondary Inspector(s):
Mandy Hall Phone:
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
N Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

t. D
Permit: NCG110091 Owner - Facility: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Inspection Date: 05/19/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Facifity is compliant.
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
n
n
n
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
■
n
n
n
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
WOOD
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
■
n
n
n
Comment: Facility is well -maintained. Efforts to control stormwater are
commendable. The outfalls observed were compliant.
Page: 2

P.O. Box 308
vKE RSA t00DJackson Street
o Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District Fax: [phone]
9yfTgRY 05www.rrsd.ora
February 29, 2008 CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
NPEDS Section
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, N. C. 27699-1617 eo
Re: 2007 System Performance Annual Report `
NPDES 4NCO024201 v"
NPDES 4WQC00027 a�
NCG110000 (W,67110091) A
g
Dear Sir:
Enclosed please find three (3) copies of the District's System Performance Annual Report.
This report is submitted to meet the requirements of the NCDENRIDWQ policy to promote
public oversight of system performance for reduction and elimination of sanitary sewer
overflows (SSO's) from wastewater treatment works and sewer collection systems.
If these documents should be provided to additional DWQ personnel; or if additional
information is required, please contact me.
Very truly yours,
,e -ft-t 4,-,
R. Danieley Bro , F.E.
Chief Executive Officer
Enclosures
Cc: Gregg Camp
Charles Turner
File
REcENF-D
MAR - 5 200E
YEN?, , WATER DUALITY
POINT SOURCE BRANCH
e.'doc uandsafitW%dwvnydonssne%.pM+p—A107_sye4.fonnantt—reportIv.do Pam:
111

PERFORMANCE ANNUAL REPORT 2007
ROANOKE RAPIDS SANITARY DISTRICT
GENERAL INFORMATION
A. Regulated entity: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District, Collection Systems (C.S.) and
Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP)
B. Responsible entity: .Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District, Dan Brown, CEO
C. Person in charge/contact
1. C.S.: Charles Turner, Operator in Responsible Charge (OR
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District R E C' E IV E"Lu)'
PO Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Phone: [phone] MAR -- 5 2COB
2. WWTP: Gregg Camp, Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC)
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District, WWTP DENR - WATER QUALITY
135 Aqueduct Road
Weldon, NC 27890 POINT SOURCE BRANCH
Phone: [phone]
D. Applicable Permit(s)
1. C.S.: North Carolina Environmental Management Commission System -wide
Wastewater Collection System Permit No. WQCS00027
2. WWTP: NPDES NCO024201
Land Application (L.A.): WQ0001989
Stormwater (General): NCG110000
E. Description of C. S.:
The collection system consists of approximately 130 miles of sewer lines. The sewer lines
within Roanoke Rapids, Gaston and all sub -divisions, which connect to the two main
Interceptors, range in size from 8" to 12". There are two main Interceptors transporting
waste to the WWTP.
The Roanoke River Interceptor collects wastewater from basins located on the north side of
Roanoke Rapids. The Gaston and Northampton basins are included in this service area. The
Interceptor begins just west of NC 48 in Roanoke Rapids. There are three primary basin
pump stations and one secondary pump station along the route. Pipe sizes for the Interceptor
ranges from 18" to 30".
The Chockoyotte Creek Interceptor handles the south side of Roanoke Rapids and three sub-
divisions, Lake View Park, Greenbriar and Lincoln Heights, outside the Roanoke Rapids city
limits. The Interceptor begins east of Zoo Road. There is one primary basin pump station
along the route. Pipe size ranges from 12" to 30".
The system has five sewer lift stations. Two stations are located in the Gaston, NC system,
One of these serves a Northampton County School and the other station pumps all flows
from Northampton County across the NC 48 Bridge crossing the Roanoke River to the
Roanoke River Interceptor. The remaining three pump stations are located within the
Roanoke Rapids system. Two of the stations, Belmont and Poplar Springs, discharge to the

Roanoke River Interceptor while the Greenbriar Pump Station discharges to the Chockoyotte
Creek Outfall.
F. Description of WWTP:
The wastewater treatment plant is rated at 8.34 million gallons per day (MGD). Peak flow is
rated at 12.5 MGD.
Treatment processes at the wastewater plant include grit and rag removal. This is followed by
primary clarification, trickling filter biological secondary treatment, activated solids
treatment, secondary clarification, final effluent chlorination/dechlorination processes, and
final pH adjustment.
During these processes solids are removed from two locations. Primary clarification removes
settleable solids from incoming wastewater to an anaerobic digestion unit. Here the solids, in
the absence of oxygen, receive pH adjustment, mixing, and heating to produce a stabilized
material. Once the solids are stable, excess water is decanted and returned to the plant for
further treatment. The stabilized, thickened solids are treated with lime for odor control then
removed to a holding tank to await land application.
Secondary clarification removes solids from the activated solids process. Here, solids in the
presence of oxygen, ph control, and mixing, accumulate in excess. They are removed,
chemically stabilized, and added to a holding facility. All stabilized solids are analyzed and
land applied according to their nutrient value, ceiling and accumulative requirements.
There are two pumping stations in the wastewater plant distributing wastewater into and
through the plant. Of these two pump stations, one has the capacity to pump 20 MGD and the
other 27 MGD respectively. Also, to aid these two pump stations; a storm water pump station
has been installed. This station intercepts rainwater, an unnecessary load to the treatment
plant, and removes it before entry to the plant. It has the capacity to pump 11.5 MGD. In
conjunction to these two pump stations there is one pump station with capacity of 21 MGD to
remove treated flows from the plant in the event of high river levels preventing normal gravity
flow discharge. Various others pumps and mixers are located throughout the plant for process
control,
II. PERFORMANCE
A. Description of overall 12 month performance, noting highlights and deficiencies:
1. C.S.:
The Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District's collection system received its inaugural permit in
2001 under the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission Department of
Environment and Natural Resources system wide wastewater collection system -
permitting program.
The performance of the system in 2007 was good.
The Fat, Oil and Grease (FOG) program initiated in 1995 has been a good tool in
preventing Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSO's). We also have a fulltime employee for the
FOG Program to inspect all records and grease traps. He also educates all restaurants
about grease and how it affects our sewer lines. The use of local newspaper for FOG
program educational ads and the distribution of brochures to restaurants and fast food
businesses have also been effective. Inspection of records and grease traps is an ongoing
measure to prevent SSO's.
Preventive Maintenance of at least four hours a week cleaning sewer mains has also been
a good tool in reducing sewer backups. The use of degreasers in pump stations on a
regular schedule has proven to be very effective in preventing lift station down time.
Also all pumping stations are checked and cleaned a minimum of twice weekly.

The SCADA system that monitors all lift station 24 hours a day, 365 days a year has
prevented lift station overflows.
2. WWTP:
Overall performance for 2007 was good. There were no NPDES permit limits violations.
(See below) There were no monitoring or reporting violations.
Under the current permit, the District has a weekly effluent total suspended solids (TSS)
limit of 45 mg/1 and a monthly limit of 30 mg/1. Also a weekly carbonaceous
biochemical oxygen demand (CBOD) limit of 37.5 mg/l and a monthly limit of 25 mg/1.
The yearly average for TSS was 22.1mg/l and CBOD was 4.8mg/1. Using yearly
average influent values for the same parameters this calculates to a 91.6% and 96.9%
removal rate respectively, The permit requirement is 85%.
The permit also contains daily maximum residual chlorine of 28 micrograms per liter
(ug/I), a weekly mercury maximum of 868 nanograms per liter (ng/1), and ph must be
maintained between 6 and 9.
Current plant capacity is 8.34 million gallons per day (MGD) with a peak flow of 12.5
MGD. For 2007 the yearly average low flow was 3.OMGD with minimum of 2.3MGD.
The yearly average high flow was 4.8MGD with a maximum of 8.2MGD. The yearly
average total flow was 3.6MGD or 43% of the plant capacity. This is a 20% decrease
over the previous year.
The decrease was a result of the drought experienced in 2007. The less rain there is,
infiltration into the collection system is lowered. Also, because of the drought, creeks
and streams and the water table ran lower. This too attributes to less inflow into the
system. Also, the collection system department has been very aggressive in identifying
and repairing problems in the system.
The District is keerlly aware of and has been very responsive to increasing environmental
awareness. House Bill 1160, Clean Water Act of 1999, ratified by the North Carolina
General Assembly on July 2001 and signed into law July 21" by the governor, has
heightened this awareness. This bill codified as Chapter 329 session laws became
effective October 1999.
In response the District has maintained staff, critical parts inventory, equipment
inventory, made plans to better address extreme conditions, upgraded critical equipment,
planned back up or alternative operations, and requested better responsiveness from sub-
contractors. Responses are continuous and increasing.
In 2007, the District continued to be very active in maintenance issues and concerns. The
WWTP spent in excess of $523,000 on maintenance and repairs to equipment, supplies
and materials necessary to operate equipment and capitalized monies to replace and
upgrade equipment.
Some of the repairs and upgrades in 2007 include the following.
Rag conveyor. The rag conveyor moves debris to a dumpster which is collected by a rag
remover. This debris is removed at this location to prevent downstream line blockages or
clogged pumps and mixers. Due to the length of the rag conveyor, the moving
mechanism or auger was constructed with a central bearing. This bearing caused jam up
and spillage of the debris being removed. Also, if jammed severely enough, the conveyor
would trip out. This in turn would disable the rag remover. With this system inoperable,
incoming flow could back up and possibly cause a spill. To remedy this, the central
bearing was removed and replaced with a "trough" sleeve eliminating the need for the
central bearing. Now spillage has nearly been eliminated and there are no jams tripping

