260024_INSPECTIONS_20171231

{� Division of Soil and MWater Conservation ❑ Other Agency x
i ., IM Division of Water Quality ' x -
yy
.. . � , g ^. :. w...�"""...."`.`i "fin, y'��.,,-.°.",.. �„��,,.....,—•-•..•- �� ' .'......_.TM,,'.'.;`.'�_a,ruvw,. "8'�:.....`.v.._._o:°;€i�,'„''w'^.,?amiw” '� '�iS : S` 5 s
Lk
A'
Routine 0 Coat laint 0 Foilo,,s-u of I)1vt ins ection O Follow -u of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number `l. Time of Inspection E� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
/RRegistered © Certified [3 Applied for Permit © Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ,,,,,,,
.
.Farm Name:. .
..... K....`..F— Er�:s.................................................... County:.... ,�G.lr 1. r.1-�.ej.................
Owner Name:. W...............Sdh' Thune Na ... zr..`................................
...................................... ........ .. .........1'J
Facility Contact: +.,..5. f l.. t�%! Title:.,.4. P ne No: ................................
ySW .... ............. j
MailingAddress:.... T,�.......... 2 2'� 4.r�!.�.fL/�.(..4 ..........................
f.....................................................................,� �
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:...................
Certified Operatort............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number,...................
......................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ' 4 Cs Longitude =` ' "
ts
❑Boars
General
i. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? El Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [J Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon ❑Spray Field ❑Other ,
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made^ E] Yes ❑ No
b, if discharge i5 observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, ►fatiE'y DWQ ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discizarge is observed, what is the estimated flaw in gal/min?
.cl. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? C3 Yes ❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? El Yes ❑ No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons holding ponds) require ❑Yes ❑ No
mai ntenan ce/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? [I Yes ❑ No
7. Did the facility Fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑Yes ❑ No
7125/97 Continued on
:' t
Design" .Current•
x= ,Design , ' urrent' `.
Design drrent
Swrne
Capacity Population
PoultryCapacty ,Population Cattle
Capacity Population
,<
❑ Wean to Feeder
I.
❑ Layer [] Dairy
Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dairy
sµ
❑Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
,
p
El to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gil
F Total SSLW
back
Number of Lagoons / Iioldmg Ponds -'
Q ' ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ L ❑ Spray Field Area x t
:
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
�
ts
❑Boars
General
i. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? El Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [J Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon ❑Spray Field ❑Other ,
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made^ E] Yes ❑ No
b, if discharge i5 observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, ►fatiE'y DWQ ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discizarge is observed, what is the estimated flaw in gal/min?
.cl. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? C3 Yes ❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? El Yes ❑ No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons holding ponds) require ❑Yes ❑ No
mai ntenan ce/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? [I Yes ❑ No
7. Did the facility Fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑Yes ❑ No
7125/97 Continued on
back

Facility Number: 17
—
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures La Dons 11oldin Ponds Flush 1'it.s etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure.2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
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)
15. Crop type...................................................................................................................................................................................
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?
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?
3 No.violkions, or deficiencies. were noted,dur.ing this. visit.- :You:rvill rece'ive•iro-ft rther, : :
Correspondence about this:visit'.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Stricture 6
..............................
............ .......I...........
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
x 5w; i a< rx.
(ret
Coinments.:(refertaQuestion #i) „Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations ortany other comments;
[Jse dra►vings tif:factlity;to bettcr'explain situations ,(use additional pages as,necessury
;,�
Ile4r-w%- C" � -115
lei I j9p
M/31 1c�
'7125197
Reviewer/Inspector Name
��
� 7
',
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 42
V *1

-{L. i. i ��. a y - ' ss - y ' �ro s u 's s ?�. ci-..�' Y� # t :1�
�< # * Q Divis►ontof Water Quality �r '``
of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review .0 Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit © Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other rIIlY1 ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 26 24
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ® Registered Date of Visit 2-2-2000
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold I Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 1Z-3.1-97,,,•,,,
Farm Name: R.J.lar.Hots............................................... County: Ctttubprlapd.................................... FRU ............
Owner Name: Rufus ...................................... jphjn sn ..................................................... Phone No: 4�S-6t9U9.1�f�t:.�2�-���X..tf�'icf<......................
FacilityContact: Q} UC)r.................... ..............I...........................Title:•............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Mailing Address: ;9 .C.Runty..1tic.tid................................. ......... k'ay.Cttie.YitlP.NC............................ 28.30.6 ..............
Onsite Representative: Qwxuex............................................................ .................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Location of Farm:
C luU ri tx . ,1u1 .
. ......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
®Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle `�❑.Horse
`k
Design Current`
L'V. '.,Design
Current: Design . Current
Swine.
Ca` acit , Po
`ulation Poultry
. Ca aci
Po ulation Cattle Ca acit . Population, .
❑ Wean to Feeder
;r
[ILayer
❑Dairy
IN Feeder to Finish
850
0
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
A
❑Other
Farrow to Feeder
❑
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design,CBpaclty,.
850
❑ Gilts
V.
a
r
'Tota1.SSLW= '
114,750
[]Boars
vl
Number of Lag oons r. 1 ds Holding Pon / So[id Traps x
y
Ni:4.r x.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the,operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. [f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. It' discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? n/a
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
Please see attached Lagoon Field Data Sheets
vVIrr
Reviewer/inspector NameTrent'AllenScott Falrclothv" > , '` x . ,.Y` p • rr ',,n _ ; Vit.
Reviewer/]nspector Signature: Date:
Printed on; 5/12/2000

