Watermark.
Lima BOSC
Switch site 38 sites · 11 basins 8 open

Each site is one Watermark investigation. The page color says what opens; the campus line is the build on the ground — two different clocks.

MAU Maumee Basin 9 sites
2MI The Two Miamis 9 sites
SE Southeastern Basins 12 sites
NE Northeast Basins 8 sites
The page — what opens on Watermark Open · Draftfull record Queued · Watchingpreview page Restrictedrequest access
The campus — the build on the ground Investigating Confirmed Under construction Operational
All 38 sites — the network index →
Building
The record
Record · Inspections & compliance reviews

Lima WWTP

edoc-467350
[verified]
Fields
agency
Ohio EPA, Division of Surface Water
district
Northwest District Office
program
NPDES
inspection_type
Reconnaissance Inspection
type_code
RI
facility
Lima WWTP
facility_address
1200 Fort Amanda Rd., Lima, Ohio
permit_no
2PE00000
npdes_id
OH0026069
county
Allen County
inspection_date
2016-07-13
report_date
2016-07-20
entry_time
10:15 AM
exit_time
12:00 PM
significant_noncompliance
no
units_in_service
summary
On July 13, 2016, Ohio EPA conducted a Reconnaissance Inspection at the City of Lima's WWTP to observe progress on the new headworks construction project. All components except two of the four primary clarifiers were nearly complete, and effluent in the final clarifiers was clear, colorless, and odor-free. No significant non-compliance was identified at the time of the inspection, though compliance data for 9/1/2015–6/1/2016 showed 2 limit violations, 15 code violations, and 57 reported SSO events.
note
inspectors
  • Peggy B. Christie
  • Thomas Poffenbarger, P.E.
facility_representatives
  • Eric Markley, Supervisor
  • David Schnipke, Environmental Compliance Manager
observations
    • kind finding
    • text NPDES Compliance — No corrective action needed.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Operations & Maintenance — No corrective action needed.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Operator Certification — Not evaluated.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Collection System — Not evaluated.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Sludge Management — No corrective action needed.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Storm Water — Not evaluated.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Self-Monitoring Program — No corrective action needed.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Laboratory — Not evaluated.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Effluent / Receiving Water Observations — No corrective action needed. Effluent observed in final clarifiers was clear, colorless and had no noticeable odor.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Construction nearly complete on all but the two primary clarifiers. Once the other headworks components are operational, the old Detroiter and primary clarifiers will be demolished in order to construct the two additional primary clarifiers.
    • number
    • deadline
    • kind finding
    • text Compliance Data (9/1/2015–6/1/2016): Permit Effluent Limit Violations: 2; Permit Effluent Code Violations: 15; Permit Effluent Frequency Violations: 0; Compliance Schedule Milestones Not Entered: 0; Reported SSO Events: 57. Limit violations include pH Minimum (Station 001, October 2015, reported value 5.9 vs limit 6.5) and Total Suspended Solids 7D Conc (Station 604, February 2016, reported value 25.1142 vs limit 20.0). Code violations span January–May 2016 for CBOD 5 day, Total Suspended Solids, Overflow Volume, and Overflow Occurrence at various stations.
    • number
    • deadline
⚠ Gaps in the record
  • TWIN CAPTURE — not the canonical reading. The portal serves this 2016-07-13 reconnaissance inspection at two docids; edoc-1914739 is the same letter and is canonical for FIDELITY (a scan is read by the vision path alone, with nothing to check itself against). Declared in data/site/document-versions.yaml as a `v2` cluster — the two files are NOT byte-identical. NOTE this capture records MORE (11 vs 6): it enumerates the report form's evaluated-areas checklist as observations where the canonical summarises the narrative. A granularity difference, not a conflict — and the checklist has no dedicated field on ComplianceInspection.
  • Document is a scanned page image; text was read via OCR interpretation — minor transcription errors are possible.
  • The compliance data tables on pages 2 and 3 are part of the enclosed inspection report and reflect historical violations, not new orders or requirements imposed by this inspection.
oepa/lima/edoc-467350.inspection.yaml · p.1 · oepa