out and disabling of the removal conveyor system. There is also no back up of the
incoming flow.
Grit conveyor. The grit conveyor moves grit to a dumpster which is collected by a grit
remover. Grit is removed at this location to prevent excessive wear on downstream
equipment. The support bearing is located at the bottom of the conveyor. The bearing
wore out and was allowing the conveyor to drop into the conveyor trough causing
excessive wear. The bearing was replaced and operation of the equipment was restored
to normal before any extensive damage occurred.
Influent pump station. The influent pump station transfers all incoming flow into the
plant. The station is equipped with four pumps. Their pumping capacities are 2, 4, 7, and
7 million gallons per day (MGD). One of the 7 MGD pumps received a new motor and
rail set-up. Now both 7 MGD pumps have the same set-up. This allows inventorying
only one spare motor that fits either pump. Also, the new motor is more compatible with
the drive system which regulates the speed of the pump depending on incoming flow.
The new motor is also more energy efficient. The 2 and 4 MGD pumps are the "work
horses" of this pump station. They handle the majority of the work on normal flow days.
This spares wear and tear on the larger 7 MGD pumps which are needed in cases of
higher flows. They alternate based on run time hours until flows increase to a level
where both are needed together. Both of the "work horse" pumps, after many years of
service, were rebuilt to restore maximum pumping capacity. Another advantage of using
these pumps regularly is when repairs are needed; the cost is less because they are
smaller pumps in the station. The pump station is controlled by a level sensing probe.
The probe chosen was constructed of stainless steel, a proven material for this type of
application. The probe worked well for some time but eventually failed. It was learned
that a newer probe material, ceramic, was available and may be even better for this
application. The pump station is now equipped with this type of sensor.
Primary Clarifier. The plant has two primary clarifiers, both of which are original pieces
of equipment put on fine in 1963. Their purpose is to settle out solids in the incoming
flow. The solids are removed for additional treatment by another process. Due to low
flow, one of the clarifiers was taken off line. This also allowed for inspection and
repairs, if necessary. During the inspection, it was discovered that the base support,
which drives the bottom scraper mechanism and the water distributing column were
severely worn. Plans have begun to replace the drive mechanism/water distributing
column. The primary clarifier could be returned to service but with reduced efficiency.
There is a surface skimming mechanism also driven by the base support. It collects
floatable solids, mainly grease, and deposits it into a collection pit. A pump is located in
the pit which is used to pump the pit out as it fills. One of these pumps failed and had to
be replaced. A spare pump was used in its absence. While the primary was drained, two
isolation valves, normally submerged, were exposed. Advantage of this situation was
taken and the valves ere taken apart and cleaned. They have now been restored for future
use.
Recirculation Pump Station. The Recirculation Pump Station (PPS) has throe pumps,
each capable of pumping 3 million gallons per day. With the use of these pumps as
dictated by operation conditions, water can be recycled through treatment processes for
additional treatment. The motors on these pumps are original motors from plant start-up
in 1963. One of the motors failed and was replaced by a new high efficiency, lower
power consumption motor.
Filter Effluent Pump Station. The filter Effluent Pump Station (FEPS) collects all
incoming flow that has traveled through the primary clarifiers and trickling filters. It then
transfers this water on to the secondary system for further treatment. This station is
equipped with four pumps, Their pumping capacities are 2.1, 7.9, 7.9, and 9.2 million
gallons per day (MGD). Here as with the influent pump station, the smaller pump is the
"workhorse". At this station the two 7.9 MGD pumps alternate after equal run times to
aid the 2.1 MGD pump during normal flows. The 9.2 MGD pump is the high flow pump

at this station. The 11 MGD after many years of service was in need of repair. Repairs
were scheduled, however when the pump was to be removed, the discharge valve was
discovered broken. This meant that the pump could not be removed from service until
the broken valve was replaced. The valve was ordered and installed. This required
storage of influent flow into the equalization tank. Once installed, flow was returned to
the plant along with the stored water, the pump isolated, removed and repaired. The
electronic control system. of this pump station is protected by an electrical surge
protection device. The device was damaged from a surge- but protected the control
system. The protection device has been replaced.
Secondary System. The Secondary System is a biological treatment system consisting of
three aeration basins and two secondary clarifiers. The system is operated by the use of
various valves and piping, control panels, traveling siphon bridges with skimmer arms,
gear boxes, motor and pumps, and blowers. Various repairs and upgrades were done.
Each year different basins and clarifiers are drained to check for preventative
maintenance. One basin drained had some flange/pipe work that was required. The
gearbox that drives siphoning/skimming mechanism of one of the secondary clarifiers
wore out and had to be rebuilt. Associated with the gearbox are cable pulleys at each end
of the clarifiers. A large pulley on the drive end of the clarifier and a smaller pulley on
the return end. The return pulley on one of the clarifiers failed. This has been a repair
more common than in other areas of this system. In an attempt to change this, one of
these return pulleys was taken to a local fabrication shop. Improvement ideas were
discussed and the wheel was retrofitted with a large more durable center bearing. The
pulley wheels at each end of the clarifiers are connected with a 400 foot drive cable. One
of these cables broke and was repaired as well. There is a skimming apparatus on each
clarifier and consists of two blades each (four total). They are used to remove floatables
from the surface of the clarifiers. One of the blades got hung up in the trip mechanism
that lowers the blades to skim on the return end or at the drive end where the arms are
raised. A price to replace was received from the manufacturer supplier. Again a local
fabrication shop was contacted and given an example of the design. The skimmer arm
was duplicated for a cost savings of 20%. The arm was installed and is operating well.
The skimmer arms push floatable solids into a dump trough that is attached to an end
wall. One of the dump troughs became detached. The trough was reattached using more
durable materials and of large size to secure it better. The control panel which operates
the gearbox has a computer plc operating process. One of the clarifier computers plc's
malfunctioned and was replaced. The wiring was deteriorated, causing malfunctioning of
the computer plc control. The wiring was replaced and the system went back to operating
correctly. The secondary system recycles solids for reuse in the treatment process. It
uses two pumps, usually one at a time that is rotated on a weekly basis. These pumps
return recycled solids to the treatment process for additional treatment. One of these
pumps failed and had to be rebuilt to return to use. Blowers are used to supply air to the
aeration basins for the treatment process. There are four blowers, two 75 horsepower and
two 100 horsepower. Their use is dependent on the oxygen demands of the aeration
basins. One of the 75 horsepower blower's internal components failed This is a major
failure. There was a spare used 75 horsepower on site; however, it heeded an inlet
bearing kit installed to prepare it for use. The failed blower was sent off for repairs. The
secondary system was the emphasis area of the plant for SCADA. Much of the
supporting equipment for control of the system can now be viewed and tracked via
computer system in the operations building control room.
Disinfection. The final phase of the water treatment process is disinfection (pathogen
kill) and disinfection removal. The former is done with the use of chlorine. The latter is
done to remove residual chlorine because of its negative effect on stream aquatic life.
The chemical used to remove chlorine is sulfur dioxide. The chemicals are injected with
eductor pumps. These pumps are used to create a vacuum on the chemical storage tanks
and to disperse them in a manner which ensures a complete mix of wastewater and
chemical. The chlorine eductor pump failed and had to be replaced with a spare. The
original connection from chemical storage tanks to the eductor pump was wire reinforced
hose. Over time these hoses failed and would not allow the feed of chemical. The hoses

