370025_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTION
S
r

i��
RE
DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review�Nt? O�lc�<.
DWQ Anima! Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
*k
Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ ins ectiora O Follmv-up of DSIVC review O Other
Elate of Inspection
Facility Number 37 oZS
Time of inspection j 3 1SV 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time fin fraction of hours
Farm Status: Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr la" min)) Spent on Rvvievr- hr
Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Not O perational Date Last Operated: ......... -- 9 7
FarmCwtnt,4TES ...................
�..
............-t r'7"R.-.. r .................... C................................C..p..................
Owner Name: ... .6.7..r�.. 1`�r. .E.LL...�f...S,gA1..... lV. ............................... Phone No: ........ .1..�9'..y6��.¢.1��.................. .
Facility Contact: hitl� - OWNW................. '
.....�r..P:...l%1.?Tl�.d .>..3IL_..... �D.... 1 hntae Nn
ailingAddress: .......... R--i...... j3.gx... 9..................................................... ............... ... F?l ?.P .!4.!....._.......-............................... ...N..:C:........
Onsite Representative: ...... Urr.,P--.K1.TT-A-6 JII ........................... . Integrator:................
Cerlified Operator:......- G1,... K.J.U. J............................................ Operator Certification Number: ..... 1.2.7K.
Location of Farm:
S,.R.....1.3d...7....... PPie! ....Fa! ... RD.: , ... r►+.. 1......(,A9.............`..... N,. e..�-................................. �...
Latitude 0 ` :i Longitude a ` :9
Type of Operation
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
aZt7 D
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity `e2.0 O
Total SSLW 3 e qi g'43
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains 1'resentJ10 Lagmm Area ID Spray Field Area
Gencr al
1. Are there any hullers that need maintenance/improvement:'
?. I: any discharge observed from any part of the operation"
I)i:claare originated aC ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. lldischar2e is obsaved, was the conveyance: man-made"
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. Ifdk,:harze is observed. what is the estimated link in lvalinain?
d. DoeS discharge bypass a laLmon system? (Ifye�. 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 Ia,00nslholding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement'?
�I/30/97
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
IX No
❑ Yes
K No
❑ Yes
KNo
Continued nit hack

Facility Number: 3 7
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the lime of design? ❑ Yes H No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes E.No.
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
KNo
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
RNo
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
....6............................ts_....._........... .............o�..- ............_.._.............. ......................... ... .................._...........
..... ...............
I...............
10_ Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
A No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
JANo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
ELYes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
t3. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
5i Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
KNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..........tj) AAAT.................... I...., ... ....... /%'t 1............................................... ........I..
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
No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
R No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes
❑ No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
& No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
D Su SuRPACC /41AGE 6. Ktrr a- air
N 8 - !]RR DER P.
/.I. Srkac.TUAC l NAS WaODY VU-e7A- "OP1 CoL'0A ckrJ) o#t OtxE THAT' uCEos rd ACnwuED,
13. NoT kEauOR-E-a 4-r TJAC of R.S-dleW.
lG. WMP GALLS FeR WHEI[r "40 M1L4- SoYOE40S WOW 7'NE,t'E"/v/NG Cr-OP Ar PIfC_fENf 7,fME
Q£t/jseN►6 WMP II' C Ari ejCAr1ON IS TAXA- FZA4fS,
Aoce esr Fouoal -uoP V151r Or 6PVAMR FeA f7W% /ol .
Alk /!� rA64L 41AY LiEGaE Tb AFRUe_5_7 14&" L rAO" ACrjt/e� �£G/SrilT/!f►7d N �.'►�4BRfE.
riff/S /QE✓/£j.1 WitL ,fAXYS AS Ca v)"iAMAT10 v 7WeX A,cr Ab 1404fs e.0 -7P S dPE,Gtrbu.
cc: Division of Water Qualdy, fvater Cluattty Nection, racitity Assessrnent unit 4r3U/V

Facility Number:37 — Date orluspection g-13-4
Addif1onal Comments ancl/vr Drarv�ngs
S 7-Au cru,t�
r
r
r
1
i
s. A. jd.27
t
ti
c
t
I
r
r
ST�2ttc.F7,rR.E )
N
NOT 7v ScRI-E
4/30/97

k"
WhR-z
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 1, 1997
Mr. George Kittrell
Rt 1 Box 4
Corapeake, 27926
Subject: Annual Compliance Inspection
Facility Number 37-25
Gates County
Dear Mr. Kittrell:
On October 2, 1997, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality conducted an inspection of your swine operation. This inspection is one of two annual
inspections as required by Senate Bill 1217. The Division of Soil and Water Conservation will also
conduct an inspection of your intensive livestock operation during the 1997 calender year.
The following comments are in regard to the inspection of facility 37-25.
The freeboard was observed to be approximately 3, 3.5, and 6 feet for your lagoons. You are
advised that you must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in each lagoon plus a storage
volume sufficient to accommodate the rainfall and any subsequent runoff from a 25 year 24
hour storm event to remain in compliance.
* At the time of this inspection your operation has not been certified in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H .0217. If you have not already done so, you must complete
certification by December 31, 1997 if you choose to remain as an active operation.
This inspection revealed that no animals were on site. If you choose to be an inactive
operation, you should complete the enclosed form to be removed from the List of
Active Animal Operations. If you choose to reactivate the farm in the future, you will
be required to develop and implement a Certified Waste Management Plan and apply
for a general permit before animals are stocked. If this operation remains inactive for a
period of four years it will be considered as a new facility. Then if you wanted to
reopen the facility, it would have to meet all of the permitting requirements of a new
facility before it could be stocked.
943 Washington Square Mall. Washington. North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

