310338_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

�VR
NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

e ,.
type of Visit: jf Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Season for Visit: 0 Routine Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:, Departure Time: _94— 451 County:
a, ol,-,
Farm Name -Sri Kry�Nt,, /^�tY,,,�'�T a• _ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
lt Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: 6162 AtylYlr,Lh.,� Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Region: Wig
Design C*urrent
Swine Capacity Pop.
Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry C*apacity Pop.
Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow
Feeder
Nan -La er
DairyCalf
o Finish
CF
Da' Heifer
o Wean
o Feeder
o Finish
Design Current
D , P.oult . Ca aciP,o
Layers
D Cow
Non-DaITY
'
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults'
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
'
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
`
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
?n No'
❑ NA
[3.NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

[Facility,Number: - 7jr Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
ElYes
y`--'
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ 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
Vf 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 DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ;?fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ 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 Vf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes jZf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ 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
Zj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
;ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes E� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 73 1 - RT jDate of Inspection: 3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes j' �i 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check r ❑,Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ' ❑ Yes P] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes V1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 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 ❑ Yes 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
b(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Cornp)a-^ I' G1a.vwtA wAs4t wA4u- wm'je-n , a f'n +,room ay� ci -,4Ae5, d In a
&JI acrtorr -Fra m k-, htlr k o m e - D, r4-16r �r 1nraS Gq f�9 +rr����11 a�, d Bern h� : v}
e`r ej,er.
1 -e s-J-ci Aker`[. Qr;-4r%-K nn,�dy'+)_ F.Ayv^ i , o,4 44rl f- Y4t e
app>roPr�} uS:> �.5. psi-' Pu1,,,p�. j s`8,,, No wa i-Ve + A4or
Pww'Phs 0"rya. No V4kV'1eV_ Sd+ f� of 4pw 1:lr or Ay " -e a�4v1►ie�.
�u W order- b
ber s +'60 t'r\ +ke air-- from dw4- p jhr . f, 41D and ` yo yy\
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ��Ltr��l'i �. ay�r�
n . ...n
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: P 23kL2_ J
Date:
21412011