were replaced. However, hard pipe was used to ensure a more durable connection.
Technology advancements have produced safer chemical alternatives for disinfection and
disinfection removal. Chlorine can be replaced with sodium hypochlorite and sulfur
dioxide can be replaced with sodium bisulfate. These alternative chemicals are being
considered Plans and drawings are being produced and a review process has begun to
study the possibilities on this change over process.
Primary Sludge Pump Station. The purpose of the Primary Sludge Pump Station (ASPS)
is to remove settled solids from the primary clarifier and skimmed surface solids
collected in the scum pit. The station is equipped with two pumps to achieve this. The
solids are sent to digester stabilization process. dust downstream of the pumps are
observation points, sight glasses that allow the operator to observe the solids. Only the
thickest of solids are removed to the digester to prevent overloading of the digester with
water. The sight glasses are equipped with container with cleaner fluid and a squeegee to
keep the glass clean. They were over ten years old and deteriorated beyond repair_ Both
of the sight glasses were replaced to maximize solids removal operation.
Digesters and Stabilization. Digesters receive solids removed from primary clarifiers.
With heat and mixing and occasional chemical addition for pH control, solids are
stabilized. The heat system is a boiler heat exchanger. To maximize the use of fuel used
to heat the boiler, the heat exchanger tubes were cleaned. Also, as a part of the heating
process, heated water must be internally re -circulated. This is accomplished with a water
recirculation pump. The pump is equipped with an impeller that pushes (re -circulates)
the water through the heat exchanger. The heat exchanger became noisy and temperature
dropped. Upon investigation the impeller was found broken. It was replaced and
operation returned to normal. The chemical used to maintain pH is caustic (Sodium
Hydroxide, 25%). The caustic pump controls were facing a wall. This made seeing
control knobs and readings difficult to see and adjust. The piping and stand were
reconfigured to turn the pump face outward. This helped operation of this system to be
more manageable. The digester building has a basement. The basement contains several
pumps and motors and other process control equipment. The basement collects water
from internal processes, wash -down for clean up and groundwater seepage. To protect
this equipment from water damage, the building contains a sump pump. The sump pump
wore out and was replaced with a submersible pump. This type of pump application
should be more efficient and reliable.
Biosolids Thickening. Excess solids from the secondary treatment process are thickened
by gravity settling tank and a dnun concentrator with the use of polymers. Polymers
create a reaction which causes solids to concentrate (floc) and water separate. The
purpose is to minimize the solids removed from the treatment plant because removal
charges are based on the amount of gallons removed. The drum concentrator uses porous
fabric with polymer in the concentrator to thicken solids and porous fabric on the solids
removal conveyor for water removal. The removal conveyor works with air pressure and
a tracking system to keep the fabric properly located on the conveyor. An air cylinder
and its hoses on the tracking system failed and had to be replaced. Polymer use is vital to
solids thickening. It is received in concentrate form and pumped to a bulk storage tank.
Intermittent mixing of the tank is required to keep the chemicals used in its make up from
separating. This is accomplished through the use of a mixing pump. The pump works
off a timer. Its pipe work to the tank started leaking. The leak was repaired to prevent
wasting of the polymer. The storage building for the bulk tank is supported by rails. One
of the rails failed causing the building to tip. This caused binding in the pipe work from
the bulk tank to the day use tank. The building was re -leveled and new support added.
Water is important to the solids thickening process. It is used to dilute the concentrated
polymer to correct concentration for the thickening reaction. Water is also used by the
drum concentrator to keep the fabrics used for dewatering the solids clean. Pressure and
volume of the water is critical to both of these processes. The entire building lost both
pressure and volume. The problem was traced to the building back flow preventer. This
component keeps chemicals and wastewater from entering the clean water supply. It had
deteriorated over years of use. Installing a new preventer, returned flow pressure and

volume to the building. The polymer dispensing pump to the gravity tank is controlled
by a variable frequency drive so quantities of polymer can be controlled as required by
the thickening process. The control became erratic. The pump was ruled out as the
problem. Attention was then focused on the drive. The speed control knob
(potentiometer) was bad. Once replaced, the dispensing control was restored. Once
solids are thickened, they must be transferred to another downstream process with the use
of a transfer pump. The transfer pump logs long run time hours in the movement of the
thickened solids. After much use, both pump and motor had to be replaced to restore the
pumping volume.
Lime Stabilization. Thickened solids are stabilized through the use of lime. Time and
pH's dictate the stabilization requirement. Lime is received in dry form and transferred
to a storage/feed silo. The feed motor of the silo dispenses dry lime into a slurry mixing
tank for dilution. Both the feed motor and mixing motor on the slurry tank in the silo
failed and were replaced. After dilution and mixing, the slurry is gravity feed to a
holding tank containing the thickened solids. There the slung is mixed into the solids to
equally dispense the lime and to keep it in contact with the solids. There are two of these
holding tanks with a mixer in each. The mixer in one of the tanks is from original
installation in the late 1980's. It has been rebuilt several times. Now obsolete because
lack of replacement parts and because of advances in technology, the mixer was replaced.
The new mixer is more efficient and uses less energy to do.the same job. The old mixer
is in storage and can be used for back-up purposes.
Solids Storage. Biosolids once stabilized are stored in a tank capable of holding one
million gallons. The solids are held and mixed in this tank to prevent settling until
removed for disposal. Even with mixing, over time settlement inevitably occurs and
approximately once a year needs cleaning. The tank was cleaned to remove this
settlement. Cleaning also allows for the tank to be inspected for integrity. It also allows
for access to the mixers for preventative maintenance.
Equalization Storage. The wastewater plant has the equipment, pumps, valving, and
piping to store wastewater in the event of high flows or maintenance repairs and then
return it to the plant for treatment. The piping in place was above ground temporary
PVC. Some of this piping was stationary; however some of it had to be located in place
for use. It was a difficult task especially for a single manned shift. With some additional
valve installation, the use of some minor piping addition with existing piping, the return
piping is now completely hard (metal) piped It is permanently intact and located below
ground.
Bank Stabilization. At one time bank erosion from stream flow encroached on the
wastewater plants main sewer lines and plant processes. A bank stabilization project was
begun to halt this threat. The process uses a stitched bagging system laid on the ground
which grout is pumped into. After drying, the hardened bags prevent erosion. The
vertical slopes were done in sections to spread the expense out over time. Approximately
1000 ft. of vertical slope would be protected. Before the projects completion a large
storm undermined a section of the vertical slope. It was repaired and the vertical slope
project completed. However, it was realized from the storm damage additional protection
would be required. It was decided that the base (or toe) of the vertical slope would need
horizontal protection. This horizontal protection extends out approximately six feet.
Again it was to be done in sections to spread expenses. Two sections, one in spring and
one in the fall, were completed. To date approximately 800 ft. have been completed
leaving about one 200 ft. section to complete this project.
SCADA (Supervisor Control and Data Acquisition) system work. SCADA is a
computer -based program. It brings site information into the central operations center.
SCADA is a useful tool by providing monitoring information to be used for more
efficient plant operation. It also brings remote site alarms into the operations center,
which provides better control over plant problems.

SCADA work continued in 2007. The area of emphasis was the secondary biological
treatment process. Pumps on/off and rpm status was added. One well level with
high/low level alarms was added. Clarivac on/off and fpm speed was added. Also, all
alarms (8 total) of the clarivac were added (i.e., motor overload and clutch fault). Also
added was the solids washout polymer.control system. Transfer pump and tank mixer
on/off status were added. Polymer tank level with high/low alarms was added. And the
polymer chemical feed pump speed was added. Work also included improving the
monitoring computer located in a control room. Many graphs and trend charts were
added to further help with monitoring the status of plant site information. The SCADA
monitoring computer was also reconfigured to make it more users friendly. The RAM of
the computer was also upgraded to provide more memory.
12" pump installation. The 12 inch pump installed at the head -works of the plant in 2000
remains a valuable tool in preventing spills. In the event of high flows or maintenance
repairs, water can be removed to two abandoned secondary clarifiers. These clarifiers
were taken off-line in the early eighties after plant upgrades, They were originally used
for stabilized biosolids storage. The capacity was increased by extending a wall up from
where the weir overflows were when used as secondary clarifiers. This increased the
storage capacity of the two tanks to 750,000 gallons. After a dedicated biosolids tank
was constructed, the two abandoned tanks were dedicated to spill containment. Once
stored, wastewater can be returned to the plant with an existing pump station. Some pipe
work has been added to this station and depending on conditions, water could be returned
as the tanks are filled. This further increases holding capacity or downtime, during high
flows or maintenance and repairs. In 2007, 2,040,313 gallons of wastewater were stored.
Since setup in 2000, 33,550,433 gallons of wastewater have been prevented from spilling.
At the average flow of 3.6 MOD in 2007, this would be 9.3 days of flow.
Another means of spill control is with a back-up generator. The wastewater plant must
continue to run in the event of power interruptions from the power -supply company.
Power interruption can occur from equipment failure, road accidents, and weather events,
such as ice storms, electrical storms, tornadoes, and hurricanes. A 750 kilo -watt
generator is on site for events and can supply enough generated power to run the entire
plant. In 2007 power supply was not interrupted.
The emergency generator is also used to curtail. The District .is under contract with
Dominion Power, From May 16'h through September 30'h (summer curtailment) and
from December 1" through March 31" (winter curtailment), Dominion can request the
wastewater plant to supply its own power for parts of the day during peak demand.
These requests usually come on the hottest days of summer and the coldest days of
winter. Dominion can then send power that the District would normally use to other
places of need. Winter requests are usually from 6am to I lam (5 hours) and summer
from 2pm to 9pm (7 hours). The contract is limited. In the winter requests to curtail are
limited to 13 or 65 hours and summer 19 or 133 hours. In 2007 the wastewater plant was
called to run all 19 times during the summer curtailment. There were 3 winter calls. The
District does incur the cost of diesel fuel. However, the rate structure the wastewater
plant has because of the contract off sets this cost and provides electrical energy savings.
An added benefit of this program is that it provides a means to exercise the generator.
This keeps the generator in better running condition and exposes any potential problem.
It would be better to find out a problem during a curtailment than an actual power outage.
By having the generator under a contracted quarterly preventive maintenance program
hopefully problems will be minimized or eliminated.
The wastewater plant is also equipped with emergency flood pumps. These pumps are
used in the event of high river levels, which prevent normal gravity flow out of the plant.
Without them, treated wastewater would have no way of exiting the plant and
consequently would flood the plant, causing extensive damage and long recovcry. These
pumps are maintained and exercised on a regular basis to ensure proper operation for
times of urgency. This station is also equipped with local and remote SCADA high level

