820598_ENFORCEMENT_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DPVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 23, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. James F. Naylor
3189 Church Rd.
Clinton, NC 28378
Subject: Notice Qf Defieqency
James F. Naylor Farm
Facility No. 82-360
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Naylor:
On April 14, 1998, staff' from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the
Division of Water Quality was notified by Scott Faircloth of the Division of
Soil and Water, that a flush tank had overflowed and entered a diversion ditch
and possibly a small stream on the farm- At DWQ's arrival,'investigators
were informed of the specifics of the overflow. Soil had been hauled in as
soon as the overflow was discovered and the drainage pipe had been blocked
to keep waste from entering the stream Further investigation revealed that
there was no residual waste in the stream due to a heavy rain prior to DWQ's
arrival.
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AMPMATIYE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/I0% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
Please be aware that as farms are permitted, any discharges are to be
w'
called in to the Division of Water Quality. Those that are not called in will be
•'•,
treated as violations.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following item{s} be
addressed-
1. As routine maintenance, the flush tanks need to be periodically checked
to insure all devices are working properly to avoid future overflows.
x 4
•''�
.
+•~.
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AMPMATIYE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/I0% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Mr. Naylor
4-23-98
Page 2
Please provide a written response to this office on or before May 15, 1991, regarding
corrective actions taken or planned to resolve this deficiency. 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 do not hesitate to contact Mr.
John Hasty, Environmental Specialist, at [phone].
Sincerely,
r
John C. Hasty, Jr.
Environmental Specialist
cc: Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Wilson Spencer - Sampson Co. NRCS
Audrey Oxendine - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Central Files - Raleigh

Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
10 Routine O Cornolaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other 1
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 3, 3 O 124 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered [ Certitied Applied for Permit © Permitted 3 —Nat eratiottal Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ...... J. t! ti �. ....1 �... .. �tl ... _Gt_ 1 .. County: �Q .!.. !� �....» ......
Owner Name:..... 'L1.,L�.. .... __....... .. Phone No: .�[. kt .. _...._......_ .._
J�
f
Facility Contact: ....... ...../Ua.16 ......�.........._. ...... Phone No:
Mailing Address:... ` _.t h.f�tlL�1..� �. ..... L.. fit.! 1.e—
Onsite Representative:... ,.. ..P_.f� _..... Ala j.� r., ... ...
OpY.._I. / V pe ... 11��. .
Certified Operator A,...-._• O rotor Certification Number
Location of Farm:
Latitude Q• 0' �" Longitude
❑ Wean to Feeder
D'Feeder to Finish VOW
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
„ 'Design
' ' ;Current V4 a yRestgltt Cur
Poultry ' apacity"Population Cattle Capacity
❑ Layer
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
Non -Layer
❑ Yes
�
tiDairy
Non-Dairy
JEI.No
10 other
on hack
'Total Design Capacity;
w Total SSLw
goons i Holding Ponds
g;eneral
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Subsurface Drains Present E10 Lagoon Area
NO Liouid Waste
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field N 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?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon 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
ipray Field Area I
❑ Yes [kNo
JqYes ❑ No
❑
YesNo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ Yes
kNo
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
F�No
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ Yes
JEI.No
Continued
on hack

r
Facility Number: — �►
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which 7 Yes-
Structures ILagoons•1loldine Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes] No
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(n) , �.... .. n-_ ................ ��.................� ........... ..... ............ _.................... ...........................................I.......1...................
10, Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 19Nro
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0 No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ 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? ❑ Yes M\o
��'aSte rlLrpllfatlOLt
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes Rd -No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff enterin waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type �ll!ti't. .....
..L.f.
....................
....
.............
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 ❑ 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
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
For Certirt_ed or Permitted Facilities Only
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.violations or deFciende's were noted during this'visit.- .You W' ill receive no further
correspondence ativut this. visit:
Comments (refer to question #b): Explain any 1 ES`answers and/or any'recommendations or any m
other coments.
Use,drawings of facility ,to better eaipiain'situations'. (use additional pages as necess5ry)
btk)Q Loas of 0n��s:4 e b Seo►�clo DS�t�.
Te p[isc�ct e ��; r` r`Cd(_'d a+ at.- MoL - unr4; on i n t.4sk -ko%k. Afr•
Nallor 5494 -{ita or, q-13-91 & V3r3 ,M, Ae r-kecked o,, 4e
a
-'�ots'tr. and eve�`�`€+-,�. was ;1+ 6rder. ��, r� e
d 6 ` g4q--9 5'
�,,rrin�J � s �• `i`a k d car-�10 w i n e_ 4a
S ediA boi+). oue o ; 4 en t?nh GUS'
P t � � � rtk way �'� �A� -� ,. j C_
d;verSio Jr'tveLo"- i+
c r' c� Reside Mr. itV aF` � t el 7!25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'f�^- 1 5 f- ����•� %
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: %i�— p Date:
V

