130011_Regional Office Historical File Pre 2018 (3)

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
'49pathan B. Howes, Secretary
�i�Y
Wilbur Williams
P.O. Box 51. -
Midland, NC 28107
Dear Mr. Williams:
DBJ-IN
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
Subject: DWQ Animal Waste Operations Site
Inspection Report
Wilbur Williams Farm, Facility #: 13-17, 11
Cabarrus County, NC
A site inspection of your facilities was conducted on July 17, 1997 by Mr. Alan Johnson of this
Office. The facilities were in good shape. A reminder, as a certified farm your files, at a minimum, need
to contain the following:
Certification forms
Site diagram
Waste application records/forms
Maps of acreage and irrigated fields
Waste management plan (if applicable)
The waste utilization plan is a component of the waste management plan
Soil/waste analysis records
Enclosed are forms to be used for keeping track of your waste applications.
Any further correspondence related to the subject inspection will be sent under separate cover.
Also, please be advised that North Carolina General Statutes provide for penalties of up to $10,000 per
day per violation as well as criminal penalties for violations of state environmental laws and regulations.
If you have.any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Johnson or me at
[phone].
cc: Union County SWCD
Cabarrus County SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ 919 North Main Street, •
Mooresville, North- Carolina 28115
Voice 704-663-1699
Sincerely,��
i/ /C -
D. Rex Gleason, P. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled/10% po`st-consumer paper

DSWC Animal Feedlot.Operation Review._ .
1`DWQ2,Animal Feedlot‘Operation:Site:Inspection
10, Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
Certified Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
V7' 'z)
24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: 4../. /4. .S
Land Owner Name: / 1.�. r „ Z:!%/.4 '"5
Facility Conctact: L..�?.�..L.t �. l; ,,,/ ..Ccc
Mailing Address: . ?, A BoX sl
County:
Phone No: Ylr5r S Zo
Title:
1..��..r Phone No:
AM 7
Onsite Representative: �,� 1,�,�� l��c�� Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
ZZ4 mS Operator Certification Number:Ore(
OI,L[�, g 4- rr �. ..... �f .1 �c� .s.. elf �la.� l�i .P I11.
,i0;4L-4 c%�) 5 ,%!_f+ '� �17r JAAN C� �C1wn c1 1t
Latitude • G° Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
•
CG
"Design . : Current
Capacity". Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
D Farrow to Finish
::❑ Other
1,30
Poultry
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
"Design Current
Capacity :Population
Total Design Capacity
otal SSLW
Cattle
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Current
.Capacifv Population
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑, Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge 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 gal/min?
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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes Lii-No
❑ Yes INo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes E.No
❑ Yes , No
Continued on back

IFacility Number: —
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?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
RNo
Icallo
MNo
❑ Yes j' No
Structure 5 Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
0 Yes IRE No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes IkNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? i Yes I No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediatepublic 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 SSttaate, notify DWQ)
/
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ►_ No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes isT No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes allo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes p. No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes J 1 No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes jz No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
15. Crop type
Comments (refer to question #) K Explain any. YES answers and/or;any,,recommendations.oranyother.comriients:
Use drawings;, of facility to better explain situations: (use additional pages as necessary):
er- ?,Lieu, osyt sAra 7e pc iI �e
Gla
recovc S
J'Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,®' No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
,JYes
E No.
No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: -7-77—?
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality S c on, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
1 7-041/
Time of Inspection (/
Farm Status:tegistered ❑ Applied for Permit
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:
rr o
Farm Name: iC v c� ba •• bh h5 .rr County:
Land Owner Name:
Facility Conctact: Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address: P:Q�, 4..,�• 1 j .r.c f la. 1 a.,10 7
Onsite Representative: 4.,
Certified Operator: 4.!,p ///� ' %5 Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm: ((
24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1 25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
00, 16.4 r •, ill` 0Bei_s
Phone No:
Integrator:
:.::.4/45 ••aq tom, .IAA 'f. a a YI S.G_...�ckb4:. .oh 6 E.
1 J�O Sh?.7e.J ..... H x ti. l C . ... G ... f �C¢s ltei. / Jr i'l gc S {
Latitude
•
Type of Operation and Design
Swine
❑ Wean to Feeder
la Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
,Design
-Capacity
" Longitude
Capacity
Current
Population.
rgUU
96F-eD
❑ Farrow to Feeder
•Q Farrow to Finish
Other,,,. ,a
umiier of LagoouslAfolding Ponds
•
GG
Design : ,Current
Poultry,: ,. <
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
'otal Design Capacity
Total `SSLW'.
a
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
1
1
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge 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 gal/min?
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?
4/30/97
Design ` . Current
Capacity -Population
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 'No
❑ Yes cr4 No
❑Yes]No
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
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?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
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 enteringnwaters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..GP\NA. v yK1`e-41.1 l�l �i �(...... 1.',f ...41
r•
16. 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?
For Certified Facilities Only Ni4.
22. Does the facility 'fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes EiNo
❑ Yes �.No
❑ Yes INo
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
❑ Yes Et.No
❑ Yes 0-No
❑ Yes gNo
`RI Yes El No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 18.No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes Si No
❑ Yes CkNo
❑ Yes E'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Coniments`(refer to question #)", Explain any,YES answers and/or''any recoinmendations'or any"other comments.,
Use drawings of facility to; better_ explain situations: (us.eadditional pages as necessary)::.: ,; - : :. ;.
P4-f artzv v-K Gt a s b e-QA Vo yr o 1 >r-c50 A
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 7—/7-9
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality S
?ion, Facility Assessment Unit
4/30/97

