540010_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

INSPECTIONS,
INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS

Facility Number S t# I
Date of Inspection i4= 7 98
Time of Inspection 17 5 24 hr. (ttlt:mm)
p Registered © Certified 0 Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not Opera( Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: D r. t........+Pp ct County: .............�.`....".......................................................
Owner Name �� Phone No: .�.......... ..................................................----.
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:
MailingAddress:...........................................................................................
Onsite Representative:...,, ... .........Al� ........
C l I, P-
.. ...............................................
Certified Operator: .... .... ..... ....2ann_/............. 9'. ".,4........................
Location of Farm:
Latitude
Design, prrent
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
2 Farrow to Wean
1200
ew
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
PhoneNo:.. ........................... ..................
..................................................................................... ..........................
Integra#or:... '�^ C 14 -.".:1
Operator Certification Number;...---....
Longitude
OmiginkCurrent:... igw. z urrent:x.
Poultry .... Capacity. Population'.' Cattle. Caparaty: Population
.'Number of:�;agonns 1 Holding Poinds 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ©Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area N
No Liquid Waste Management System
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
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
main tenance/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?
7125t97
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IR No
❑ Yes U No
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back

Facility Number: S Lt— 10
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes 19 No
Structures (La oons oldie Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 8 No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: 5,„'d i ark- ................................. _......... ... ................................................... .....................................---............... .....
Freeboard (ft): ...y .5..
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes Ik No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 19 No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
CH 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
No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type - �e"!----.---. ......... - la". .................... ,0- . A'
---------- ------ --------------------............................... --........... ---- ------------
........ -----.................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
E3 No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
M 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
Certified or Permitted Facilities Onil
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(5 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
[3 • No violitiohs'6i dericiencies. were noted during this;visit. � You:*il] receive• no further" : -
_
c0rrespi)ndeke d out this:visit : .
10,
Til
7/25/97
Reviewer/InspectorName '
r yy �s .¢,� '$� tl yam`.
""e:ii`'"Ya..." ".k., iu :^x ,.iL.... _. . YeXdb.i :..'�.'�i. '°°¢R«'.. �I °i&"s`Ikw.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

c
, I

,.: ..... ............. ................. ..................... ............
DSWC Animal Feedlot Peration Review
W Animal Feedlot ection
......... .
;u
y
D Aeration Site Insp
® Routine 0 Complaint
U Follow-ue of DWQ
inspection Q Follow-up of DSN C revie", V Other
Facilit►' Number 5 17
Date of Inspection
t' —► '
Time of Inspection
® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered © Certified
13 Applied for Permit
0 Permitted
I Date Last Operated:..._....,
[3 ;Sot Operational
Farrar Name �"`�
-................................................................................
. I .,. l
................... County:............1
^ ..?.....................................................
.`.'.... ar
(}js'ner Name: ................
Phone No:.........
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:
MailingAddress: ........................ . ................................ ............
Onsite Representati%'e:............�R7...... �.. � �............ .........
.
Certified Operator: .................
Location of Farm:
PhoneNo :...................................................
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number,
Latitude • 6 " Longitude ' °
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
1220'
El Farrow to Feeder
/22a
❑ Farrow to finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Mc
Design Current Design. Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity. Population
❑ [.aver ❑ Dairy
❑ Nnn-Layer I[] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoun Area ❑ Spray Field ,area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there anv buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes IN No
2, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 9 No
Dischnr2e 0626 aced at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a- If discharge is observed. was the cojivcvance man-made, ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If dischar�_>e is observed. did it reach Surface Water" (if yes. notity DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. w'Iiat is the estimated flow to _allnun?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (It yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 09 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes M No
5. floes any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes I] No
maintenanceli anprovement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes (O No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 6 No
7/25/97 Continued on back

