400112_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA .�
Department of Environmental Qua!

INSPECTIONS,
INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS

Wq R
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 29, 1997
Mr. Ronald Murphy
R & N Swine
Rt. 2, Box 455
Snow Hill, NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
R & N Swine
Facility No(s). 40- i 12
Greene County
Dear Mr. Murphy:
On October 21, 1997, I conducted an animal feedlot operation site inspection at the referenced facility. Overall, the
operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules IS NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 12I7, and
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of
seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment section of the attached
inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted concerns, as soon
as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil & Water Conservation District
Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. -Should you have further questions or
comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 32 L
Sincerely, (� (�
8 �6vt—
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist I1 .
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
WaRO ,7
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

I& tcoutme a L.ompiatnt p rottow-up of uwi4 inspection p ra
Facility Number
■ Registered p Certified a Applied for Permit a Permitted
Farm Name: R.&..N.Swine.................
Oivner Name: Ronald
Murphy....
p Uther
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Not operattona Date Last Operated:
County: Greene WARO
PhoneNo:.74.7.:.S4.b5..................................... ...........................
Facility Contact: Randy..Hiunzat.................... . .................:.......Title:.....---....................................................... Phone No: .....: .......................
Nailing Address: RU..Bic.45S.............................................................................I........... ScLow-Hi.II... NC....................................................... 285$t1..............
Onsite Representative: Rauld.lftrphy..................... ...... Integrator:..,.............
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 4 64
Operator Certification Number:
Longitude • ° C]"
estgn urren Design, urren . - estgn Current,
Srviae� r. ° Capacity, Population Poultry.,° Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Weanto Feeder
p Fee3er to tuts
p Farrow to Wean
<
p Farrow to ee er
0 Farrow t0 Finish
p Gilts
i] Boars
p Layer p airy
p Non -Layer p on- airy
rt C] Uther I-
Total'Design Capacity 250
Total- SLW y xi
ls. �} � '�'+'K.-�— rl ^Y.�;`�I•;i � i s L k r� �i�� k Ak!.� 61 :"a'��. �{��"� -� � V
lj t
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ENO
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes g No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes g No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes g No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require []Yes g No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes g No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes 13 No
7/25/97

It -act ity Numberi: 40_112
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
N No
Structures a.-oons,Holdin Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
6
identifier;
Freeboard (ft): 2 ft. 2 ft.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
(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?
p Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. roa ......................Fesc Fescue ............................................. ..
P type ...Rye.............................................................................................................................
.........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
p Yes
p No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
Ig No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
® No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
® No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? p Yes p No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management PIan readily available? p Yes p No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes p No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes p No
Q.. ov�o ons.or derxies•were.note r ngt isvisinawy .reeeivenofurther. .
: orrespojiUM0 about Mij.*6 . • .
Reviewer/Inspector Name .D -Ohfi B L'uI orn �; fi g a_ � r >
k! ., �i "ti+gk ? " 4 - -�r:3� , -`- :. '` t� �t.._.La:v
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
®'lwision of Water Quality
IG4.outine O Complaint O Follow-up of DNV0 inspection O Follow-up or L) we review Q Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection p-.21-
Z .
Time of Inspection l3 30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
O egistered © Certified 0 Applied for Permit d Permitted of O erational Date Last perated: „..... .....
Farm Name: ..� ... ........ lL............................................................ County: .Id.R.An..Q.......................... Wok `s
Owner Name-.... Qq... . . ...........! `^', � ........,.. .... Phone No:...Cj.� ..-.. 7 -�.— s L5............,......,....
�'
t
FacilityContact: ........................................... ...................... le:................................................................ Phone No:..7 .1.`..cS..85,S„ .......
a8s
Mailing Address:... �..... .`A5..5........................................... .... r e-...................... gt
Onsite Representative:......rElt2.1(LLD............1..` W.!r.. Integrator: ................................................................
Certified Operator;............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number;
Location of Farm:
...... .................. ........................ I ...................................................................................................................................... I .. . ......................................................................... -&
[M-�-
,... V
.......... .........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude ' it Longitude • 04 it
Design Current
«SIAe Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ F er to Finish
B'Farrow to Wean
' U
<.
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current '. Design Cuirrent-
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity population,;'
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I I JE] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity,d
Total SSLW
Numbetb Lagoons l Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Tt ❑ 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?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon El 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 gal/min?
cl. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systelrl? (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 21<0
❑ Yes Ll'1vo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑, No
❑ Yes
L K10
❑ Yes
,.�
t...�ko
❑ Yes
U<0
❑ Yes 0
❑ Yes M-1V0
Continued on back