•
Len-Cility Number:
Date of Inspection -1
Additional COmme' 'nts and/or Drawings:
5- of 4ke6 sy�-, * Ck_ :57r.10_
LA4 4�
p, e- 4-o Kee� roag11 C( -eek
+
s ? r c, f e r,4%, '5 r �M-Or, kOLO lorv� 4�& -J�1�-tsk
4-a�\-k ouer-PoLoe-J, por- koL&) muck was4e- --PloLoeJ of aF-Ke
+ ,k. bLAe 4z> CL- kea\J1 er-lor arr'md)
We- WeVt LLr\ct�t-)le 41 Ae4elM'jr%e ADW MtkCk- X av%,Lj wa5l�
mc"l
have JAerL -6 +�e s-A-ickil creek. 71-iem I rAO+
be c-y%l 4--o 4-4p `rrlspednrs.
Aerie 0 M ()ac-+ J Lke 4
ffeckr-eA +� 6 oisokorle.
bAe- � rAc. Nick."itor-'s SWI -P" Cx J 1 an. uXry A, s c ouet
bbe VIA i r"A I A *I M) -z C -d -Oiwl
r4) C c e WcLvvr5 )
L e
h't S U-)CkS Ci_ V\, LA-n�rAxkncc4e (zcct-clevc� 6-rvldpck(!:Lr\ 't QC3L_1
I 11
ckeck+lLese p'r,! on L
z
+ke -(U4L4(-'.
4/30/97

�n ❑DS
n ,E•. 3 b
Routine
Follow-uD of
`Feedlot O�per
' Facility Number 2 1
Farm Status- ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
Certified ❑Permitted
of Operational Date Last Operated: ....
Farm Name: er--- 1 .. - County:
Land Owner Name: 4hecl.. ... ...... , Phone No:
Facility Conctact: V-.4. Phone Non��r.L... ._.. Title: 1 1a, r ...._ .. ....�_.. ��....... _.....__ ..._
Mailing Address:. -� 5. .`` r 15� :... _.. _... �..._ ......�1%�.TQN� ... _....
_.
Onsite Representative:.....L�Q„..L v j rl.r .......... ... _ _ lntegrator:. -!-tf�4 �.......�.... ... _ ...
Certified Operator:. Q 1 �'[ _ Operator Certification N�ber: .---- --•
Lnrstinn of K -arm-
Follow -u of DSWC review O Other
�I N ■�NNNN�
Date of Inspection17-10-171
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (bh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection includes.travel and processing)
!►
... .......... __......
....__ ... _.... _... _ .__ .. _ ...._ ......... _..... _.... �.... �... _ a
Latitude r_�' �� l u Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
'S:s>n¢.�•n"i`
C Desi n CtlrreQt ' Designs Cn17 Cnt° a DCSAgi1 Current
.1W111C 7,uW V
g x z s aa3w Yaw. M.> a �•
_ g :Pouf Cattle
aci Po uition Y Ca achy . Po "alahan - u. Ca aei Po alafion .�
❑Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver' ” ❑ D
:.
Feeder to Finish '. Non -La er �' ❑ Non -Da
Farrow to Weanrzc°aws
Farrow to Feeder $ TotalDesignCapac�ty
rl Farrow to Finish *�1
..q„•.. ..:....,..w,,,�or...,.,-.... ... ........ Z'7a - r
.Tvtai SSLw�
❑Ot11e� � x�,;� "#'-.,�`N?�s��ss y�r„�..,[+ �� sr�,w�•°z�' ���a�.�
^-;`.'..y,.�..�.�y:d"`R"'xi<+v+:ii`• s�,F "Y,. `, 'p ,i�r#::o-s�_`,..•�i .,,`3a?.�,i°�`�4'kiar., t.'-7n..-'3a�.;,„r ,�°m',�, '{F .vP.A�' ..`>`i,W
aa%s'iT` .. _. _ ...... - - - . _. _ - - ...,. _ cg i
Number 1". ons /#Hold€ag°°'Ponds ❑Subsurface Drains Present
AlEz Lagoon Area Spray Field Area
General ,,,,,[�
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑Yes No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes *To
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed., was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ANo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Waters? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes spo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? 44f
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes XNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes J�No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes No
4/30/47 maintenancelimprovernmt? Continued on back