• w
Facility Dumber: 5;11 — fp
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes IN No
Structures (Lap-oons,Holding_Ponds, Flush Pitstcj
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes El No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Idell tiFier Q!.
-. -..... ....... ............ ............................................................................................. ...------.........................
..........
Freeboard
.. .................................
(ft):...........................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
C9 No
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
❑ 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
No
Waste
Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP. or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ......Car' V -4" ..
.......................•....... ................... ............ ................... ...................................... ....................... ..............
..............................--....
lb.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yeti
❑ No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage For land application?
❑ Yes
IN Na
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
WNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
14 No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
i6 No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative"
❑ Yes
@�No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement'?
El Yes
[,No
ror Certified or Permitted Facilities Onl�-
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available`?
ElYes
[INo
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 deficiencies were noted during this'visit. .Yo'U.Wi11 re-ceive'no further
corres*ondence about this.v�isit:
...
Comments (refer to question #]::.Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations.or'any other comments.. "
Use drawings of facilityto. better ex lain situations:.(use additional pages as,;necessa
p .. p g ry)::
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
.lames B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
May 29, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN CEIPT REQUESTED
eraine Howard ❑ ier
Owl Pond
1373 Davis Mill Rd
Deep Run NC 28525
Farm Number: 54 -10
Dear Leraine Howard Collier:
Aw
C.-D + .
F4CDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
JUN 4 1998
WASHiN -TOM REGIONAL OFFICE
You are hereby notified that Owl Pond, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply for
coverage under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter', your farm has
six 60 days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance
with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or
operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the Department SHALL NOT
OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must be returned
within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also
subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated
following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before retuming the application package.
The signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location
map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the
application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Sue Homewood at [phone]
extension 502 or Carl Dunn with the Washington Regional Office at [phone].
SincerelyJr., P.E.
,
A. Pre ,
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
l
Washington Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27625-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recyciedl 10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.rfj
P
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATI S SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: ]� l , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: = C_ 4
Hailing Address: �T. L_
County: [_7.-� rZ 17
Integrator: ,
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
cs'� L-'-)
Type of operation: swine Poultry Cattle
Desicz Capacity: � No. of Animals on Sited w /"d Ro 1/2, i,-Qw%o
DEM CertifigcLation No. • ACE DEM Certification No.: A�W
Latitude: 3L Longitude: Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freebpat* of I Ft r 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) Yes o
Actual Freeboard: Ft -< � _ Inch
e
Was any seepage observed from the laaoon(s)? Yes o No'
Was any erosion observed? Yes or No,
Is adequate land available for sway? Ye No
Is the cover crop adequate? Y s or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SC inimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? Yes or No 100 Ft from Wells. Yes or No
Is thermal waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line 5tre m?
Yes a Na
Is animal was
applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a ❑SGS Map Blue
Line? Yes o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state rri an -made ditch, flushing
rny
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or o
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 No
nspector N me Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments &.Sketch an Back of Sheet
tpgy

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two /� ,L -
C omrnent s : SCF �l
c
Sketch:
- q,A5 r

OPERATI�IS RBI - WQ Fax:[phone]M J '95 12:46 P.16f16
FAX [phone] P. 08
+' "JLL " ina is.e33 USDA sm wl F#MI 1978ml P.03103
F�na�a
SITE VISITATION RE `
oOW.
a :4nv
AgaM nj ris
for: Cad"
Tjrpe a! raBort; .� PC 7 cm
tic .._�
Typ,ofwtmftaAWN
CUM T a or No
OM 00 Mmal WOO LWM nm wWO heboW of 24 hoUr iUm evert
OWwkft* t FaA +7 h*u) Y=
AaWd I`� Wag
Fcr 6cfts aft mars tm om bow, FWw edd = %oaM ttboard woder to
axmnmb sue.
Was any *VW wed Thom to *i? Yes
ft bm arwmof to damp? Vas
b 8*06 w trab* 16r tad appb"? No
k ire t a*adagsfia? Q0Ho
Ad anal C�t� �a. ee.� . -OLreA 4 - _ ,
sold" of , �
Feac to ist9]?i6-

