760017_INSPECTIONS_20171231

p uompiamt p rouow-up
Date of Inspection
Facility Number t�-- — —17-13
Time of inspection r--T27UU-1 24 hr. (hh:mm)
■ Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted IgS Not 0pera lona Date Last Operated: .
Farm Name:–aaacllcey.FarW.......................................................... County. --Randolph WSRO
Owner Name:lRiibea:t:> .................... ........... IaacksX:: :-..................................... Phone No: 1622-4827...................................................................
FacilityContact:...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Mailing Address:. 1.838.51iady.Oraxe.II.Ind..................................................... Staley ...N.C............................................................... 2.7.355. .........
Onsite Representative: Rxibcrt.114,.Lackey............................................ .... Integrator: .....................................................................
Certified Operator: Robert.M............................. Lackey............................................... Operator Certification Number: 18,8.7.7.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•®� ©°� Longitude ®• ®� ®��
esign Currentesign urren ,esign urren
Swine1� Caacity.,::Poputation ��P,oultry �,� Capacity Poliulation, Cattle Capacitopulation�i.
[3 Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to
mis
13 Farrow to
Wean
t3 Farrow toee
er
to
anis
rFarrow
Gilts
Boars
,€ 17 ayer i; D airy ;,::�;
p Non -Layer , p on- airy
F. �E
Other
Total Design ;Capacity.
Tot 1 LW850,2
; uldPD,usuraceNmber of,Lagoons Hrains Presen p agoon rea p pray113 ie rea �I?
0Liquid- WasteManagemen 5.Em� ....... �,. ��
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon 13 Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) E3 Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ® No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

Facility Number: 76_1
r4 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures_(Lagoons,Holdin Pg onds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 17 Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): ................................................. .................................... ....... I ...... I .................... ..................................................................,
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....................... Uzruja...................... ....... .........................
.........................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (A WMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
iK .o;o`'xveisa}ioh1o�lnesf;.o�r ab�uere'tn�cisie.Ys�'sie�=r:e..moa during rs v1s1 . nnwill .receive no:further.
e . .
C. 1 111 . .:.. . .
.
p Yes ® No
p Yes H No
p Yes ® No
Ig Yes p No
E3 Yes N No
I .... I ........11.1.1.1111-1.
p Yes
...........
p No
Yes
®No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
® No
Yes
®No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
�omm`ents (retcr to questiait aiiy YES answers i 'ndlor aiiy"r ecomineridntioris o'r any otlieY cainments.
Use draw of facility.. to better eac Iain situations. (ase additional pages as.necessary,):
r
# l3 - SWC/NRC►S has not set elevations for markers yet. This will be included
# 16 - SWC/NRC►S is currently working on plan.. z
�,
23-25 -Not certified yet. r r +`
;aOV
Mr. Lackey currently is operating under the threshold number of 250 swine. I {e Ia01✓S wish to remain on the list, 11 awever, he
would like to be INACTLUATFD until such time as he has greater than the threshold number of swine. J-' 4s 7197
,.
Reviewer/Inspector Fame Corey= asmger -, � � .� .� � $' k i<' `°�
�ee�.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

.. ............ .._...... _ _.._. _.. _....-- _.,__., . _.
❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
MWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Routine O Com laint 0 Follow -u of DWt ins eTtion O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
[��
Facility Number nate of Inspection /&/03/0F1
Time of Inspection 2 : �O 24 hr. (hh:mm)
'Registered 0 Certified 0 Applied for Permit © Permitted 0 Not O eratinnal Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .4.40—e61 .....F--4R................................................................... County:....v.....,............................5;"
M / l.J
Owner Name: � 1zT LACkc=� Phattc No: 6ZZ -48Z �
........, r..........................................................................................................................................
Facility Contact: .. Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address: .... A b' -b 34AV'I....C'ROoer ..Cha" .. t? ................ ....x...1 ,4.............,........ 217-35
........... ............... ................... ....................ate.....
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Intel;rator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator;,,. D T'....M............... LAZW:Operator Certification Number;BS+-4-
.............................. ................
Location of Farm:
................:........ ...-..... ....13 ttts... ?!^/,......T..,... a.........mr ...... :...csi r y...Fr/�K..l�r.
h?-
Latitude ®a 4�- ` 13 Gf Longitude 9 ®4 ®"
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish 00
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design I Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
n Current
Ry Population
baa
BSa, 'zoo
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System -
General
1. Are there any buffers that need rtrlithtenance/improvement'?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. lfdischarge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface: Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in rallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'! (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes *0
❑ Yes •A No
❑ Yes l rNo
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes EtNo
❑ Yes JRMo
❑ Yes .ET10
❑ Yes IqNo
Continued on back

Facility Number:: -- I �—
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'?
Structures tl.aQoons.liolding Ponds, Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
..............................................................................................
Freeboard(ft) .............................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes SR'No
❑ Yes XNo
Structure 5 Structure G
15. Crop type ..... ........................................4✓t z,^.'..................................................................................
lb, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities -Only.
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'!
No. viol ations or de Fcienctes.were'note'd during this" visit. You:Will receive -no further,
0&6p6nde'ke Ah:otlt-this visit.-','.
Cotriiiients (refer to question #):,,Explain any YES answers.and/or any recommendations or any ott
Use drav�ings of facility to bette� explain srtuahons. (use additional pages as necessary)
,,,
t3. SOc gZa ha.S 0-15+ Sed " e -t eVa 'i o►n--T we44 l le'f
14. S>VwMC_S ct,r 1 ter &­- -p
❑ Yes tTNo
❑ Yes 1?!rNo
❑ Yes G�No
KTYes ❑ No
❑Yes C___
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
ARNo
❑ Yes
StNo
❑ Yes
RNO
❑ Yes
R.1 - No
❑ Yes
Ef No
Cl Yes
i�(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
7125197
Reviewer/Inspector Name R1,
r
me ... x ;.
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 3