alarms. These alarms provide notification in the event of station failure, Enough
notification time is allowed to take remedial action before plant damage occurs. The
alarms are checked on a regular basis as well.
This flood pump station has a back-up pump valving and pipe work installed independent
of this station. In the event of catastrophic flood pump or flood pump control panel
failure; treated water will continue to be removed from the plant. The pump is capable of
treating 8.5 million gallons per day or about 4 million gallons more than the average daily
flow in 2007. Plant maximum rated capacity is 8.3 million gallons per day. In 2006 the
pump was covered to help keep it protected and in better working condition. Lighting
was provided for nighttime operation. Also, a battery charger was installed to keep the
pump ready for use. The pump is exercised regularly to ensure performance.
The biosolids land application program ran fairly well in 2007. In the required annual
report to North Carolina division of Water Quality (NCD WQ) and the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), there were no deficiencies or spills. However, there was one
violation. It occurred at the District's farm. An error in flagging off a buffered zone led
to the problem. Normal buffer distance from a property line is 50 fect, but there is a three
acre area located within a 67.2 acre field that needed to be buffered due to the low lying
of the area and also due to a well location. A 15 foot wide strip of this buffered acreage,
including the well location, in approximately two acres received approximately 6500
gallons of biosoilds. This represents less than 1% of 754,000 gallons applied to the
correct areas of this field. The NC Division of Water Quality discovered the infraction
and issued the violation and assessed a $2000 penalty with a $387.82 investigative cost.
Although the District received the penalty, the contracted application company agreed to
pay the $2387.82 because of their error in flagging the required area. This was the first
application to this field ever and lack of knowledge of the field's buffer zones was an
attributing factor. Because of the incident, additional training has been instituted along
with designated personnel to flag fields. Also, permanent boundary markers are being
considered. in 2007 there were 215 stabilization events at 12750 gallons per event. This
is 59 % of the days in a year. The wastewater plant has entered into agreement with area
farmers for the use of their land for biosolids application. The farmers in turn receive the
nutrient value, moisture content, soil remediation, and lime, which is a by-product of ph
control in the treatment process of the biosolids. If necessary, additional lime can be
applied. There are 3100 acres, consisting of 128 fields, available in Halifax,
Northampton, and Warren Counties. All acreage was inspected, approved, and permitted
by the State of North Carolina. Using EPA approved treatment processes, 2,749,000
gallons of stabilized biosolids were safely applied to area lands, consisting of 6 fields and
219 acres, for beneficial reuse. This included the use of four different farms. Cost of this
application process was approximately $98,000. Cost of treatment to stabilize solids is
separate. Land that grew fescue, rye, and wheat'were applied to. The amount applied in
2007 is down nearly 19.5 % from the previous year. Charges for application are based on
gallons. In an attempt to save application costs, biosolids are thickened as much as can
possibly be handled. The removed water is returned to the treatment plant. Also, once
biosolids are placed in storage for land application, water is further separated. This water
along with environmental water (rain, snow, etc) is decanted and returned to the
treatment plant. In 2007, 681,444gallons was decanted, at savings of $16,968. Although
3100 acres of land is permitted and storage of 1,000,000 gallons is available, at times
application is difficult due to weather conditions, crop status, and crop rotation. Owning
land would provide an outlet for these times. In 2004, the District purchased a suitable
land application site. It is located in Northampton County where the District already has
farmer owned land permitted. The land has been developed for livestock (cow)
operation. The area has been split into two fields. One contains 41.8 acres of fescue and
the other contains 67.2 acres of bermuda_ Both fields received their first application of
biosolids in 2007. Fescue was applied 429,000 gallons which is approximately 10,300
gallons per acre. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations allow up to 3
times more per acre on fescue (as determined by nitrogen and % solids content).
Bermuda was applied 754,000 gallons which is approximately 11,200 gallons per acre.
EPA regulations allow up to 3 times more per acre on Bermuda (as determined by

nitrogen and % solids content). Both grasses responded well to the applications. The
fields were intentionally split into these two types of grasses too provide for winter and
summer applications. Also this allows the cows to be moved off the field (the two fields
are separated by fence) which has been applied to for the EPA regulated 30 days.
Since purchasing the land investment improvements continued in 2007. Some of these
improvements are road improvements, weed spraying, annual rye over seeding, and soil
remedial potash application. Also, the permit renewal applied for in March of 2007 was
approved in September 2007. The new permit is valid through August of 2012.
Improvements were in excess of $11,500.
In March 2007, a permit renewal package was submitted by the District for the non -
discharge land application program. After the Division of Water Quality (DWQ) Aquifer
Protection Section's preliminary review an additional items request letter was sent. The
list had l0 items associated with the buffers of certain land application areas. They
requested a response to these issues by July. Some of the 10 responses included the
following. One of the fields was sold and a new landowner agreement needed to be
submitted with new buffered property lines. One field had a home built on it with a well
addition. This addition required a different buffer zone. Several fields had ditches
indicated rather than streams. These streams required a revised buffer area. in all, all 10
items were addressed and returned to DWQ. DWQ reviewed and accepted all 10 item
changes and in September of 2007 issued a new permit to the District. R is valid through
August 2012.
In 2007 the industrial pretreatment program had oversight of two significant industrial
users. One user has a categorical discharge pipe. Four non -significant industrial users
are permitted to send flow to the wastewater plant. Significant and non -significant status
is determined in part by the volume of flow discharged and the pollutants in the
discharge. The pollutants, carried by certain industrial wastes, determine the categorical
status of an industry. In 2007 there were no significant industrial users in significant
non-compliance; a status based on the number and types of violations of a permit. There
was one violation of a permit. There was one "failure to Notify".
In 2007, industrial users were re -issued permits. Two significant industrial user and 4
non -significant user permits were issued. From March 17 to April 11, 2007, the District
provided temporary services to Halifax County Public Utilities for the purpose of taking
wastewater effluent from their pretreatment facility. The pretreatment facility which
treats wastewater from a food processing facility, was unable to meet the effluent
standards outlined in their permit with the Town of Weldon, NC. In order to allow the
facility to be brought back into compliance status with their Weldon issued permit, the
District agreed to temporarily allow Halifax County to pump the discharge to the
collection system belonging to the District for subsequent treatment by the District
wastewater plant, while necessary steps were taken by Halifax County to bring the
facility back into compliance. The facility was brought back into compliance with their
Weldon permit and the pumping concluded.
The North Carolina Division of Water Quality performed its annual inspection of the
pretreatment program on April 26, 2007. A letter of April 27, 2007 was received
complementing the program on the organization, documentation, and time management
instituted within the program.
The pretreatment annual report (PAR) was submitted to the state pretreatment unit on
February 14, 2007, A letter, dated April 23, 2007, was received stating review of the
PAR indicates the report in good order and satisfied the requirements of the North
Carolina Pretreatment Program.

