310419_Complaint_20191221

(ffDivision of Water Resources
t Facility Number O - ��f O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency / �6
I ype of visit. kD Lompaance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (2 RRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 /. Arrival Time: i (Ci c7 Departure Time: County: bie , hA Region: 7 b20
•Z t 15 �.,,.,
Farm Name: ! /`(L iC1 ;^[)y1 ,J/'o'i7 Owner Emai :
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title:
Onsite Representative: )6"717e/X
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:t!
Certification Number:
Design Current
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
ceder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Ptim
Layers
Non -fa ers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DW R)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dair
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Rr o
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ETl<
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page l of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [—]Yes E? No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
,t
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
07No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
✓ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
J/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
Z/N o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are
there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
E]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals
(Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
210'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
No
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
B
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E5"No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes Lao*N�o
❑ Yes gleo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Fability Number: / - le? jDate of inspection: /
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check � * Cs ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the apropriate box(es) below.
Ll Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Dto ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 2<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
Ejr'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
2'�es;
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
El No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[2 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 4): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessarv).
G✓1511! C�cCu�pr� !„ T�.r'<
5
�je f�c� • r/�'�'/<y— i �Y.+:'!Cir� iL�r � � ' �✓/��"iG ��'�'s•—
/�j, !� f� J%lisl �f �7s�ly . fit✓/�/�i �/�, s <7r,6/ <� r/�'
<`v< ,�iU Weer/ �lsp <�fr G%Cntl�G�� vi.t
Y1lo/ir/lc/ 14� ..20,1.- �i
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412015

A ;
O
a
a�
LU
T� U
i
U=
L_J
1" Z*
Z
Za
W
Zu
01
O
z
o
Z Z
W
r
r
II
\Of
>
Of
r�
�
E
MaN10
n
fill
m
OkiOki
�
: P
NOV"
pY33
�_
6
¢
\ I
C
II W
WNW\i
W1POBul
rS
8 6.
lON
I
ANON
r u3snnN
D al evi
1
S
`
i
i
'
I "w
wpO140
G
(D,Od)
' )aulnuoD
a
(D
(L
a
M
7
M
a
M
O
a
C7
a
C7
a
C7
a
(7
que
�"
U
UC7U(7UC7UC7UC7U0UcsUC7
almodwop
adRl aldwae
e
o
c
g .\
001
_E
U
h
O
g�
y
a
d
;
^I
\ "
c
1
a
�+
E
r
iV H

[envirochem
ANALYTICAL & CONSULTING CHEMISTS
Environmental Chemists, Inc.
6602 Windmill Way, Wilmington, NC 28405 • 910.392.0223 Lab • 910.392.4424 Fax
710 Bowsertown Road, Manteo, NC 27954 • 252.473.5702 Lab/Fax
255-A Wilmington Highway, Jacksonville, NC 28540 • 910.347.5843 Lab/Fax
[e-mail]
NCDENR-DWR Date of Report: Dec 28, 2017
127 N. Cardinal Drive Ext. Customer PO #:
Wilmington NC 28405 Customer ID: 09010049
Attention: David Powell Report #: 2017-20060
Project ID: 31-419
Lab ID Sample ID: Collect DatefTime Matrix Sampled by
17-48625 Site: 1 12/21/2017 1:45 PM Water Client
Test Method Results Date Analyzed
Fecal Coliform
SM 92220 MF
2100Colonies/100mL 12/21/2017
Lab ID Sample ID: Collect Date/Time Matrix Sampled by
17-48626 Site: 2 12/21/2017 1:50 PM Water Client
Test Method Results Date Analyzed
Fecal Coliform
SM 9222D MF
Comment:
Reviewed by: ��(� Iv�.v . t 'LA
290000Colonies/100mL 12/21/2017
Report #:: 2017-20060 Pape 1 of 1

d19
g�
x�
p
m
�
C
p
Z
m
2>
m
m
3
ti
E
c
°
T
o
�
?
c
�
c
E�
riZ
n
3
Ri

E & K Farms, Inc.
143 Doc Brown Road
Rose Hill, NC 28458
[phone]
To whom it may concern,
gP
'�( _yi
ECEIVE
JAN 1 1 2018
BY.,
I am writing this note in response to a small accidental discharge that happened around 12-1 I-17,
at the Patricia Brown Farm, Old Henry D. Teachey Farm facility # 31-415 owned and operated
by Kenneth R. Brown.
Explanation of what happened: A piece of plastic board (used by loading crew) was washed over
the drain hole inside the building; therefore, as the flush system flushed the inside of the house
filled up and began to overflow. I estimated about three thousand gallons were discharged into
the yard area beside the building and some effluent ran into woodland that is owned by Kenneth
R. Brown.
Cleanup measures that were taken: Solids were gotten up by hand with shovels and properly
disposed into lagoon. Liquids that pooled in low area was then pumped back into lagoon
multiple times as they filled up. Two rows of baled wheat straw was put down to act as filtration
system and additional containment barriers. I am so sorry this happened, but it was a total
accident.
Sincerely,
Kenneth R. Brown
E & K Farms, Inc.