State of North Carolina
{ - Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Washington Regional office
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
Nancy Smith, Regional Manager
Water Quality Section
August 1, 1995
Mr. Ray Collier
Route 1 Box 325
Deep Run, North Carolina 28525
Subject: Owl Pond Farm Animal Waste Lagoon
Facility No. 54-10
Lenoir County
Dear Mr. Collier:
•
ID FE F=?t
Division of Environmental Management
On July 31, 1995 staff from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of
Environmental Management inspected the lagoon serving your animal feeding operation.
It was observed that the lagoon had an insufficient amount of freeboard, water level in
relation to 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 take the appropriate
action necessary to reduce the level of your lagoon(s) immediately. Please note that a
buffer of twenty-five feet must be maintained while spray irrigating from any drainage
system (ditch, swale, canal, stream, etc.).
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. Lagoon dikes should be mowed so they can be visually inspected.
If you have any questions regarding this letter I can be contacted at (919) 946-
Sincerely,
Scott Jones
Environmental Technician
cc: ne Wilbum
FO file
1424 Carolina Avenue. Washington. North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Af irmcr ive Action Employes 5C% recycled/ 10% post�onsumer paper

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS
0
INSPECTIONS

I ?
f
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of -Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
J.C. Howard
1373 Davis Mill Rd
Deep Run NC 28525
Dear J.C. Howard;
■
NCDENR
NORTH CAROUNA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
May 17, 2000
Subject: Rating of Potential Risk
Inactive Waste Lagoons and Storage Ponds-
Alphin Farms
Facility Number 54-11
Lenoir County
During the 1999 session, the North Carolina General Assembly passed a law directing the North
Carolina Department of Environment of Natural Resources (DENR) to develop an inventory and
ranking of all inactive lagoons and storage ponds in the State. In order to meet this directive, a
representative of DENR has recently evaluated the inactive lagoon(s) and/or storage pond(s) on your
property. Inactive lagoons and storage ponds were defined by the Statute as structures which were
previously used to store animal waste but have not received waste for at Ieast one year.
The information collected on your property is contained in the attached field data sheets. Using
this field data, staff ranked your inactive waste structures as high, medium or low according to its
potential risk for polluting surface and/or groundwater. Your waste structure(s) was ranked as
follows:
Structure Number Surface Area (Acres) Rankin
1 1.85 Medium
2 1.56 Medium
3 1.58 Medium
This ranking is based in part on the conditions existing on the day of the site visit. Changes in
these conditions or the collection and evaluation of additional data may modify the ranking of your
waste structure(s) in the future.
Information on your facility along with over 1000 others contained in the inventory has been
provided to the General Assembly. During this year's session, the General Assembly will consider
additional requirements for future management of these structures which may include requiring
proper closure of inactive lagoons and storage ponds according to current or alternative standards.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affsronatire Action Employer 50% r'ecycled/10% post -consumer paper

Rating of Potential Risk
Inactive Waste Lagoons and Storage Ponds
Animal Waste Management System —
Page 2 ..
Regardless of their ranking, owners of ail waste lagoons and storage ponds have certain
management responsibilities. These include taking appropriate actions to eliminate current
discharges, prevent future discharges and to insure the stability of their structures. Staff of the
Division of Water Quality will be in contact with owners of all inactive structures that have been
determined to pose a serious environmental risk, based on its ranking and/or additional field data
collected by the Department.
All liquids and waste removed from these structures must be land applied at a rate not to exceed
the agronomic needs of the receiving crops. Any major modifications made to the dike walls or
structure must be done in accordance with current standards and under the direction of a technical
specialist designated for structural design. Your local Soil and Water Conservation District is an
excellent source for information and guidance related to proper waste application practices, structure
operation and maintenance, and other related animal waste management standards and/or
requirements.
Nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility and liability for
any past or future discharges from your lagoon(s) and/or storage pond(s) or for any violations of
surface water or groundwater quality standards.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance in this process. If you have questions concerning
your inactive structures, please contact the staff of either in the Division of Water Quality or the
Division of Soil and Water Conservation in the Washington Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely,
ROGER THORPE FOR
JIM MULLIGAN
Jim Mulligan
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Lenoir County Soil and Water Conservation District Office
Facility File

