Camden Attributes Permit Delays to State Staffing; Full Timeline Remains Unverified

Editor’s note: The Camden Tribune sent detailed questions to Camden County and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality seeking a project-by-project permitting timeline and documentation supporting the county’s explanation. Both agencies were asked to respond by Friday, Aug. 7. Neither had responded as of publication, and the requested response period remained open. This report will be updated when material responses or records are received.

CAMDEN, N.C. — Camden County has attributed delays affecting water and wastewater infrastructure projects to staffing shortages within state government, but the public has not yet been shown the application records or review timeline necessary to evaluate that explanation independently.

During the Camden County Board of Commissioners’ Aug. 3 meeting, Public Works Manager Charles “Chas” Sawyer said pending state approvals “have taken a lot longer due to staffing issues.”

The Camden Tribune has now asked both Camden County and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality to identify the projects, applications and regulatory reviews Sawyer referenced.

As of publication, neither agency had responded. The Tribune’s requested Friday deadline had not yet passed, and the absence of an early response should not be interpreted as confirmation or rejection of the county’s account.

County cited state staffing, but did not provide a timeline

Sawyer’s presentation referenced several infrastructure and regulatory matters, including a clear-well project, an authorization to construct, a stream-modeling study, a July 14 meeting involving engineering consultant Timmons Group and DEQ, and an NPDES discharge-permitting process.

Those references appear to involve multiple state reviews rather than one general permit.

During the public update, the county did not identify each matter by its official project name, application number, or permit number. It also did not publicly state:

• When each application was initially submitted;
• When state regulators determined each application was complete;
• Whether DEQ requested corrections, revisions or additional technical information;
• When Camden County or Timmons Group responded to any such requests;
• How long each application has been under active state review; or
• When the county now expects each decision.

Those dates are central to determining responsibility for the elapsed time.

A project may have been initially submitted months before it became complete enough for regulatory review. A state review may also pause while an applicant, consultant or engineer prepares additional plans, modeling or supporting information.

Without the complete history, the available record does not establish whether state staffing was the primary cause of the delays, one contributing factor or only one portion of a longer project-development process.

Camden Tribune asks DEQ to verify county’s explanation

Camden Tribune asked DEQ whether it agrees that staffing shortages delayed any Camden County approval discussed during the Aug. 3 meeting.

The agency was also asked to provide, for each applicable project:

• The official project and application name;
• The application or permit number;
• The responsible DEQ division or section;
• The initial submission date;
• The date the application was determined complete;
• Any requests for additional information;
• The dates Camden County or its consultant responded;
• The current review status; and
• The estimated decision date.

DEQ was also asked to confirm the reported July 14 meeting with Camden County and Timmons Group, explain what additional work was requested and state whether the stream model Sawyer discussed has been received.

Camden Tribune asked whether Camden County formally requested expedited processing and whether a state official told the county that the applicable NPDES process could take 24 months.

DEQ’s published NPDES guidance does not establish a universal 24-month timeline. The agency says permits for new or expanding discharges can take from six months to several years, depending on the complexity of the proposed discharge and the completeness of the submission.

The same guidance says new or expanding discharges can require an engineering alternatives analysis, verification of receiving-stream flow and, in some cases, additional environmental review.

Permit numbers would allow public tracking

DEQ operates an online Environmental Application Tracker that allows applicants and members of the public to search pending regulatory applications.

The tracker includes NPDES wastewater matters, collection systems, gravity sewer extensions, state stormwater applications and other environmental reviews. DEQ says the system displays application milestones and tracks progress from receipt through issuance, withdrawal or disapproval.

However, the county did not provide the applicable permit or application numbers during Sawyer’s public presentation. Without those identifiers, residents cannot easily determine which entries in the state system correspond to the projects discussed at the meeting.

Camden Tribune has asked both the county and DEQ to supply those numbers.

Camden County asked to support its assertion

Camden Tribune separately asked Sawyer, County Manager Erin Burke and the Board of Commissioners to identify the documents supporting the county’s staffing-delay explanation.

The county was asked whether a named DEQ employee provided that explanation, whether it was communicated orally or in writing, and whether the state has issued any deficiency notice or request for revised plans, additional modeling or supporting information.

Camden Tribune also requested copies of the applications, correspondence, engineering materials, completeness determinations, requests for additional information and written requests for expedited processing.

The county was asked to explain what contingency plan exists if the necessary approvals, bidding or construction work remain incomplete when the subdivision moratorium reaches its scheduled conclusion.

Camden County’s Planning and Building Department says the current moratorium on land subdivision remains in effect through December 2026. Transfer-plat subdivisions are exempt.

June water figures require clarification

Camden Tribune is also seeking an explanation for water-production figures Sawyer presented during the same meeting.

Sawyer reported that the county water plant treated 21,451,000 gallons during June, averaging 691,967 gallons per day. He characterized the average as approximately 96% of the plant’s stated capacity.

June contains 30 calendar days. Dividing the reported total of 21,451,000 gallons by 30 produces an average of approximately 715,033 gallons per day.

The daily average reported to commissioners — 691,967 gallons — corresponds almost exactly to dividing the total by 31 days.

The difference may have a routine operational explanation. The production report may cover a 31-day meter-reading period rather than June 1 through June 30. That reporting period was not explained during the public presentation.

Using the stated capacity of 720,000 gallons per day:

• The average reported by the county represents approximately 96.1% of capacity; and
• A 30-day average calculated from the reported total would represent approximately 99.3% of capacity.

Neither calculation establishes that the plant violated a permit or exceeded an enforceable operating limit. It does affect how commissioners and residents understand how close production came to the plant’s stated capacity.

Camden Tribune asked the county to provide the exact beginning and ending dates of the reporting period, the source worksheet used for the presentation, daily production records and documentation establishing the plant’s rated capacity.

What the available record establishes

The record available before the agencies respond supports several limited conclusions.

State approvals remained pending when Sawyer delivered his Aug. 3 update. Sawyer attributed the extended timeline to state staffing shortages. The county did not publicly present the complete application and review history needed to independently determine why each approval remains unresolved.

The existing record does not establish that Sawyer’s explanation was false. It also does not establish that state staffing was the sole or primary cause of each delay.

The central accountability question is who possessed the next required action during each segment of the process: DEQ, Camden County, Timmons Group or another participant.

Applications, completeness determinations, deficiency notices, technical submissions and correspondence should establish that timeline.

Response period remains open

Camden County and DEQ were asked to respond by Friday, Aug. 7. Neither had responded as of publication, but the deadline remained open.

The Camden Tribune will update this report when either agency provides a material response. A separate follow-up will reconstruct the project timeline when sufficient records become available.

The Board of Commissioners’ adopted schedule lists its next regular meeting for Sept. 8 at 7 p.m.

Response status: The Camden Tribune sent questions to Camden County and the N.C. Department of Environmental Quality on Wednesday, Aug. 5. Both agencies were asked to respond by Friday, Aug. 7. No response had been received as of publication, and the requested response period had not expired.

Have information or records concerning these projects? Contact the Camden Tribune. Documents submitted for reporting will be reviewed and authenticated before publication.