In 2005, the Sanitary District adopted a Fat, Oil, and Grease (FOG) ordinance. Its
adoption was a direct result of the NPDES permit process which required the
implementation of measures to address sanitary sewer overflows (spills), Fats, oils, and
grease (FOG), if placed in the sanitary collection system can over a period of time build
' up and clog pipes causing spills.
In 2007, all initial inspections of restaurants were completed and recommendations for
necessary improvements were compiled. Regular inspections of the 66 restaurants in the
Sanitary District's Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) database were also begun in 2007.
There were ten Notices to Correct sent out that required existing restaurants to install or
modify their grease traps and one restaurant was granted a deadline extension. Thirteen
additional Notices to Correct have been sent out with deadlines set in 2008. Five other
Notices to Correct were sent out that did not require equipment installation and were
addressed immediately. One restaurant requested a variance to extend the cleaning
frequency schedule of their trap and a variance study was begun.
The Sanitary District's informational slide on the Roanoke Rapids public information
channel was updated. FOG informational pamphlets were inserted in the annual
consumer confidence reports.
There were seven sewer blockages attributed to FOG in 2007. Two of those blockages
were attributed to restaurants and the other five were attributed to residential contributors.
The two restaurants have since modified their grease traps and management practices
regarding FOG. There were no Notices of Violation or civil penalties accessed or
collected in 2007. The Sanitary District began the process of revising the FOG ordinance
to clarify some of the variances available to food preparation facilities.
In 2006, the wastewater NPDES permit came up for renewal. North Carolina Division of
Water Quality requires specific information and data for analysis in structuring a new
pertnit. The submittal package is due 180 days before permit expiration. All required
information was submitted in October 2006. In 2007 a draft permit was received in May
for District review and comment. This draft was made available to the public for 30 days
also. There were some minor errors that were discovered, such as typographical errors
and dates. Also there were several issues of concern and some clarifications noted. The
District notified DWQ of these issues. There was no public comment. DWQ addressed
them and issued a finalized permit in June. It is effective until March 2012.
A requirement of the wastewater plant through its NPDES permit is quarterly chronic
toxicity testing. The test involves using a predetermined amount of effluent along with a
macroscopic organism. Ceriodaphriia are placed in the effluent and must survive and
reproduce for a specific length of time. Results of the test are either pass or fail. A pass
indicates the absence of substances in the effluent which may be harmful or threaten
aquatic life. The wastewater plant has been required to test for chronic toxicity since
April of 1993. To date only one test has received a fail result. This occurred in July
2001.
Another testing requirement of the NPDES permit is the annual priority pollutant analysis
(APPA). As indicated, it is an annual test that checks the effluent for conventional and
non -conventional compounds, total recoverable metals, volatile organic compounds,
acid -extractable compounds, and base -neutral compounds. These substances, if found in
sufficient quantity, could be harmful to the wastewater plant, receiving stream, and the
public. To date, no substances have been found in significant quantity to cause harm.
The test is done seasonally over the term of a five year NPDES permit.
The wastewater plant now has a general storm water permit. It was received through an
application process as required by the North Carolina Division of Water Quality. A
requirement of this permit is a written storm water management plan. The plan is used to
evaluate potential pollution sources and to select and implement appropriate methods to

prevent or control the discharge of pollutants to stormwater runoff. As a part of the plan,
semiannual preventative maintenance evaluations and semiannual inspections of site
runoff areas are required.
The Division of Water Quality did not conduct their annual comprehensive evaluation
site inspection in 2007. However, they did contact the District and asked if voluntary
participation in a pilot program would be considered. The District agreed. The program
is Basin -wide Information Management System (BIMS). In the works for years, the
RIMS program is an electronic means for submission of discharge monitoring reports.
These reports are a monthly requirement to the Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
reporting the permit data points of the wastewater treatment facility. For years these
reports have been prepared on paper and mailed to DWQ. This program, if successful,
will eliminate the "paper trail" and mailing of the report process and speed up and
streamline the method of data reporting.
The safety program within the District is very active and assertive in its approach to the
protection of the employees and surrounding citizens. The program consists of a safety
officer, safety committee, incident/accident committee and appeals committee. The
safety officer sets up the monthly safety meetings, coordinates the activities of the safety
committee, keeps up with safety regulations, and many other various safety activities.
The safety committee prepares safety policy programs and updates current ones. They
also do site inspections and produce potential hazard punch lists. The safety committee
and safety officer also keeps up with and prepares for updating regulations and
integrating new regulations of OSHA. The incident/accident committee reviews all
potential accidents and accidents. The appeal committee follows up the safety committee
recommendation at the request of an employee. The attempt is to minimize the
seriousness of an accident and ultimately prevent accidents. As a result of the awareness
and training from the safety program, there were no loss work days in 2007. There were
also no reportable incidents or accidents.
In 2007, the wastewater plant was nominated for the Burke Safety Award. The
nomination was one of many across the state. This award comes from the Water
Environment Federation (WEF). The WEF is a not for profit technical and educational
organization who's mission is the preserving and enhancing the global water
environment. The Burke Award recognizes active and effective safety programs in
municipal and industrial wastewater facilities. The Federation" Member Association
Safety Award is presented to selected associations in recognition of their association
safety program, use of safety aids to promote safety programs, and the success of those
programs. The purpose of the award is: 1. Promote the establishment and
implementation of organized safety programs in local wastewater works and collection
systems, 2. Encourage Member Associations to conduct programs to promote safety in
local wastewater works and collection systems, and 3. Encourage participation in the
collection of injury statistics from individual wastewater works and collection systems,
and to encourage Member Associations' use of this data.
In July, an inspector for the WEF visited the wastewater plant for a tour of the plant and
to make an evaluation. A few months later, it was announced that the Roanoke Rapids
Wastewater Plant had won the award. Two staff personal traveled to Charlotte for the
annual WEF state convention in December to be presented the plaque in recognition of
this award. It was a great honor to be recognized by a group of peers in the industry and
be bestowed with this award. It took the steadfast support of administration and board
with the financing and direction to make this happen. It took the dedication and
commitment of the employees as well. It was a team effort and it is a team award.
After years of preparation, the District called OSHA and requested consultative
inspections to help maintain a safe work place for its employees. After a series of
inspections from OSHA safety and health officers, the District met all requirements of
compliance by correcting all hazards identified during consultative visits and by
developing an occupational safety and health management system. Once met, the

District was eligible for the SHARP (Safety and Health Achievement Recognition
Program) Award. This year marked the sixth straight year the wastewater plant was in
the SHARP Program. With this achievement, NCDOL (North Carolina Department of
Labor) grants exemption from programmed OSHA compliance inspections for a specified
period of time. It is a compliment to the dedication and continued hard work of the
administration and staff. It serves also as a testament to the commitment of the company
for the protection of the employees and surrounding community.
The District has an emergency response team (ERT). in 2007 the ERT went through
some restructuring. The entry teams were reorganized. The entry assistants were
reorganized. The vitals checker and time keeper positions were assigned back-ups. The
van organization, loading and unloading positions, were assigned back-ups and a new
team leader was designated. Because the wastewater plant is the only location with
chlorine and sulfur dioxide, now, the response van is now located here. This should help
with response time in the event of an emergency. Also relocated to the plant is the
chlorine gas detector. It has been assigned a caretaker who also does monthly
calibrations. The formation of the team arose from chemicals, chlorine, and sulfur
dioxide stored on site. Another factor for its formation was the lack of any other agency
in the immediate area to deal with these chemicals. The team meets and has drill
practices regularly. The team is fully equipped and trained to handle emergencies which
may arise from the use of chlorine and sulfur dioxide.
B. By month, list of the number and type of any violations of permit conditions,
environmental regulations, or environmental laws, including (but not limited to):
Permit limit violation
1. C. S.: None
2. WWTP: None
Monitoring and Reporting Violations
1. C.S.: None
2. WWTP: None
2007 Sanitary Sewers Overflows (SSO)
1. C.S.: There were 11 reportable SSO in 2006.
1. Manhole ##185 in US 158 Estimated at 200 gals.
2. 400 bik. Of Marshall St. and Carolina St. Estimated at 600 gals.
3. Greenbriar Pump Station at end of Hall St. Estimated at 300 gals.
2. WWTP: N/A
Bypass of Treatment Facility
1, C.S.: NIA
WWTP:
There was one reportable bypass of the treatment facility in which more 1000 gallons of
wastewater reached surface waters in 2007. It occurred on August 24"' during a
construction project. A process control valve was being installed. During the
installation, influent flow had to be diverted into a storage tank. Once the process was
"dried" up and cut into, the project had to have influent flow diverted until a new valve