i
of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up D Emergency Notification 0 Other
Facility Number 54 II
0 Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered
10 Not Operational Q Below Threshold Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 12/0..7...........
❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit 2rz�atroo
County: .. ......
Farm Name: Alphin.FarmS......................................................................... ................ .......... ......W.e Q.......
Owner Name:,I.G�....................--.-----.-----.-------- Hatrad..... ........... .........
..............._ Phone No: �152:5.5.6 42:D4...................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1K3,.D.wyjs.MiJJ.Rd.......................................................................... DR.0p.,Rmxt.NC ................................. .. ............
Onsite Representative:
Location of Farm:
k'rfrata k1►�y,.a .,S .11 4. 3'e t.�F ><7at yam .l.x�ai1�.Q�a.tfaf<. X.... ---------------------
Integrator:J.C.jUomaril.Fprm....................
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current Design Current Design Current
awrne - - " acrty Population
Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish 1800 0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Poultry - Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laver I 1 0 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JEJ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,800
Total SSLW 243,OU4
- Nu lber of Lagoons Y 3 Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a- If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) [] Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in cal/min?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
Please see attached Lagoon Field Data Sheets
iV
Reviewer/Inspector Name Niartiin Mclawltiorn 'y `: E6teired b 'Ano':T yndall ; -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Printed on: 5/12/2000

a
Facility Number 54 — 11 Lagoon Number 1....- Lagoon Identifier Triiangular.)Raggon.......................
O Active 4 Inactive Latitude 35 11
Waste Last Added 12/1/9.7_--...................._......._.... Longitude 7L.7 ® 02
Determined by: ® Owner ❑ Estimated By GPS or Map? ® GPS ❑ Map
GPS file number: IL022214B
Surface Area (acres): 1.,$5........................
Embankment Height (feet): 4.............. ........ _........
distance to Stream: O <250 feet # 250 feet - 1000 feet ❑ a1000 feet
By measurement or Map? ❑ Field Measurement ® Map
Down gradient well within 250 feet? O Yes Q No
Intervening Stream? D Yes Q No
Distance to WS or HOW (miles): O < 5 O 5 - 10 ©> 10
Overtopping from Outside Waters? O Yes *No O Unknown
Spillway O Yes O No Adequate Marker O Yes O No
Freeboard & Storm Storage Requirement (inches):
A. l
inspection date 2/22/2000
appearance of O Sludge Near Surface
lagoon liquid O Lagoon Liquid Dark, Discolored
Q Lagoon Liquid Clear
O Lagoon Empty Freeboard (inches): 48
embankment condition O Poorly Built, Large Trees, Erosion, Burrows, Slumping, Seepage, Tile Drains, Etc.
*Construction Specification Unknown But Dam Appears in Good Condition
O Constructed and Maintained to Current NRCS Standards
outside drainage Q Poorly Maintained Diversions or Large Drainage Area not Addressed in Design
O Has Drainage Area Which is Addressed in Lagoon Design
O No Drainage Area or Diversions Well Maintained
liner status a High Potential for Leaking, No Liner, Sandy Soil, Rock Outcrops Present, Etc.
O No Liner, Soil Appears to Have Low Permeability
O Meets NRCS Liner Requirements
cation equipment fall to make contact
and/or 5prayfield Q Yes OQ No O Unknown with representative 4 Yes Q No
unavailable
comments * All three lagoons look to be in pretty good shape.
No solids present and liquid looks clear.
All the lagoons are joined by a pipe.

E
t
Facility Number 54 •-- 11 Lagoon Number 2........... Lagoon Identifier Be-ctan-g lar..UagQQi1.................
O Active OQ inactive Latitude 35 11
Waste Last Added 12W.97.......................... Longitude 77 ® 02
Determined by: ® Owner ❑ Estimated By GPS or Map? ® GPS ❑ Map
GPS file number: IL022214B
Surface Area (acres): J.,.6................
Embankment Height (feet): 4............. _.................
Distance to Stream: O <250 feet a 250 feet - 1000 feet O a1000 feet
By measurement or Map? []Field Measurement ® Map
Down gradient well within 250 feet? O Yes # No
intervening Stream? O Yes *No
Distance to WS or HQW (miles): O < 5 O 5 - 10 OQ > 10
Overtopping from Outside Waters? O Yes (*No O Unknown
Spillway O Yes O No Adequate Marker O Yes O No
Freeboard & Storm Storage Requirement (nches):
inspection date 2/22/2000
appearance of O Sludge Near Surface
lagoon liquid O Lagoon Liquid Dark, Discolored
O Lagoon Liquid Clear
p Lagoon Empty Freeboard (inches): 48
embankment condition O poorly Built, Large Trees, Erosion, Burrows, Slumping, Seepage, Tile Drains, Etc.
*Construction Specification Unknown But Dam Appears in Good Condition
O Constructed and Maintained to Current NRCS. Standards
outside drainage 0 Poorly Maintained Diversions or Large Drainage Area not Addressed in Design
O Has Drainage Area Which is Addressed in Lagoon Design
O No Drainage Area or Diversions Well Maintained
liner status 0 High Potential for Leaking, No Liner, Sandy Soil, Rock Outcrops Present, Etc.
O No Liner, Soil Appears to Have Low Permeability
- O Meets NRCS Liner Requirements
cation equipment fail to make contact
andlor 5prayfield O Yes Q No O Unknown with representative O Yes Q No
unavailable
comments * All three lagoons look to be in pretty good shape.
* No solids present and liquid looks clear.
* All the lagoons are joined by a pipe.
V-I