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,FI.WA
Health and Natural Resources A
Washington Regional Office frr
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary p E H N F�
Nancy W. Smith, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section
October 27, 1995
Mr. Keith Murphy and Randy Hinnant
Rt. 2, Box 406
Snow Hill, North Carolina 28580
Subject: Animal Waste Lagoon, Facility No. 40-112, Greene County
Dear Mr. Murphy and Mr. Hinnant:
I inspected the lagoon serving your animal feeding operation
on October 25, 1995. Mr. Ronald Murphy accompanied me on this
inspection. It was observed that the lagoon located behind the hog
houses had an insufficient amount of freeboard between the water
level and the lowest point of your dike wall. You should maintain
a .minimum of nineteen inches of freeboard in the lagoon. This
letter is written to bring your attention to this situation and'to
ask you to begin spray irrigating wastewater or taking the
appropriate action necessary to reduce the level of your lagoon
immediately. Please note that a buffer of twenty-five feet from
ditches, swales, canals, and streams must be maintained while spray
irrigating from your lagoon.
Although the lagoon was not overflowing on the day of the
inspection, please be aware that it is a violation of North
Carolina General Statutes to discharge wastewater to the surface
waters (farm ditches, creeks, streams, etc) of the State without a
permit. The Division of Environmental Management has the authority
to levy a fine of not more than $10, 000 per day for the unpermitted
discharge of wastewater into the surface waters of the State. At
some point in the future, staff will reinspect your facility.
If you have any questions in regard to this letter I can be
contacted at [phone] (EXT 349).
Si erely,
Ed Warren
WWTP Consultant
cc: Dianne Wilburn
AFO file
7424 Carolina Avenue, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmotive Action Employer 50%recycled/ 10%post-consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. 41) -1 ! z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: �-S , 1995
Time:�(1'�,
Farm Name/Owner: •'i /r]1 c.n� rIPA 7Yh n cl.
Mailing Address: 9i" Z- -- °� ` �� Shy
County:
Integrator. Phone:
On Site Representative: 6 fela Phone: ' 7517 - sf33 S
Physical Address/Location: r� �n_�*1SV �i � aS�' Soli o_.0 -5k 1103 ,
ad iurr:, .r-
Type of Operation: Swine �L-1 Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: o7S -Vws + o2S^T
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ' ' " Longitude: ' ' of
Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes orQ Actual Freeboard: _J _Ft. 4 Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? (Vor No Is the cover crop adequate? Gor No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? ge or No
100 Feet from Wells? Gor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes o No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or o
Additional Comments: // Mr. rn .%� G /� e <
ci YY ! I T/! ni/fl% na. ! -f 1 %ti W Ip.S fT "_ A,'_ ._f/
F1
Fj L4-rrPiV1J &Z aa,� ,
inspector Name Signature
9
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.
1
Y'54 1
N

sty' —,,
Z-cArr&ytl

Facility Number: 41) z
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site s ttd
which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes,
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pils, etc.)
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2'No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: l
....... .. . ....... ........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(ft): ........... ;_z, ................ .......... [>r......... .................................... ....................... .............
10. Is seepage. observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 9410
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes B No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes
(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?
❑ Yes
M<
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
, ,
EKO
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Ir_
Crop type .....................C"l� S�..¢—............... ............................. .
16.
mal
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the AniWaste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑Yes❑,
N�o
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
El Yes
K10
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes�o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
M'No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
(To
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
EKo
22,
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
tkt"No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities OnI
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0. No.violitions-or deficiencies were; noted -during this;visit:- You'.will `receive.no•furi er•:
correspoMeke about this:visit
V 9-! A,lfl V• ,!L LV fJI.L W!''VA lll.3 LYRLIV !:f YJV VYlLl V1lLLl, W RJ lV�.�.JJNL
Rt'
., '..'�1/r:>.:.`."rn,. ��,��v�$s.", :1yv+,=.�`
4w�v(//�]\} l <.J �+ 6— tJ�.Jr��-+� 1 V
'-T s V" s;+ cc) fOA-s ,rQ YOO 6
7/25/97
ReviewertInspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _�)q,y�{L (!S , �� Date: 1 b —Zl: — q