R
;(13I11:140LMAN
1SECRETARY
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
WATER QUALITY SECTION
June 23, 2000
Kip Williams
P.O. Box 51
Midland, NC 28107
Subject: Notice of Deficiency
DWQ Animal Operation Inspection
Wilburn Williams Farm, Facility #: 13-11, 13-17
Dear Mr. Williams:
Mr. Alan Johnson of this Office conducted a site inspection of your facilities on
June 20, 2000. This letter is being issued for each facility as a Notice of Deficiency
for failing to maintain the vegetation around the storage pond and buildings.
Excessive vegetative growth prevents a proper inspection of the facilities and the
storage pond. This deficiency has been noted during previous inspections.
At facility 13-17 (feeder -finish), small shrubs on the northeast corner of the
storage pond embankment need to be cut down. Grass and weeds around the
remainder of the pond and the buildings needs to be properly maintained (mowed
and/or herbicide). Also, the pump marker needs to be repainted so that it is easily
identifiable.
Facility 13-11 (farrow -feeder) requires similar maintenance. The grass and
weeds need to be mowed to allow for proper inspection of the buildings and storage
pond for seeps and leaks. Also, the rodent problem needs to be controlled.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact Mr. Johnson or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
.
D. Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Regional Coordinator
File
919 NORTH MAIN STREET, MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28115
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