r+
Fcacility Number 54 — 11 Lagoon Number :3 Lagoon Identifier Fa.tl-. _ - Pe- -.1 9 4!. ............
Q Active Q Inactive Latitude 35 1507
Waste Last Added 7..... ...... Longitude L44 D2
Determined by: ® Owner ❑ Estimated By GPS or Map? ® GPS ❑ Map
GPS file number: L022214B
Surface Area (acres): 1..: ........................
Embankment Height (feet): 4 .............
Distance to Stream: 0 <250 feet Q 250 feet -'1000 feet Q >1000 feet
By measurement or Map? ❑ Field Measurement ® Map
Down gradient well within 250 feet? O Yes Q No
Intervening Stream? Q Yes *No
Distance to WS or HOW (miles): 0 < 5 0 5 - 10 * > 10
Overtopping from Outside Waters? Q Yes *No O Unknown
Spillway Q Yes Q No Adequate Marker O Yes Q No
Freeboard & Storm Storage Requirement (inches):
inspection date 2/22/2000
appearance of p Sludge Near Surface
lagoon liquid a Lagoon Liquid Dark, Discolored
0 Lagoon Liquid Clear
a Lagoon Empty Freeboard (inches): 48
embankment condition 0 Poorly Built, Large Trees, Erosion, Burrows, Slumping, Seepage, Tile Drains, Etc.
*Construction Specification Unknown But Dam Appears in Good Condition
p Constructed and Maintained to Current NRCS Standards
outside drainage 0 Poorly Maintained Diversions or Large Drainage Area not Addressed in Design
Q Has Drainage Area Which is Addressed in Lagoon Design
Q No Drainage Area or Diversions Well Maintained
liner status d High Potential for Leaking, No Liner, Sandy Soil, Rock Outcrops Present, Etc.
Q No Liner, Soil Appears to Have Low Permeability
Q Meets NRCS Liner Requirements
cation equipment fail to make contact
and/or sprayfield Q Yes Q No Q Unknown with representative 0 Yes 0 No
unavailable
comments * All three lagoons look to be in pretty good shape.
* No solids present and liquid looks clear.
* All the lagoons are joined by a pipe.
#1
J

Facilir_•' :Nnnihor• ]late 4)r IItspcciion J
Time of inspection j�j -J 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Permitted p Certified 0 Conditionally Certified p Registered ■ Not Operational �Daattae Latest operated: IcQ/9--
Farm N ime. Alp hinTarjrts.................................................................... Grunt}: Lenoir WARD
........................
Owner Name: J.0. ........................................ Roxv.ar.d ...................................................... Phone No: 252.-.aft:42.Q4...................... ---................
...... ........
Facility Coiiblc•t: Rax..Colli.er......................................................Title:........................ ............ Phone No: 75Z.-56B-4z0.4, J=L..3:1....
Mailing Address: .l..i.7.3..Dayis.?a9ili.M............................................................................ Dee,p.RiiaNG.......................................... .............. Z8 2)5..............
Orlsite Representative: Flax.Collier ...................................................................... Irite�rator:J..C.Hoiaard.Farms..................... ......... ---............
Cvrtified 0per.ilur: Darin.y.R ........ ....................... Grant ... ---........................................... Operator Certification 1Number:1767C.............. ...............
Location of Fnrm:
�I
\I
Latitricic* I 11 �� Longitude ©•� ®�°
Desr n Current— -= - — estgn I�: urrent- esign'�.:; Current-.
Sine Capacity``Pobulation Poultry• Capacity'. Pbjn lation .;Cattle:?=--,Ca'aeity—Population-
Wean to ee er
® Feeder to F cols
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ aver �. ❑ Dairy
[3on- Non -Layer
:, ❑ on- atry
Other ...
Total Design Capacity, 1,800
Total SSLW 243,000
Number of Lagoons`t=_. ❑ u s u r ace ratns resent ❑ agnnn rea p pray ie rea
�."
.� •::
Hold in Ponds 1 Solid Taps _;"w":M ❑ o rqur aste anaQement ystem r "
Dlsc ian,�es & Srre.lIII IIII pacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Dischai ,e originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a- If dischar�_e is observed. was the convcvancc Inan-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ® 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) ❑ 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 C(PIIection & T:-catmcnt
4. Is storage Capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 3 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure C
!CICnlIr CI•. ..........1��]............... ... S.ec..... ..... ..... .Sec:.............. ...
Freeboard [ilicl es3: .............. ...6i.Q..
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes ®Na
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on buck

