780046_CORRESPONDENCE_20171231

CORRESPONDENCE
w"rwiw

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review ® Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification ® Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z-12-2042 Time: 9:QQ
Facility Number 78 4G
rf Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
❑ Permitted E3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........_ ._ _.
Farm Name: 8JClxey.Fs1r.M$......................................................................... County: Robrjoi.................................. FED.........
Owner Name: Chetles----------------- �riYey--------.......-•------------ Phone No: 7�1--------•---•-•-----•-------------
Mailing Address: 80A.Howell.Rd.............................................................. .........................St...Eeiala..NC ......................................................... 2831 d..............
Facility Contact:........................................................... Title: .. Phone No:
...................................................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: Rv�rte[_._------------------------------------_ __ Integrator: -------____ .-.------------------------_-_-•
Certified Operator: ..................................................
Location of Farm:
SR 1935 and 1 mile East of US 301.
Operator Certification Number:
® Swine [I Poultry ❑ Cattle [I Horse
Latitude • ' �"
Design::::. Current . Design.. `°;Current
Swine L .. : Capacit IPopulation .:::Point
y;;3 ... capacity. Populatia
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
1200
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
3
Subsurface Drains Present
No Llnuld Waste Manager.
.............. ............... ..............
Longitude • II "
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. 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 Water of the State? (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)
Area I0 Spray Field Area
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? []Yes [] No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway []Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 21' Structure 3 Structure 4 Strueture 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........................... .......................... ................................................................................ ..........................:
Freeboard (inches):............36............ ............ 3Ea....._..... ...........45............ .................._.._..-...................._... :.. .

UJ/U3/Ul
Fac ty Number: 78-46
Date of Inspection 2-12-2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. 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?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
[) Yes N No
N Yes 0 No
Q Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes D No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes 0 No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? D Yes [] No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? D Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? D Yes [] No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? D Yes E] No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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?
D Yes D No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[] Yes O No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Yes [) No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
D Yes D No
Yes [] No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? C] Yes 0 No
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
D Field Copy D Final Notes
lagoons had adequate freeboard. These lagoons were rated as high risk by DSWC. This was a follow up inspection. No seepage and no
ion noted.
Reviewer/inspector Name JohnHasty. .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature; Date:

,.,
'
f
a r
5
'
i
i