66/EZ/E
voq uo panuyuop
om sax
9 anuanxis
OM SAD
omlg saA
om sair,.
OMD sajc.
om saA
oD sal,. 0
omA saA
(-oia `a.Budaas
`uolsolz aianas `saari iv,!) i,panirisqo srunion.ns qT Jo Suu Jo Slpanui aqi 01 maim aluTatutul Sur gram aiy .5
5 an -norms
aimaruls
SumIlldS
:( piromaid
mtlpuopi
E ainionus z atU1JT111 1oirnon.us
Laiunbapu Urn ssat (•affulois uuois snjd pluoqaail) Sipudua aftiois
luatruna.u, :s) uoimatioD alsum
La2lutioslytl ulaij lIIfl iamo 1E1 41 JO siare/ . zip 01 slouduil aSIZApE 1E911010d io sic:Eclair asianpu 7.;1019 0.10M
j,11011E.10d0 0111 jo 1.IEd A.11E 11101} ofautiosT is-ud jo actrappka
(OiAcr kuiou -sa,c Lutaisns uooEui0 ssudial ipspszoa -p
i,iqui/tuf01 mou palutupsa auj S -reqm `paAlasqo aBlutiosip j.J•:)
easy piau Xeads 0
(bAka Spiou 'sal{ ,-.,atuls alp jo qouoi 1! pip `paniascio 51 ofauipslp JI -q
Laputu-uum aatiuSaAuoa am sum ‘paniasqo siafirilrism
Iztil0 0 PPE iCuidS 0 uoofiwa ---10 paiuulflio arhuu,ospa
Luopriado oqi Jo uod Suo tuoij panuasqo a2autioslp Suo si
tualsSs 3uatua2unulA1 alsum pmbn
may uootlwi 0
*E
• I
sizgatui iuraus -2s) srairipsya
luasaaa suc.i4jaoupnsqns
spipii.oumi9FE:,.:.. •
:::'stioolleTj0;Iaqumm : :
, - •
• • - .
. ' - •
SiTa-uom
icn.a 0
: _uormindirdi.&pEthJag.luo
.'quo 0
iaSuq-(iom
ia4u--I
uoguindoa- .imaedeD
ixfoisaa
smog 0
c)?
qs!tqa01 moued
C72/ 1P0d01/410.11Ed
11E0M 01 MOSIEd DI'
qsIurd01 iapaad
lapazd01 imam DI
uoggincloa Smagdup
wannj u.ii!saa
auisAtg•
77
apnigluo-1
apnp
+7 v:iaqumm uoguognaai lowiado
:om atioqd
A r)
1-11 f),-) :amleviasaidali amsuo
Ls (c:ssaappy flumulk
:puluop klmoua
0-s -
:paluaado alga
:ON 01.10qd
:DULL
wribn 1_A-,-)(11 ,17-v1
:S.Iunop v2.7,z4 SVIA-15‘1. p
icuogs-Lacto iom
uogoadsui Jo atuu,
uogzadsui Jo alga
-13/440 0 mailtal alma Jo
paaalsOau
jo 11239.w56i
:lowlado paggiap
.V4:A Cr?
P3119-103 "ZIFuog!Pu03 D Pan!uuM
:aituem Immo
:atuum tuied
1 I laquaitm &maga
n-mo lo,4 0 uogoadsu! Omaj9 dn-Atolloa 0 lumcituop 0 augnou

.cility Number: / Z� — % J Datc of Inspection
Printed on:
5. .Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? •
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notifyDWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
4/24/2000
11. Is there evidence of over application?
12. Crop type
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. •Is facility not in compliance with'any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Odor Issues
CO r h) LA_S ce.-e_cc � t _<0t otc vi
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? 0 Yes
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) Tnis facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? 0 Yes 0 No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes g No
❑ Yes $Q No
❑ Yes ' No
,Yes
1 Yes
❑ No
sj.No
❑ Yes ❑ No
available?
❑ Yes g No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes KI No
❑ Yes Flo
❑ Yes J l No
❑ Yes [ANo
❑ Yes p,No
D Yes
0 Yes
`AYes
%No
ISNo
❑ No
❑ Yes 9-No
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes 0 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the Iiquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. -Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ' ,No
❑ Yes 'No
❑ Yes g No
❑Yes 0No
❑ Yes IttNo
❑ Yes ❑ No

L6/SZ/L
Qd • Tr-f-,0_,,-0 cfp yo e
pcl C--vJ 0.4-5
JQ
uopaadscri jo alta
- I macpunisi SlupEa

Voutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection_ 0 Follow -up -of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number /3
H '7
( Permitted fit Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
0 Not Operational
Farm Name: 10f l/�iC'!S �G1- -7
Owner Name: il[j.s,Lti-r\.. L& lar&i..
•
Facility Contact: rr Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address: b,C1 f�l7.t..S[fk 1.CZ.!'.ld . " 2, X Ig.7
Integrator:
_ Operator Certification Number:.,./ 6
Onsite Representative - � 4` .i c-y t$
Certified Operator:
L non of Farm:
Date Last Operated: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_,_
County: ' C i.. ,rLrt-i.S
Phone No: 4'r —�
Latitude I
•
.Longitude
•
LL
Swine
Design Current -
Capacity Population Poultry
❑ Wean io Feeder -
j Feeder to Finish
l 2.02)kerb
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to.Feeder
ID Farrow to Finish
ri Gilts
❑ Boars .
Design Current
Capacity Population Cattle
Layer
Non-Laver_I
0 Other
❑ Dairy I
❑ Non -Dairy I
Design Current
Capacity Population
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons
flolding.Ponds / Solid Traps
0 Subsurface Drains Present
❑. Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area
0 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream'Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?"
Discharge origihatcd.at: 0 Lagoon , ❑ Spray Field 0 Other
. a. If discharge is observed: was the conveyance man-made? •
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If ycs, notify DWQ)
c..lf discharge is observed. -what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If•yes. notify DWQ) •
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than frorti'a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment .
4. Isstorage capacity (freeboard plus stomp storage) less than adequate? 0 Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 " Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): J j
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 "
•
-❑ Yes IkNo
El Yes 1❑No
- El Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
:❑No
(t'No
kNo
❑Yes .kNo
Structure 6
❑ Yes 14.No_
Continued on-liack