act itr' N um er_ �a-11
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ® Yes p No
(If arty of questions 4-6 was answered ves, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other titan waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
p Yes
p No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markimgs7
p Yes
[]No
Waste Alic-,ilia l
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑Yes
p No
11,
Is there evidence of over application? G7 Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑Yes
p No
12.
Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
p No
14.
a} Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[]Yes
[]No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
[]Yes
[]No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
[]No
15.
Does the receivin, crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16.
is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Requircii
Record'. (C 1_)Eicuinc•nts
I7.
Pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
p Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
p No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
❑ No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
p No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emer-ency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
El No
23.
Did R ev ie\v er/I nspect or fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
p No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
p No
C1' a atian5_or.:def:cicncres. ere.nnted .during-tkis visit_ :1'rsu.i�ijl recei� � no, further.:.:
-.�Ctjt't•cs�(rndeFlCc:�k}n>Sri(t]1=3'I51t. .�.-.�.-.•.-.•.-.�.�.-.�.� -.�.-.�:-:-:-.... .,.:.:. .:.:.:.:. .:.
Continents (refer to question #)::Explain:any;'-YES answe
- -Qom.,.,•,_:.. .. __.. _ � ..
Use'dra winds of facilitl' tWhetter explain sittiafions :{ttse::
..._ ...- ... r _ ,
-arm has been inoperable since Dec. 1997 It
4o plan to reopen
'Ian to close out lagoons
301dings. are partly torn down
recommendations or
es as:necessary]=
IV
P Lyn B. Hardison Entered b Ann :T �da11 - - -P--- TY
v ns cctor ame =
Revic'r'erllnspcctnrSibnaliire: — Date: _��+

Facility Number Date of Insilection
Time of I nspecIimi ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 10 Not Operationa Date Last Operated: 411198
Farm Name. Alphin.F.arms................................................................................................. County. Lenoir WAR❑
Owner Name:IC........................................... Ho►vax.1........ ....................... ..... Phone No: 2;52-56.8-.4I44.. _.._....__.....
Facility Contact: Ray..Collier_.... ................. ............................Title: ............... ............................. _............... .. Phone fro: ..... _... .......... _... _...... ......... ........
Mailing Address: J3.7AJ)axisA1ill.lf,;d............................................................................. 1Jicep.Ru,n.NC.............................. .......................... 18525...............
Onsite Representative.- Ray.C,all.ier....... ........ ................... ........ ....... _....... ....................... Integrator:J.C.Ha.►s:axd..F.axnos..............................................
CertifiedOperator:Danuty:.R............................... Grant................................................. ❑peratorCertiticaIion Number:1.7.6.7.6.............................
Location of Farm:
�I
Latitude ©• ©° © Longitude ©• ®° ®••
_ .Design Current
Swine Capacity `Population . Poultry =
❑ Weanto Feeder
® Feeder to F tuts
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to ee er
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Ell
esign. Current Design.current-, -
.Capacity Population Cattle Capacity. Population.
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity I,
Tota1'S$LW 243,0
°Number of La cans hHolding:Ponds p u sur ace rams resent p Lagoon Area p pray tie yea
g .-. _ _
_-_T ❑ -
,, _ _ o Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? []Yes ❑ No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discliar,—,c is observed, was the conveyance man-made:' []Yes ❑ No
b. Udischarge is observed, did it reach Surfacc Water? Of yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVinln?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (lf yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ❑ No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonsfholding ponds) require ❑ Yes p No
maintenance/improvement?
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? p Yes p No
7/25/97