Facility Number 26— 24 Lagoon Number .Q1......... Lagoon Identifier In.atl!/..IgQR.n,p.................„.....
O Active 0 Inactive Latitude 34 50 24
Waste Last Added.1.2-11:9.....................................
Determined by: ® Owner ❑ Estimated
Surface Area (acres): 1..,1.e ........................
Embankment Height (feet): 4-5 ...........................
Longitude 78 52 11
By GPS or Map? _® GPS ❑ Map
GPS file number: IF020217A�
Distance to Stream: 0 <250 feet O 250 feet - 1000 feet O >1000 feet
By measurement or Map? ❑ Field Measurement ® Map
Down gradient well within 250 feet? O Yes 0 No
Intervening Stream? O Yes *No
Distance to WS or HQW (miles): (0<5 O5-10 0>10
Overtopping from Outside Waters? O Yes *No O Unknown
Spillway O Yes O No Adequate Marker O Yes O No
Freeboard & Storm Storage Requirement (inches):
Inspection date 2-2-2000
appearance of O Sludge Near Surface
lagoon liquid O Lagoon Liquid Dark, Discolored
0 Lagoon Liquid Clear
O Lagoon Empty Freeboard (inches): 48
embankment condition 0 Poorly Built, Large Trees, Erosion, Burrows, Slumping, Seepage, Tile Drains, Etc.
O Construction Specification Unknown But Dam Appears in Good Condition
O Constructed and Maintained to Current NRCS Standards
outside drainage O Poorly Maintained Diversions or Large Drainage Area not Addressed in Design
O Has Drainage Area Which is Addressed in Lagoon Design
0 No Drainage Area or Diversions Well Maintained
liner status 0 High Potential for Leaking, No Liner, Sandy Soil, Rock Outcrops Present, Etc.
O No Liner, Soil Appears to Have Low Permeability
O Meets NRCS Liner Requirements
ration equipment fall to make contact
and/or Sprayfield 0 Yes O No O Unknown with representative O Yes 0 No
unavailable
comments 1:1 Side Slopes. Large pine trees on lagoon walls. No application equipment on
farm site. Has a spray field in front of hog house.

Rating of Potential Risk ,
Inactive Waste Lagoons and Storage Ponds
Animal Waste Management System
Page 2
Regardless of their ranking, owners of all waste lagoons and storage ponds have certain
management responsibilities. These 'include taking appropriate actions to eliminate current
discharges, prevent future discharges and to insure the stability of their structures. Staff of the
Division of Water Quality will be in contact with owners of all inactive structures that have been
determined to pose a serious environmental risk, based on its ranking and/or additional field data
collected by the Department.
All liquids and waste removed from these structures must. be land applied at a rate not to exceed
the agronomic needs of the receiving crops. Any major modifications made'to the dike walls or
structure must be done in accordance with current standards and under the direction of a technical
specialist designated for structural design. Your local Soil and Water Conservation District is an
excellent source for information and guidance related to proper waste application practices, structure
operation and maintenance, and other related animal waste management standards and/or
requirements.
Nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility and liability for
any past or future discharges from your Iagoon(s) and/or storage pond(s) or for any violations of
surface water or groundwater quality standards.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this process. If you have questions concerning
your inactive structures, please contact the staff of either in the Division of Water Quality or the
Division of Soil and Water Conservation in the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Cumberland County Soil and Water Conservation District Office
Facility File

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
May 17, 2000
Rufus Johnson
2923 County Line Rd
Fayetteville NC 28306
1 � •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF-
ENVIRONMENT
FENVIRONMENT ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Rating of Potential Risk
Inactive Waste Lagoons and Storage Ponds
R.J. Farms
Facility Number 26-24
Cumberland County
Dear Rufus Johnson;
During the 1999 session, the North Carolina General Assembly passed a law directing the North
Carolina Department of Environment of Natural Resources (DENR) to develop an inventory and
ranking of all inactive lagoons and storage ponds in the State. In order to meet this directive, a
representative of DENR has recently evaluated the inactive lagoon(s) and/or storage pond(s) on your
property. Inactive lagoons and storage ponds were defined by the Statute as structures which were
previously used to store animal waste but have not received waste for at least one year.
The information collected on your property is contained in the attached field data sheets. Using
this field data, staff ranked your inactive waste structures as high, medium or low according to its
potential risk for polluting surface and/or groundwater. Your waste structure(s) was ranked as
follows:
Structure Number Surface Area (Acres) Rankint;
1 1,18 Medium
This ranking is based in part on the conditions existing on the day of the site visit. Changes in
these conditions or the collection and evaluation of additional data may modify the ranking of your
waste structure(s) in the future.
Information on your facility along with over 1000 others contained in the inventory has been
provided to the General Assembly. During this year's session, the General Assembly will consider
additional requirements for future management of these structures which may include requiring
proper closure of inactive lagoons and storage ponds according to current or alternative standards.
2Z5 Green Street, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

w + .M. .