0
Facility No. 37-25
Kittrell
Page 2
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have any questions in regard to this
letter I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208.
Sincerely,
jrely,
t%C.s
Carl Dunn
Environmental Engineer
cc: X 2K0 Files
DSWC - WaRO
Gates County NRCS
Compliance/Enforcement Group
Central Files
913 Washington Square Mall. Washington, North Carolina 22869 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Actinn Employer

DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review E
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of 1DNVQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
�aciliter 2$'
Time of Inspect ion IIS _ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered Cl Certified 13 Applied for Permit M Permitted JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated;,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ...........
Farm Name: Cs K i �e ii 'i Sor. County:........�•`�..`Oc-........................................ .......................
............................ ..................................................
OwnerName: .......G...P...K!,��e�!......6.. sO`.�.............................................................. Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: .Geofje.........KotII Title Phone No: .................................
...................................
Mailing Address: R� � � � N� �2 Co rp�,,1� 2792G................................................ ..........................
y...................................... .
Onsite Representative :......��.P.......�`�4{re:i.�........ Integrator:
................................ ..................._..................................................
Certified Operator;....... G.P...... k.W.'�I j Operator Certification Number,....................................................................... .
Location of Farm:
Latitude a 1 44 Longitude '
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
:d
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
200
1 Q
❑ Gilts
I ti
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I0 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity .
Total SSL W
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharoe ori�,inated 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 -al/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a Iagoon 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?
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?
7/25/97 _
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes )allo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I&No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes XNo
Continued on back

acilit jP Number: 37 — 'Z
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures, Lagoons, [toldins Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 5 T.9�!.............. �` 1^ a4rays rn.�
1................I........... ........ I.- .............. ..........
.
Freeboard(tt):..............3........................._2 _2S ................. (0 ............ .................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 10 No
Structure 5 Structure 6
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?
(1f any of questions 9-12 was alswered 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 ........................... .................
l6. 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?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ Yes
'M No
❑ Yes
19 No
V Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �9 No
•................................................
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
V No
No violations or. de kiencies.were noted during this.visit. Yodw"ill receive no further
correspondence: about this'. visit'.-'.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
k t , 1, e 17 r?, ,F
�'J otrn i ►� • Of Stqere � � a r� A.�tS Si /�i, � � S K4+ Inw& atip r, .aLt c7/i
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �,,c..t� Date:

-- a
---- _........ _.... .... _.
❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
ff DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
e Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of MVQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Humber E 7
Time of inspection oc1 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered © Certified © Applied for Permit 0 Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:. ..............
Farm Name: e lcr f 5-6,r— Co r' Fqr &� County :......... ..... K4.-i'
.......................................................................................................................
O«ner Name: �..........s�e..e_ ........ Gt?.?....................................... .................. Phone No:......�`Ib..... �,�....................................................
Facility Contact: GJer K Title:............................................................. ... Phone No:.........................
.......p..................................................................
ibfailing Address:.......9O1.........NoSeP�•". S"w..P i�c� �✓4��� R...................2.7.0.1..........I........................... ..........................
............................................................................... ..... ....
Onsite Representative:.--.... ' .----()� ................ Integra tor:........... ............................... ..................
Certified Operator ;......... J�......... �.................................................................... Operator Certification Number..................-----------------.......
Location of Farm:
Latitude a 1 =6 Longitude • 4 46
Design Current Design Current Design. Current
Swine Capacity :Population Poultry Capacity. Population Cattle Capacity. Population
[] Wean to Feeder JE1 Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish 10 Non -Layer I I JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder 111 Other -
Farrow to Finish 12 60 Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ soars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes id No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes NNo
Dischar-e originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If dischar-c is observed, dill it reach Surface Water" (If yes, notify, DWQ) ❑ Yes [I No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/tnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ONo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
P(No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
Yes
❑ No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
XNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
§(No
7/25/97 Continued on back

• a
Facility Number: 7
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,tiolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft) .'. `r.............. ..............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 5
l L 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. Croptype Corn bu�t�seSC�-.
YP {.....................
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?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes V?A1
Structure 6
...............................
❑ Yes C9 No
❑ Yes Klo
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes bg No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
hNo
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
X No
❑ Yes
bKNo
❑ Yes
XNo
j� Yes
❑ No
No.violations or. deficiencies. were' noted- during this. visit. You.will receive -no ftirther-
correspondence about this..visit:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer: to question #): Explaidany YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Usedrawings of facility to better explatn:situations. (use;additional.pagesas ne&ssarv)
_C* j,' Jv b., ld, . r ft- o�.�su4¢ 5 ers. Tt�,r3
Z z' Nee 4b Jo c,"
15 Ore-CO,daj 0K.
co td c105 P,Pes 40L.j le-.j
vjrfl.14n L.Jg1C-e. e1w-
N,. 4., C4cC ce--}r'y�y,4,-1, of 'Tali^ . r ., % � /25/9
Reviewer/Inspector Name w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: � Date: 2Z-- 47