aci ity' �'ym��r: 54_ll 1)11te of 111SIjecIinrt
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
p No
Structures Lai=oons.H.oldin Ponds. Flush fits, cle.
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes
p No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
6
I dent i fi er:............... 9:1............... ...............k2.................... J13............ ....
Freeboard (ft): 2.5 2 3
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
p No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
p No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p 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?
13 Yes
p No
Waste Application
14.
is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
p No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type...............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
Yes
p No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
p No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
13 Yes
p No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
p No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
p No
21.
Did Rev iewerllnspector fail to discuss rev iewlinspecIion with on -site representative?
p Yes
p No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
p No
For
Certified or Permitted Facilities Qniy
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
p No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
p No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
❑ No
R ..No -vicF tlons.or erencies:were.note t!F n t Is visit:. ❑a Wl .receive no' urt er
:'Qoir>r606n0rie�aWO ttiis-*Wt::•: .:•::•:•:•:•:•:•:•.-:•: ...-:•::-:•:.:.::.:.:.:.:•:•.
................................................
Comments (refer to;question #): Explain:any-NES'answers,andlor.'any_recommendations. or. any, comments.= -
Use dra►vings irf fakili&!to better explainatton sifus fuse idditi6nal pages as`necessa-rv):=w=
Facility is no longer in operation. Facility was depopulated as of 411198. This visit serves as confirmation that facility is no longer AL
in operation.
C. Howard harms intends to permanently close out lagoons. Contact a technical specialist or the Lenoir Soil & Water District .
Ffice for assistance in developing a proper closure plan. Need to notify DWQ of depopulation and planned closure.
)ntact: Sonya Avant, NCDWQ - Compliance Group P.O. Box 29535 Raleigh, NC 27626-0535 [phone].
T1
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott:Jones
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspectimi = 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not 0perationa Date Last Operated:
Farm !Name: AlphinTar_ms................................................................................................. Count►•: Lenoir WARD
OwnerName.IC........................................... No►aair l...................................................... Phone No: 9.19.:56.8.4204.......... ................. .................... ...........
FacilityContact: ..... .............. ........ .................................................... Tille:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Mailing Address:.1.d7.�.Daxi&Abl1.Rd............................................................................. Mep.Rlzn.NC.......................................... ........... ... Z8525 ..............
Onsite Representative. Ray-Callier................ ........... .. .. ... In leg rator:XC.Roll'.ax:d.E.arx....... .......................................
Certified Operat.or:DaW...&.............................. Grant................................................ Operator Certification Nuinber:l7.fi7.G.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0©` ©" Longitude ©■ ®� ®`-
n Currentw. - Design, eslg
Swine: Capacity Population. Poultry_ Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® ceder to P ints
❑ Farrow to can
❑ Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
❑ Boars
Layer
p
Non -Layer
_Number of Lagoons 1.Holding Ponds: ❑ u sur ace rains Present
p agoon rea ❑ pray ie Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management SystAV
em
Ceneral
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes p No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes []No
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes []No
b. If -discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ) © Yes p Na
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system:' (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes p Na
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes p No
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 lagoonsiholding ponds) require ❑ Yes p No
maintenance/improvement?
b. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes p No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes []No
7/25/97