was installed. During the course of the project, it was discovered that a valve located
within the flow diversion box was not seated properly. The new process valve was
installed quickly as possible. However, during this project, approximately 9000 gallons
of wastewater was spilled. The spill was reported to the Division of Water Quality
(DWQ) within 24 hours, by phone, and followed with a written report within 5 days as
required by DWQ. As also required a press release was issued.
C. Description of any known environmental impact of violations.
1. C.S.: None
2. W WTP: None
D. Description of corrective measures taken to address violations or deficiencies.
C,S.:
Preventive maintenance cleaning with Jet Vac, and a rot cutter which is attached to the
Jet Vac hose for cutting roots and using TV camera. Manhole repairs and spot line
repairs. We also used BioNomics to clean and TV Outfall G from Roanoke River Outfall
to the -wastewater treatment plant Plus the Roanoke Rapids Sanitary Dist. Crews cleaned
chi Wed 13 miles of sewerlines. BioNomics inspected M/H's, TV'ed, and cleaned 2
miles. Plus L&J Contractors smoked, TV'ed, cleaned, and did some Pipe Bursting &
Point Repairs a total of 7 miles. MJ Price Construction cut Chockyotte Creek Outfall and
Laterals which was 8 miles, making it a total of 30 miles between all 4 companies.
2. WWTP:
The WWTP is very aggressive in reacting to violations and identifying potential
deficiencies. Once identified, plans are made to upgrade or replace potential deficiencies,
which may result in violation. Modifying operations, training operators, laboratory
training, improved equipment, maintenance inventory parts and equipment and raising
awareness is also an on -going and continuous process.
Some of the work done to prevent problems is the identification of potential spill areas.
Once identified, arrangements are made to stop or minimize and contain.
The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SPPP), implemented in 2006, will be a
valuable tool in identifying deficiencies. It incorporates annual awareness and training
not only to all plant personnel. The plan allows for scheduled identification of
deficiencies before they become problems.
In 2007, graveled walkways and observation decks were added to three areas required to
be monitored. Now all five observation areas of plant stormwater runoff can be easily
accessed.
There has been a storm drain management program at the plant that is now incorporated
into the SPPP. Storm drains are gated and remain closed in case of on -site spills. The
spills would be contained or minimized from reaching surface water. The contained
spills are then returned to the plant. The gates need to be opened in the event of rains to
allow normal rain water to drain from the plant. In 2007 a storm drain gate use log book
was developed. It will be helpful as a reminder to return storm drain gates to the closed
position once rain has ended.
Also, as part of the SPPP, dedicated wash down areas have been set up. These areas
allow wash down of equipment where the wastewater rinse is contained in the plant. In
instances where petroleum wash down is necessary, there is a parts wash solvent sink
with containment. The containment is recycled through a contracted company. If larger
parts need petroleum wash down, a local company has been contacted that can handle
these larger items through a recovery unit. A fee is paid to handle the cost of the solvent
recovery and recycling.

The Fat, Oil, and Grease (FOG) program, which began as a committee, advanced to an
ordinance, and now has a full-time employee to administer the program. The goal is to
prevent FOG from entering the collection system causing blockage problems resulting in
spills. The wastewater plant will benefit by having less FOG to handle and chemically
treat. During implementation of the Fog ordinance, oversights and deficiencies were
observed and noted. Work is under way to make revisions. Once completed, the
ordinance will be resubmitted for adoption by the Board of Commissioners.
Identifying and eliminating inflow and infiltration (I&I) is an on -going and difficult task.
It is important to stop or minimize to take unnecessary flows off of the treatment plant.
However, it is also important to address because excess I&I can "dilute" incoming waste.
Diluted wastewater makes it more difficult to meet percent removal requirements (85%)
of the plants permit. In 2007, more areas were identified and addressed to help resolve
this problem.
A polymer feed pump station remains on line to help with solids washout at times of high
flows. In 2007, this system was added to the SCADA monitoring program to give better
control of this system. In addition, operational strategies have been put in place to
minimize solids wash out at times of high flow. And as described in performance section
"II", a 12" pump is in place to retain flows that might otherwise reach surface water.
This setup continues to be a valuable tool each year in preventing spills. Retaining high
flows in equalization tanks helps with solids wash out also.
A valve exercise program is now employed. It keeps valves in good working order. In
the event of routine maintenance, equipment problems, or emergencies, valves used to
address these issues are in a state of readiness. As valves are repaired or replaced, they
are added to the exercise list.
There are various alarms throughout the plant site. However, if they malfunction they are
of no value. These alarms are lights with horn or sirens. Some are station (remote) only.
However, many of the alarms are also on the SCADA system located in the operations
building control room. Also, to make these alarms more audible, the speaker system was
expanded into other areas of the operations building. In an attempt to keep functioning
alarms, they are tested on a regular basis. As more alarms are required or added, they are
added to the testing list.
Equipment status indicator lights can be a very useful too] for operations. The harsh
environment at the wastewater plant makes maintaining functioning lights difficult. To
remedy this, new weather proof light sockets are being installed. Also, the lights have
changed too. LED lights are now installed. They are more dependable, can be seen
better in daylight, and last longer.
The plant generator is capable of powering the entire plant in the event of a power loss.
Without it, spills would occur. It is on a contracted quarterly preventative maintenance
program. It is also exercised monthly by plant staff. And, the curtailment program with
the main power supply company assures further testing and exercise of the generator.
The disinfection system is on a contracted semiannual preventative maintenance
program. It is an attempt to ensure that the release of hazardous chemicals, chlorine and
sulfur dioxide, are prevented. Also, the automatic tank valve closures are sent off for
repairs and recertification annually. The batteries that operate these valves are replaced
regularly to ensure their proper operation in the event of a leak.
During high flows or some maintenance repairs, influent flow can be diverted to
equalization storage tank. Once flows lower or repairs are complete, the stored water is
returned to the plant for treatment. The return pipe was above ground rubber hose and
PVC. This was a risky set up. A tear or break could have easily occurred and a spill
could have been inevitable. In 2007 this pipe was replaced with underground metal pipe.
- l5-

IV
Now return of stored water into the plant is much safer and much less- likely to cause a
spill.
During a construction project in 2007, influent was diverted to equalization storage tanks.
During the process, it was discovered that a valve was not seated properly and some
spillage occurred. A pipe plug was installed down stream to prevent future spills. Plans
are under study to replace the faulty valve. The wastewater plant uses chlorine for
effluent disinfection. It uses sulfur dioxide to remove chlorine after disinfection has been
accomplished. Both chemicals are very effective; however, both are also very toxic. In
2007, plans were implemented to switch over to safer chemicals. Sodium hypochlorite
will replace chlorine and sodium bisulfate will replace sulfur dioxide. As well as safer,
these chemicals are effective as well. Drawings and drawing review has begun.
NOTIFICATION
A. A condensed, summarized version of this report will accompany the annual water report
which will be distributed to the on
and customers of the Roanoke Rapids Sanitary
District via mail. The full report will be available at the main office upon request.
CERTIFICATION
A. I certify under penalty of law that this report is complete and accurate to the best of my
knowledge. I further certify that this report has been made available to the users of the
named system and that those users have been notified of its availability.
R. Danieley Bro , PE
Chief Executive Officer
Reduce
Recycle
Satisfy
Develop
apKF R1
aZ' i
yL�T�RY U,S^�,G
hv�8
Date
-16-

F WAr� Michael F. Easley, Governor
Q R William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
QC� OG North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
fn1 {j t e�t� Coleen H. Sullins, Director
uYul3ilu L�IJ Division of Water Quality
April 4, 2008
Mr. R. Dameley Brown, CEO
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
P.O. Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspections 4/2/2008
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
NPDES Permit No. NCO024201
and Stormwater Permit No. NCG110091
Halifax County
Dear Mr. Brown:
On April 2, 2008 Myrl Nisely of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted an annual compliance
inspection of the Sanitary District WWTP facility. Following that inspection, a stormwater
compliance inspection was also carried out. Thanks to Greg Camp and Greta Glover for their
assistance.
Description of the WWTP
The facility is comprised of bar screen, grit chamber, dual primary clarifiers, dual trickling filters,
three aeration basins, dual secondary clarifiers, gaseous chlorination with contact chamber,
dechlorination, dual secondary sludge thickeners, three anaerobic digesters, lime stabilization,
sludge storage and sludge drying beds. Discharge is into the Roanoke River, class C, in the
Roanoke River Basin.
NCO024201
The plant was in compliance. Comments from the inspection are shown on the attached checklist.
This is a well run plant, with all operational units functioning as they should.
NCG 110091
The plant has a sound stormwater program and is implementing it. See the attached checklist. The
installation of observation stations at many of the outfalls is commendable.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 919-791-4255.
Sincerely,
Myrl A. Nisely
Environmental Chemist
cc: RRO/SWP files
Central Files+
NC€�EP:ri
Raleigh Regional Office 1628 Mail Service Center phone [phone] Customer Service
Water Quality Section Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 facsimile [phone] 1-877-623-6748