. 1
Facility Number:.
5
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes No
9. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes KNo
$t ctures (Lagoons andler Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5r
Structure 6
�
I0. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ YesNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ko
(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?
❑ YesXNo
``
Waste Application//
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State notify DWt)
/I(No
15. Crop type'.!1�i _..�...�r.. ......�...._ _. _� .... _ _ _ . _ . �...._..._ _ .__
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Platt (AWMP)?
❑ YesNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes I>&
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes PNo
19. is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ANP
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 J§:�o
For Certified ilio
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes Y(No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes KNo
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes ANo
Cariiments`{refer to questuoii #) Explaln any`YES'a'nswers`and[dr any reebmmtndations or any; other comments: :' F
Use drawtngsKof faciltty to better explain situattons . (use aildutional pages as necessary) ,� v� .
z411 -„gid, �,< ..
5
a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
0
Date: 7— /D -1-7
cc: Division of Water Quality, fV�(Ier Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

4
_ x
xx ❑DSWCCAnimal:Feedlot Op•
MDWCr Animal ,eedlot. Duel
FQ Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DS'VVC review O Other I
Facility Number Z (pts
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection t 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: 0 Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:i 25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
('Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational) Date Last Operated:.... _ .. ... _ ...._... �_.r..... _ _ ...W ... .. ... _ ....•........
Farm Name: ..L_�Q County: ,.1}'s1. 0111_
Land Owner Name: ►" .. .- .. kk .iii. _ ... _.. Phone No:
FaciiityConctact:-..6!_.l.t ..... __ Title:Phone No:..?2..t.tll. _. _.. .
Mailing Address:.,.•_Zpigg ��PC; l�_..L��i.�._...............r..........__ ...�. ��!��L`�.�.....� � ......._....._.._... ���-'.D
Onsite Representative:.. '.. ' �'S l ..... �. Integrator:...... ` -L&r.� .. .... Y ,._.
Certified Operator: r _ .. x...1..6, Operator Certification Number:
Y nnnNnn nFri'nrm•
Latitude 0 4 " Longitude ' 4 �u
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Desh '11 rent
SWinCi: g d' 9a, mow.t c jhAjjjaPo8t1011R�"ttle a{.CS8Cn p0 ElflOn:r
4 mew -m . -ns � y; ( aCI M^I'a ul`a"tian� Paul a i
❑Wean to Feeder ter. Layer 10 Dairy
`Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Layer Q 3f Non
Farrow to Wean
x Farrow to Feeder ' Natal DesfiziMapa&i
Farrow t Finish
0 Other g�
"a'r"";�"s�"^.�,.-..,.n,. - � w'�,. '-.�.a , ,,::z, ,rte., "�'. ..�r. . H :.I -'.f .r.,.x�s4:�.�r r,
`z ``Alf ' ^?, Y Ek `�i&'x-.,,._... ... .. -
Numbr of Loans l Holding Ponds FE]Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area `'� Spray Field Area y
g p Y
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes *0
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 4No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other �%
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 0 Yes 9KNo
0
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Watee? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
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 ko
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes RNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require Q Yes XNo
4/30197 maintenancelimprovement? Continued on back
S.
7 -Site Inspection
FQ Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DS'VVC review O Other I
Facility Number Z (pts
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection t 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: 0 Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:i 25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
('Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational) Date Last Operated:.... _ .. ... _ ...._... �_.r..... _ _ ...W ... .. ... _ ....•........
Farm Name: ..L_�Q County: ,.1}'s1. 0111_
Land Owner Name: ►" .. .- .. kk .iii. _ ... _.. Phone No:
FaciiityConctact:-..6!_.l.t ..... __ Title:Phone No:..?2..t.tll. _. _.. .
Mailing Address:.,.•_Zpigg ��PC; l�_..L��i.�._...............r..........__ ...�. ��!��L`�.�.....� � ......._....._.._... ���-'.D
Onsite Representative:.. '.. ' �'S l ..... �. Integrator:...... ` -L&r.� .. .... Y ,._.
Certified Operator: r _ .. x...1..6, Operator Certification Number:
Y nnnNnn nFri'nrm•
Latitude 0 4 " Longitude ' 4 �u
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Desh '11 rent
SWinCi: g d' 9a, mow.t c jhAjjjaPo8t1011R�"ttle a{.CS8Cn p0 ElflOn:r
4 mew -m . -ns � y; ( aCI M^I'a ul`a"tian� Paul a i
❑Wean to Feeder ter. Layer 10 Dairy
`Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Layer Q 3f Non
Farrow to Wean
x Farrow to Feeder ' Natal DesfiziMapa&i
Farrow t Finish
0 Other g�
"a'r"";�"s�"^.�,.-..,.n,. - � w'�,. '-.�.a , ,,::z, ,rte., "�'. ..�r. . H :.I -'.f .r.,.x�s4:�.�r r,
`z ``Alf ' ^?, Y Ek `�i&'x-.,,._... ... .. -
Numbr of Loans l Holding Ponds FE]Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area `'� Spray Field Area y
g p Y
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes *0
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 4No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other �%
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 0 Yes 9KNo
0
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Watee? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
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 ko
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes RNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require Q Yes XNo
4/30197 maintenancelimprovement? Continued on back