Facility I rr.. 54_11 I)atc 01, Inspection
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
p No
Structures (Lagoons,iioldin-_ Ponds, Flush Pits, c(c.]
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: ............
Freeboard (ft):
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
p No
1 I . Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
p No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p 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
❑ No
Waste Anplication
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
p No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ........................................... ............. .......... ..................................... '.............. ............................................... ............................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
0 Yes
p No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
❑ No
I &
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
p No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
p No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
p No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
p No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
p No
1. ..o:vio A tions.or �crencies:were.nnte uringt is visit.. ❑u,yv1 receive nu furthert:eree�0000qcf� ONO
Comments:{refer..to'question };'. xp ain°any= apswers_an or any, recommen aftons nr;any=ote er:ca�ttments ":-....
__ -
Use larawm s of Ncilit to better ex fain situations. {use additional pages;as necessary}: x
_-_
g y -p
w.
_ -
Hte farm has no animal on site and -a closure plan is being developed with the NRCS.
z
Reviewer/Inspector Name Carl Dunn -
s. -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

t
i V.
n Soil an 'Water Conservation Other Agency
�0 Division at I d � 0
Division of Water Quality
® Q
a
� Y
... nri., vim... .... �...
® Routittc Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number
© Registered © Certified 0 Applied for Permit [] Permitted
Farm Name: t yltlin r nr
Owner Name :'.`+.��.......................................
Facility Contact: ............................................ . Title:
MailingAddress:.......---...D............................................ ..................
Onsite Representative = ........... n' roilier..................................... ..
Certified Operator: .........................? r.
Location of Farm:
Date of Inspection o-7• 7
Time of Inspection R' 4 24 hr. (hh:mm)
ID Not Operational I Date Last Operated: „
COtiilt►':......... "....................... ....... ..........,
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:—,.... ......C.....41 � � ........................ ...............
Operator Certification Number,
Latitude •10" Longitude ` 0C 46
-- - - ------------- -------------- ---------- - ...... - - - - ------------------------- ----------
Lles� Current:''° .' a: Dcsi Current : Deso,
i ".
C.
'Svt�i e Ca a. tY;:.Pp..-... _ ......-. Capacy Popelaton =aan PaiItrY' Ce
„Number of I agoans l Hatding.Pon& : 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area D Spray Field Area ;
_
o Liquid Waste: nagemen ys em • < w -
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ElLagoon ❑ Spray Field ElOther
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 flop' in aal/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 lagoonslholding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
T Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
El Yes
10No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
CA No
Continued
on back

Facility Number: $
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes M No
Structures (Lagocizis,I_inldin Pot;_dsLxlrislt Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 10 No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
ldcntifier:
Freeboard(!'t):............ ........�............... ... ....... �:.�.....................�:..y�......................................................................................................................-•---....
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes M No
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? °RYes ❑ 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 W No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes 19 No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type w............................................................................................................................................................................................
.................112 .
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?
O- No violations,or deficiencies. were noted -during' this.visit.- You.will receive.no f&ther
Orresp6ndence a6"out this visit:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes t,No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes 91No
❑ Yes ®,No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
ommet3aks (re. er:to:qu€estion:#3: �,, la" anyxYES answers andlor, any rectiizi�tuen ilatinfn s.:or: Tither comments:. � a i'
» ......
Use tlrawi s:of factht to:hetter Tex lam'situstiaus: use.additions! ° a es:as necessa ::`
)'. e
....,,.m y' P pY . g.
l2. FAr S�a •s F 5 dQf5,-f.4� i
7125l97
:.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
.. ..:•
-.fen..:: i^'°F
ReviewerlInspectorSignature:
Date:

} Site Requires Immediate Attention• _
Facility No. _4Z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: A z 1 , 1995
Time: b� A 0
Farm Name/Owner:_—, L C -
Marling Address: 1 T_T_�,.k 93J . _ L Q-V, -
County: l_er obd _
Integrator, el - C. i4
Phone: SC_4� a (D q
On Site Representative:— Jt-' pq �aoad Phone:
Physical Address/Location: Nc if . l�}�-' t �A4QQ-)_ t_�)
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: _4-�2)� Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3S - I ( 4 5 " Longitude: -1-1 ,q4 ' C� " Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon havcjsufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) DYesr No Actual Freeboard: }3 "'Ft. Inc s
Was any seepage observed from the la oon(s}?es or l`�o Was any erosion observed?0�rNo
PY
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No is the cover crop adequate? es or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings. Ye or No
100 Feet from Wells? gor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No.�
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes ❑ No
Is animal waste discharged inI❑ waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, aI other
similar man-made devices? Yes No If Yes, Please Explain. '
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (vg�umes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes o o
Additional Comments:
lJ+v k' A �S r3LS� l3 0 ❑
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

n
vi
0
t