The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About760022_Technical Correction_20180530i Division of Water Resources ❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency Facility Number: 760022 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC760022 Inpsection Type: Technical Assistance Inactive Or Closed Date: Reason for visit:, Follow-up County: Randolph Region: Date of Visit: 05/30/2018 ' Entry Time: 09:40 am Exit Time: 12:20 pm Incident # Farm Name: Green Valley Farm, LLC Owner Email: Owner: Keith Hockett Phone: Mailing Address: 1001 Hockett Dairy Rd Randleman NC 273178042 ❑ Denied Access Winston-Salem 336-674-5055 Physical Address: 1001 Hockett Dairy Rd Randleman NC 27317 Facility Status: ❑ Compliant Not Compliant Integrator: Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 54' 00" Longitude: 79° 50' 10" From GSO: US Hwy 220 south to Level Cross exit. Left onto Branson Mill Road at the top of the ramp. Left onto Bus. 220. Left onto Hockett Dairy Rd. Dairy is on the left. Question Areas: Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Other Issues Technical Assistance Certified Operator: Keith S Hockett Operator Certification Number: 21595 Secondary OIC(s): On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone 24 hour contact name Keith Hockett Phone On -site representative Herschel Hockett Phone Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock `�6_ 776 _ 96 3 / Phone: 30 Ol Inspector Signature: � Date: Secondary Inspector(s): Inspection Summary: page: 1 Permit: AWC760022 Owner - Facility : Keith Hockett Facility Number: 760022 Inspection Date: 05/30/18 Inpsection Type: Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: Follow-up Today's visit was a technical assistance follow-up to March 2018 compliance inspection. Staff with NRCS were present for visit, including engineer Pete Crawford. Some permit deficiencies were observed and are noted below. 2., 5. and 7. Observed that waste had overtopped damaged area of #2 waste pond. No evidence that waste left farm property or entered Randleman Lake. No immediate threats to the integrity of the structure but if dam were at correct elevation, waste may not have over topped. Repair of dam will help prevent future overflows. DWR was not notified of overtopping of the waste. NOD. 4. Difficult to determine waste level accurately since there is no marker for structure #1. Waste level is reportedly 2-3 feet above maximum in the new (#3) waste pond and is seeping through sand placed in the spillway. Not a water quality concern as the waste is still in the spillway and the buffer is 200' wide and well vegetated. NOD. The flow of waste on the farm is as follows: #1 receives waste and seperated liquids from flush ditch and the sand seperator >>> waste is pumped up hill to #3 >>> waste from #3 is used to flush ditches at the end of the freestall bams >>> waste is flushed into the sand seperator. #2 stands alone and receives sand/waste from barn. 7. Must repair dam of waste pond #2 and have correct elevation determined by NRCS. Dam condition has been an on -going concern (see 2016-2018 compliance inspections). H. Hockett states that dam will need to be dry, then remove waste and sand, then re -shape and repair prior to establishing permanent vegetation. NOD. 7. Must remove sand from spillway of new (#3) waste pond as soon as waste level is lowered so that structural integrity of structure is not compromised (see March 2018 inspection). May install a shallow trench in grass near buffer fence as a back-up for any future events. NOD. 8. Per permit, the marker in #1 waste pond must be re -installed within 30 days. NRCS will assist with determining the correct placement. Lack of marker has been a concern for several years (see 2013-2018 inspections). NOD. 9. There are plans to extend the roof line over the flush trench. This should be a big improvement with regard to the waste pond holding times. Project is not financially doable at this time, though. 30. Due to excessive rainfall in the last two weeks, the waste level was above the maximum in #1 and #3 waste ponds. Waste levels were compliant until two weeks ago. Per permit, DWR-WSRO must be contacted when manure level rises above start pump/maximum liquid level (see 2013 NOD). NOD. 34. DWR will need to complete a follow-up inspection this Fall to confirm completion of dam repairs and marker installation(s) page: 2 r Permit: AWC760022 Owner- Facility: Keith Hockett Facility Number: 760022 Inspection Date: 05/30/18 Inpsection Type: Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: Follow-up Waste Structures Disignated Observed Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard Waste Pond LOWER 42.00 Waste Pond NEW WASTE POND 0.00 Waste Pond UPPER 24.00 page: 3 Permit: AWC760022 Owner - Facility : Keith Hockett Facility Number: 760022 Inspection Date: 05/30/18 Inpsection Type: Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: Follow-up Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No Na Ne 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ M ❑ ❑ Discharge originated at: Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other ❑ a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the ❑ ❑ ❑ State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment Yes No Na Ne 4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)? 6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ ❑ ❑ waste management or closure plan? 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ❑ ❑ 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable 0 ❑. ❑ ❑ to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? Other Issues Yes No Na Ne 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, ONE][] contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Application Field ❑ Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑ Other ❑ If Other, please specify 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ❑ ❑ 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ page: 4