%6' (refer to'questtntt #) Explam an YES answers and/or an recommendations oran"' other rommerits. K $ as
y Y Y
Use drawings of facility to better explain sitEiatraris: (use additional pages as cessary} e 3 y
Facility Number:.. Z.„
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?
0 Yes 00-N0
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes 1�-e'g'o
Structures flLagoons and/or Holding Panoo
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes fi(No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ YesANo
l l _ Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes XNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes WNo
(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 >(No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes ? No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of a State, notify DWQ)
IS. Crop type.C.
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes KNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes Wo
1$. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes XNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes "XNo
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes 1!5�Ato
Far Certified Facilities Only_
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes AZ40
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes W'No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes '_No
%6' (refer to'questtntt #) Explam an YES answers and/or an recommendations oran"' other rommerits. K $ as
y Y Y
Use drawings of facility to better explain sitEiatraris: (use additional pages as cessary} e 3 y
HO
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Z_/ 0— 9 7
Ce. Division of Water Quality, O rater Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Robert Naylor
Robert Naylor #4
2988 Church Rd
Clinton NC 28328
Dear Mr. Naylor:
wpm
IDEHNR
VELIJ
April 3, 1997 EC"
APR D 7 1997
REYETT G � i�
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Designation of Operator in Charge
Robert Naylor #4
Facility Number 82--598
Sampson County
You were notified by letter dated November 12, 1996, that you were required to designate a
certified animal waste management system operator as Operator in Charge for the subject facility by
January 1, 1997. Enclosed with that letter was an Operator in Charge Designation Form for your
facility. Our records indicate that this completed Form has not yet been returned to our office.
For your convenience we are sending you another Operator in Charge Designation Form for your
facility. Please return this completed Form to this office as soon as possible but in no case later
than April 25, 1997. This office maintains a list of certified operators in your area if you need
assistance in locating a certified operator.
Please note that failure to designate an Operator in Charge of your animal waste management
system, is a violation of N.C.G.S. 90A-47.2 and you will be assessed a civil penalty unless an
appropriately certified operator is designated. Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving you of the responsibility and liability for any past or future violations for your
failure to designate an appropriate Operator in Charge by January 1, 1997.
If you have questions concerning this matter, please contact our Technical Assistance and
Certification Group at [phone].
Sincerely,
for Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
bb/awdeslet 1
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Facility File
Enclosure
P.O. Box 29535, �4% FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 V*fcAn Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycles/ 10% post -consumer paper