18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 0 Yes' 7� No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) 0 Yes ANo
20. Is facility not in compliance with 'any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 7yk\To
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?, y 0 Yes 5No
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)•
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does- facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Odor Issues
22.
23.
Printed on:
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? •
,cility Number: 13— /7
Date of Inspection
4/24/2000
es kq
o
❑ Yes ❑ No
VLYes ❑ No
kYes iTo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? 0 Yes l No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? 0 Yes
11. Is there evidence of over application? 0 Excessive Ponding 0 PAN ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Cc i' V \ (L �a�•i S b 4ib1 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? 0 Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? y 0 Yes 0 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes 0 No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? 0 Yes 0 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 0 Yes 0 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? 0 Yes ❑.No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes
Yes y,No
. ❑ Yes VcI.,No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes No
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement buildinglo the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/orhelow ❑ Yes 0 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? 0 Yes r�io
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, 0 Yes [o
roads. building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) 0 Yes
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? 0 Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? 0 Yes 0 No
❑ No

Facility Number: 1 3 — (-2
Date of Inspection
Additional:Cominents anti/or))raFvings
Gvt.ca
• vveek, e_
sa \
ScLles
1 too)
7/25/97

Notice of Violation (responce)
Facility 13-11 & 13-17
1) trees and shrubs: November 2000 Rocky Durham inspected the facilities. A question
was directed to him concerning the issue. responce: I see no problem and don't see
where Alan Johnson would have a problem with the said matter, as trees had been cut back
during the previous summer..
2) In all past visits you have understood the way the waste records were kept. Why on this
visit you don't understand. I have checked and corrected a few minor details. Waste was
within limits.
3) You have only asked for a site diagram. We have offered to show you the risers.
The mentioned above have been corrected or are in the process of being corrected..
The embankments cannot be mowed with a one to one slope. I will not endanger myself or
any one else to satisfy your requirements.
NC DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENT
AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVIL LE PEC=TONAL OFFICE
`JUN 0 8 2001
44)
/ 7/0/

Michael F. Easley
Govemor
William G. Ross, Jr.,Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
WATER QUALITY.SECTION
May 24, 2001
Kip Williams
P.O. Box 51
Midland, NC 28107
Subject: Notice of Violation (Response)
William Swine Farm
Facility 13-11 & 13-17
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Williams:
Thank you for your response to the Notice of Violation issued on April 3, 2001 for the inspection
conducted at your farm. It will be included with your file. We apologize for any confusion you may have, but it
was requested that a letter indicating the actions taken to correct the noted violations be mailed to Mr. Alan
Johnson's attention.
The Division of Water Quality requires that all trees and shrubs and other woody vegetation be removed
according to good "engineering practices" and the storage pond embankments be kept mowed. Mr. Johnson has
noted excessive vegetated growth on the embankments during his inspections for the past three years (September
2, 1999; June 23, 2000, and March 29, 2001).
It is important that the information on the waste application forms agree with the information shown in
the farm plan. The box on the IRR2 form for field size should contain the acres covered by the irrigation system
(the wetted acres). It was not clear whether the total acres, wetted acres, or the acreage covered for each pull (by
the traveling gun) was used without recalculating the information on the form. It is important that all required.
information be clear and available for review.
A general drawing and/or diagram of the irrigation system might have been useful in the review of the
records. A drawing/diagram should be included in your files and be available during inspections.
Your previous response failed to indicate the time frame for correcting the above noted issues. Please
submit a written response to this Office by June 11, 2001 indicating the actions to be taken. It is requested that
your response be addressed to the attention of Mr. Johnson. It is also requested that your response_ reference the
facility number.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Johnson or me at
[phone].
cc: Compliance/Enforcement Unit
.V File
NCDENR
Customer Service
1 800 623-7748
Sincerely,
n )
An .:
�Rex Gleason, P.E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
Mooresville Regional Office, 919 North Main Street, Mooresville, NC 28115 PHONE [phone]
FAX [phone]