820319_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

NURTH CARULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

North Carolina
'Department of Environment and Natural Resources AMU-
•
/
Division of Water Quality -►�- =��
Fayetteville Regional Office
Michael F. Easley, Governor NCDENR
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
July 23, 2001
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Murphy -Brown, Inc.
Attention: David Nordin
P. O. Box 856
Warsaw, NC 28398
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Murphy -Brown, Inc.
Farm: 2702
Facility No.: 82-319
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Nordin:
On July 10, 2001, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality conducted a routine
inspection of Murphy -Brown Farm ##2702 (Carroll's Foods) in Sampson County. The inspection revealed that waste
application fields in the general area of pulls 4A -4E had poor to non-existent stands of matua. These fields were
predominantly competition grasses -and weeds.
In regard to the deficiency(s) noted during the inspection; the following actions are requested:
1. Work on weed control in application fields.
2. Evaluate the waste application Gelds and promote the establishment of the required crop.
Please provide a written response to this office on or before August 6 2001 as to the actions taken or proposed to be
taken to resolve these deficiencies, Nothing in this letter should be taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and
liability of any violations that have resulted or may result from this deficiency.
If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact Paul Sherman at [phone].
Sincerely,
M. Paul Sherman
Environmental Engineer
cc: Sonya Avant -Compliance Group
Trent Allen-DSWC Fayetteville Office
Wilson Spencer -Sampson Co. MRCS
Central Files -Raleigh
225 GREEN STREET - SHITE 7141 SYSTEL BUILDING / FAYETTEVILLE, NC 28301-5043
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone] WWIV.FNR.STATE.NC.US/F.NR/
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST CONSUMF,R PAPER
DENR TOLL FREE HOTLINE: I-877-623-6748
C:�

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other © Denied Access
Facility lumber 82 319 Date of Visit: 711 012 44 1 Time: 15:44 Printed'on: 7/16/2001
Q =Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionalh' Certified © Registered nate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: 2.70Z .................................... County: 5.aMRjQ)3........................................... FRO .............
Owner `ame:............... ....... Caxr.411.'s.. Qosis..ln.c.............................. Phone No. 91.0-291-3.43.:1 ........................ ...................................
.Mailing Address: ft) ..11ax.$,5.6.......................... .....-...........-----.......................... ...................................... ................... zM9.8 ..............
Facilitv Contact: Aft'.:ti12Tdi]R................................................... 7'itle:...... .................................. .................. I...... Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: DQU.LaCQc................................................................................... Integrator: Car.roll's.kQct�l�.Imp.............................................
Certified Operator:GhlktQxl---------------------------------- h uxi?11Y........................................... Operator Certification Number:1.8.7.75 .............................
Location of Farm:
1.4 miles southwest of Keener. 314 mile west of intersection of SR 1771 and SR 1829. A.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �� �� Longitude �• �=
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity population Cattle
Ca acity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
I
JE1 Non -Dairy
® Farrow to Wean 2400
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,400
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
1,039,200
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste ,i-lanagement System
Discharges & Stream lmQacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: [-I Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated floe, in gal/min?
d- Does discharge bypass a ]a-oon systems? (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 from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .............................................................................................
...................................
Freeboard (inches): 40
05/03/01
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Continued
CA'

Facility Number: 82-319 Date of Inspection F7/10/2001 Printed on: 7/16/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed:' (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes X No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ®No
(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? ❑ Yes ® No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings'' ❑ Yes ® No
Waste .application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Matua Millet Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
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) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(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?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answersand/or any recommendations or a'ny other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑Final Notes
15. Poor matua stand for pulls 4A -4E. Competition grasses and weeds predominatly.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Paul Sherman
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number: 82-319 Date of Inspection 7/10/200I Printed on: 7/16/2001
Odor Issues'
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ® Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
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 ®No
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.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ® Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:.:, µ
J
05/03/01