Permit: NCG110091
SOC:
County: Halifax
Region: Raleigh
Compliance Inspection Report
Effective: 10/14/05 Expiration: 07/30/08 Owner: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Effective: Expiration: Facility: Roanoke Rapids WWTP
135 Aqueduct Rd
Contact Person: R Danieley Brawn
Directions to Facility:
System Classifications:
Primary ORC:
Secondary ORC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Related Permits:
Inspection Date: 04/02/2008
Primary Inspector: Myrl Nisely
Secondary Inspector(s):
Title: Superintendent
Certification
Roanoke Rapids NC 27870
Phone: [phone]
Entry Time: 12:25 PM Exit Time: 01:25 PM
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Reason for Inspection: Routine Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Permit Inspection Type: Municipal WWTP > 1 MGD, Stormwater Discharge, COC
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Question Areas:
Storm Water
(See attachment summary)
Page: 1

w.,
Permit: NCG110091 Owner - Facility: Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
Inspection Date: 04/0212008 Inspection Type: Compliance Evaluation
Reason for Visit: Routine
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
Yes
No NA
NE
Does the site have a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations and drainage areas?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of significant spills occurring during the past 3 years?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
■
❑ Cl
❑
# Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Is the Plan reviewed and updated annually?
■
❑ ❑
❑
# Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Has the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan been implemented?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment:
Qualitative Moriitoring
Yes
No NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
■
❑ ❑
❑
Comment: Most of the five discharge points now have wooden access stations to
provide good viewing of the water quality. The most recent monitoring was in
November 2007,
Analytical Monitoring
Yes
No
NA
NE
Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility conducted its Analytical monitoring from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
❑
■
❑
Comment: Exempt from Vehicle Maintenance monitoring, so there is no Analytical
monitoring required.
Permit and Outfalls
Yes
No
NA
NE
# Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
■
Cl
❑
❑
# Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
■
❑
❑
❑
# If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑
■
❑
# Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges?
■
❑
❑
❑
Page: 3

n
o`apF W A rFgQG
, al,-�
Mr. R. Danieley Brown, CEO
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
P.O. Box 308
Roanoke Rapids, NC 27870
Dear Mr. Brown:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
November 17, 2006
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspections 11/14/2006
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
NPDES Permit No. NCO024201
and Stormwater Permit No. NC6110091
Halifax County
On November 14, 2006 Myrl Nisely of the Raleigh Regional Office conducted an annual
compliance inspection of the Sanitary District WWTP facility. A stormwater compliance inspection
was also carried out. Thanks to Greg Camp and Greta GIover for their assistance.
NCO024201
The plant was in compliance. Findings during the inspection are shown on the attached checklist.
Please note the comments that follow some topics. From this site visit I will prepare a staff report
for input to the permit writers as they renew the permit.
NCG110091
The plant has established a sound stormwater program and is implementing it. See the attached
checklist.
If you have any questions or comments, please call me at 919-791-4255.
Sincerely,
1 nn
�1
Myrl A. Nisely
Environmental Chemist
cc. RRO/SWP files
Central Files
Raleigh Regional Office 1628 Mail Service Center phone [phone] Customer Service
Water Quality Section Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 facsimile [phone] 1-877-623.6748

United Slates Environmental Protection Agency
Form Approved.
EPA Washington, D.0 20460
OMB No. 2040-0057
Water Compliance Inspection Report
Approval expires8-31-98
Section A: National Data System Coding (i.e., PCS)
Transaction Code NPDES yr/molday Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
1 N �2 '513 NCCiiCi 0�1 11 12I Co!1i/14 117 1119us 20I/J
L LJ
Remarks
2111 1 11111 1111111.1111_1_.111111111111111111111111111
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating S1 OA ------------- Reserved-----------
180
671 69 70I u I 71 Lj 72I ., I 73I 1 I � 174 751 I I I I I Li
u k
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)
09:25 AM 06/l1/14
05/10/14
.cLr,oice Rapids Ltit4T"
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
135
Roanoke Rapids NC 27E70
11:10 A39 06/11/14
010/07i30
Name(s) of Onsite Representative(s)/Titles(s)/Phone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Contacted
ral'ielp; Brow^, PC P.ax 3CE kaana're P-I :ids NC
No
7670/ Sij?eri.ntendent/252-557-913,/2525�75�136
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection (Check only those areas evaluated)
Storm Water
Section D: Summary of Findin Comments Attach additional sheets of narrative and checidists as necessary)
(See attachment summary)
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspector(s) Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
v/rl *lise1.1 RRO iiQ//019-791-4200/
Vo �Li I ( 111b1o6
—
Signature of Management O A Reviewer Agency/Offce/Phone and Fax Numbers Date
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 9-94) Previous editions are obsolete.
Page # 1

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
Questions for General Permit Inspections
Date: 11/14/2006 Permit No. NCG110091 Facility: Roanoke Rapids Sanit Dist
Time In: 9:25 Departure Time: 11:10 Inspector(s): Myrl Nisely
YES NO
Is a copy of the Permit and the Certificate of Coverage available at the site?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a General Location (USGS) map?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a "Narrative Description of Practices"?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a detailed site map including outfall locations?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a list of significant spills in the past 3 years?
®
❑
Has the facility evaluated all illicit (non stormwater) discharges to the storm sewer system?
® .
❑
Has the facility evaluated feasible alternatives to current practices?
®
❑
Does the facility provide all necessary secondary containment?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a BMP summary?
®
❑
Does the Plan include a Spill Prevention and Response Plan (SPRP)?
®
❑
11.
Does the Plan include a Preventative Maintenance and Good Housekeeping Plan?
®
❑
12.
Does the facility provide and document Employee Training?
®
❑
13.
Does the Plan include a list of Responsible Party(s)?
®
❑
14.
Is the Plan reviewed and/or updated annually?
®
❑
15.
Does the Plan include a Stormwater Facility Inspection Program?
®
❑
16.
Has the Plan been implemented?
®
❑
17.
Has the facility conducted its Qualitative Monitoring semi-annually?
®
❑
18.
Has the facility conducted its Quantitative (Analytical) monitoring?
❑
❑
19. Does the facility have Vehicle Maintenance activities on site (uses more than
NA
55 gallons of new motor oil per month)?
❑
®
❑
❑
19a. Has the facility conducted its Annual Quantitative (Analytical) monitoring at outfalls
receiving runoff from Vehicle Maintenance areas?
❑
❑
®
❑
20. Were all outfalls observed during the inspection?
®
❑
❑
❑
21. If the facility has representative outfall status, is it properly documented by the Division?
❑
❑
®
❑
Comments: Have established a strong program since receiving the permit.
Any sludge losses at the loading station go into a grate and are returned to the head of the plant.
Recommendations:
Requirements:

Michael F. Easley. Governor
o�0� W A 7�'q
October 14, 2005
Mr. A. Gregg Camp
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
PO Box 308
William G. Ross Jr., secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W- Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Roanoke Rapids, INC 27870
s
Subject: General Permit No. NCG 11,0000
Roanoke(R vi er WTP �' e
S, COC NCG110091= ,y kqlc c S D .
Halifax County V
Dear Mr. Camp:
In accordance with your application for a discharge permit received on SeptembAl ;L-5, '
2005 we are forwarding herewith the subject certificate of coverage to discharge under the
subject state — NPDES general permit. This permit is issued pursuant to the requirements of -'-
North Carolina General Statute 143-215 .1 and the Memorandum of Agreement between North
Carolina and the US Environmental Protection Agency dated May 9, 1994 (or as subsequently
amended).
Please take notice that this certificate of coverage is not transferable except after notice to
the Division of Water Quality. The Division of Water Quality may require modification or
revocation and reissuance of the certificate of coverage.
This permit does not affect the legal requirements to obtain other permits which may be
required by the Division of Water Quality or permits required by the Division of Land
Resources, Coastal Area Management Act or any other federal or local governmental permit that
may be required.
If you have any questions concerning this permit, please contact Jonathan Diggs at
telephone number [phone] ext. 537.
Sincerely,
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY BENNETT
`Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Central Files
Stormwater Permitting Unit Files
IVo thCarolina
Natimally
North Carolina Division of Water Quality 1617 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1017 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet: h2o.enr.state.nc.us 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, NC 27604 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 509% Recycledll0% Post Consumer Paper

STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
GENERAL PERMIT NO. NCG110000
CERTIFICATE OF COVERAGE NO. NCGI10091
STORMWATER DISCHARGES
NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM
In compliance with the provision of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1, other lawful standards and
regulations promulgated and adopted by the North Carolina Environmental Management Commission, and the
Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended,
Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District
is hereby authorized to discharge stormwater from a facility located at
Roanoke River WWTP
135 Aqueduct Road
Weldon
Halifax County
to receiving waters designated as the Roanoke River, a class C water in the Roanoke River Basin
in accordance with the effluent limitations, monitoring requirements, and other conditions set forth in Parts I, I1, III,
IV, V, and VI of General Permit No. NCG110000 as attached.
This Certificate of Coverage shall become effective October 14. 2005.
This Certificate of Coverage shall remain in effect for the duration of the General Permit.
Signed this day October 14, 2005. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
BRADLEY SENNETT
Alan W. Klimek, Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission

LanIaG4' 1 t, ri' ,.--.' J _. rr .• p• �/ x.r '�•yrls4:r• ---u_ ,.••--r --. '- \y.
�it.f`��\f�1., �L t •� r y �... 1� ry� j yr. �.si ,�j\�.H�j�.i,/ r �'•".•'"\ .1
� � rrf.•ji � _ �y P � G � ',t. S • o •. yy� .,x � e. � � r ii �� 4 ``` �
�r.J�:. 1;1 '�' i f r.�� � i .-.- 4 r 0. •4 /� N • .r � - ~ °`��p .s►d , ',� � G��.:,.;/ - t` o �x
_'� � } y ° J ..l ice. ru .H •� .. �1 _ ura 1 "i 1 x � NO
Val,
Gaging SlG�
4 h �I tg Y V � _• .'v
�1A...,�. ,.� ��e 9� r ° "• '` ����U�lr� ' or . tc`�—.�, r � c �j � '� ...�- l �`•i
l n �� � a _ sn .eaa 1• `��` f�" 1 { C _� . s � -, f'' i'•,; �t, d
moo,hf � '�i ", i• `�,. \ �� . i i 1 � 4 �x , � xx -ram � . L1,.,' } �I } \' j r i � ._
e¢ � �r�, � ` ��,r �+.�` , � i.r�s,h"r ; tl \.. � X' CSC, � �!"`5 ° �' � \` �r' f 1 tE� t -� •I j f r `I 3 � �+�/; �!
�� +' w� a � �-.1s y: t'�• �Z rl1 br _✓(�Lr! - }c../ \`} [ `�y,ti� ti���'��y�/3h����;r-.'.�Cr�' �i �����a-.,�`• �+}' ���(`�� p �l'r i
X�,� � , l' f cl}.='..i{��{r l rtr 4 � ` �'� •� ti ��� Lr� f'�'•.J_.-�'ti- •C �t r�� � (�-ti � . { E7/�' � � ��
� k�,•�`�. A "Ai ! if�y�~`x /� ^�. r}{i i r r % �('�}�s °i/ ) i• 1
'' \ t��:^, �. _•��� ��`r { %„ f�l��t C-..L;�i -��r `�'`r'7 ;� �/! I�' J� i.l �I^J�l
;!tit©'�`��4�
/ 1�l{{ �iiiiil ,\\\�\j��j � •x. 't�� 1 -� `'r>'._ Cr.. � � ��lir.^ i���-�.,f° 1 •---��` �•,l(�r'��� ''l�r 1�1� _•q
VMS
rt �Y- �� \. � �x �`t-cs � '_�1��� � _ -'Y l� �������6 `� ��G r t:."x-- }� r r. r-, 't, i---. •\, ii
l •' r O , ♦,`,1+- t s a ` rt / K _'7�+` '1ti r---y :.x •O Z Y �\`,,��_"1 l: t ,� '`—.
\` ` �f C2j
l •!• +` --/.`- \1 � �1 �` `\ `�•'tif! is a�._ � :_� � ,. \ V y i/ � �! i} 1 - �.:� - � �
lly ` �."'� i$1{ ;L S ; �` . �F{� `l1 �� �6� � i � `. �•.. ( � ' v7` ��` `j " � t\�\
' L� �, t".'� ,✓ f R ! ..w•, 1 ��-�.,' `' 7 �ra1tek1 t�ll, j\ \ \\, .. i �t��`���' 1 �t � . t� `�' ` `. .1 �... �_-
AT
�� t. - � �`� �a� � ' � f - - r�� � 1 -{1 � � 1, '`,ti i - i � i.` 1 i. � i ir�i �• � i, ' 14i�,- -'�"'�
' r�.. I '� @.:, ~ 'Z t']i CFe L �•^��{ e1 Flw-" Fl f
_� � 'may � � .� J � ql� � � \�� '�\ "• � ;.,`�� I _ (''" �. '+.. � "�� �'; 1t�y ��,�� _ �.-"'� II / lt:
�'� � � �, � 7 ®y� F) \ ��` � +� 1�. p S "1 � fr+� ��•~ Jrr.. -ti ��Il ;; 1 . ,N i ( 4.. � �
� ORS. 4 � � ;5, -� �'� � � /' r �•,,,�-�,�' %i,r i< L � �" •,- C/'1"����s �,', ''ji`c�1 � r%.
` r
v. -. Cal pg nit -,, •n,�{ �,,�` Ski; F t
! �'u.• ,at !i � i5s� , a" `. k + � r
Fr -
a .;' �o t (FI � � '' •' .- • .�� ' C'"_=, �' �•; .%"'' • 4 r;; a:. j. y� `' \ • r �� ji t14 F � �
V r\ , � � ~ .�-� k58 "1...;� � ` � �` ` .•' �•_. "�-.� -�'� �1 ���� � ,
ed
�`�/ i1 J �� ��. � `YY e� i ,�E•.; 1�Yt,,. Ft��' � Attic ,.. �� �.
ry Fie d i
�� ter.._ � 0 'G � ....J\�. -�•"1 .�J _ . ���i•. �.,` i 4.� '��� � �St j !•s•-
4 .•,��.1 0 ,jQ,vs �-�r:..i•-f�.. '�-. �11 )� �' / -s 'i'�t`4 �, _�y 1 5 �-
ff
rgro a •' s'C•Fj'i / �.�� ; t ;� ;rxy{ v. tint, { 3;
'�. •�-��.r @ "� /j� l 1 '•fS• =��, ..�� _J-� ( Il §' .{(!,S'�a' ens" ., Z§ � �
�._.•�-� i �'� ,,,� /� r/ � ! L /`Golf}���� {. t • � F�.1 I . -•' f { ; '`�'� t � F� � �} 1 �f"� ��•�
Gelf-j
i
�--., � � �/ �� �z � � sr- ! `; :,�'?��.. �` � ��� � t ,� • ,'k}}� � \ r� J � � {X4 � s f; lrl � • � d'Fa`� � �,�' � �! l I � �d�
If
� ��^ f �� �� -�.i �1 � �,rjJ � --x � � '6���• j• _ �5., •J 1 # r, r W ` a
� � nx4o otic // ✓` �ti,�a: _fir. V C �n I, i. t , � • .. , �'
--•. ,, s --.�_ Git7 orrat-teIN
_; �. , ,�,., '� • ; ' ice ,�'� 1• � ! 't �•" ! '
/,/V1'/�� r �,�'�'/.tt�~1 /, �� - a r v,Fr(��/"� ��}P.S�r.�S�� •;i.}i..j�pt�� 7/ SV/ f I `
l d4
ag
was j .. !I • i �) sa f , . LFiRio '
11
,G40-
S•• 'rt ,�,l�xt�:�.6' •�- 1}y%n,f� �_` , 50
i i +���� 4 \ �" 1 � \���� : '. `��L`� t ll� nL`ti �F?lfo:� Fi � ��7�t�? �-"=`^�:>;G�'° �..--.•`., '. E •n� '
Copydght (C) 1998, Maptech, Inc.

Markers
Name: Roanoke Rapids WWTP
Short Name: RnkRpd
Coordinates: 036° 26' 11.17" N, 077° 36' 35.57" W
Comment: Roanoke Rapids WWTP NCG110091, Roanoke Rapids Basin, 03-02-08, Roanoke River,
Class C, Weldon USGS

Re: Roanoke River WWTP
Subject: Re: Roanoke River WWTP
From: Myrl Nisely <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2005 07:26:39 -0400
To: Jonathan Diggs <[e-mail]>
Hi, Jonathan,
There may be a bit of terminologPt)
to clear up on this. The application is for the
Roanoke Rapids /I(not Roanoke RiveWWTP. Oddly enough, one does enter the edge of
Weldon to get to —the_ ant,—hu otherwise has no connection with the government of
Weldon. It is actually owned and run by the Roanoke Rapids Sanitary District.
Yes, they should be issued the stormwater permit. They have a fine plant, excellent
housekeeping, and conscientious workers.
Have a great day,
Myrl
Jonathan Diggs wrote:
Hey Myrl - we issued that Weldon WWTP plant stormwater permit last week. I have
another WWTP for Weldon - the Roanoke River WWTP. I'm assuming we want to go
ahead and issue this permit as well. Any concerns about the facility? I attached
the NOI as a pdf. Thanks - hope you are doing well - Jonathan
Myrl A. Nisely <Q))))><
Environmental Chemist II NC DENR -- Div. Water Quality Raleigh Regional Office 162B
Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1628 Telephone: [phone] or x4255
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail] ><((((Q>
1 of 1 11/10/2005 05:08 p.m.