400140_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS.
INSPECTION'S
INSPECTIONS

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Sail and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400140 Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County: Greene
Data of Visit: 09/14/2016 Entry Time: 01:46 pm Exit Time: 2:50 pm
Farm Name: S & K Farms Inc
Owner: Steven F Dail
Region:
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Washington
[e-mail]
252-747-8315
Mailing Address: 201 Hunter Trace Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address: 120 Fred Harrison Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35" 23' 05" Longitude: 77' 40' 29"
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OiC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Marlene Salyer
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-11-16 = 1.09
3-4-16 = 1.53
6-23-15 = 1.11
1-12-15 = 1.57
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Phone:
Date:
Reviewed: rainfall/freeboard; calibration due 2016: 2015 sludge survey at 42%, due in 2016 and aggitation is being used to
reduce the sludge level
Fb range: 19" on 5121116 to 42" in July 2016
page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/14/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
swine
FWno - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,672
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 01 /31195 T- 19,00 29.00
page: 2

r Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/14/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le] large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?.
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drifl?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

I Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/14/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No No Ne
Crop Type 1 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents ,
Yes
No Nd No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
[]
❑
R
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

i`
r•
Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail - Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/14/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
26. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
NoD
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fall to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fall to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Otherlssues
You
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
400140 Facility Status:
Active Permlt: AWS400140
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0911612015 Entry Time: 01:00 pm
Exit Time: 1:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
S & K Farms Inc
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner:
Steven F Dail
Phone:
252-747-8315
Mailing Address:
201 Hunter Trace
Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address:
120 Fred Harrison Rd
Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -grown LLC
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Latitude; 35° 23' 05"
Longitude: 77° 40' 29"
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Rep rosentative(a): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis:
6-23-15= 1.11
1-12-15= 1.57
Soil Tested: 2015
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Have a new composting facility.
Reviewed: rainfalllfreeboard; New COC; sludge survey With POA until 2016 ® 60%, callbration12014.
Looks good
page: 1

I
Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/16/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
$wine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,672
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Data Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon i 01/31/95 19.00 :44:Eol
page: 2

ti
Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/16/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & .Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑M
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑M
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
■ ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yea
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le) large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Y9s No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number:
400140
Inspection Date: 09/16/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes Nc NA No
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/16/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
MCI
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
MOD
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑0
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fall to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
M ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
■ ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
❑
❑
page: 5

4�
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
400140 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS400140
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
09/1912014 Entry Time: 11:50 am
Exit Time: 12:40 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
S & K Farms Inc
Owner EmaIt-
[e-mail]
Owner:
Steven F Dail
Phone:
252-747-8315
Mailing Address:
201 Hunter Trace
Snow Hill NC 28580
Physical Address:
120 Fred Harrison Rd
Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status:
0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35° 23' 05" Longitude:
77° 40' 29"
NCSR 1117 on right
side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col. Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Steven & Kristie Dail Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: April 2012
9-5-14 = .93
1-16-14 = 1.73
8-14-13 = .89
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: New COC & Permit; rainfall & freeboard; soil test. Sludge survey & calibration is due by Dec. 31 st.
page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/19/14 Inppectioh Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3.672
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 01/31/95 19.04
page: 2

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/19/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No No Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yea No No No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
MEI
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na_No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
�]
page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number:
400140
Inspection Date: 09/19/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No No
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Anima( Waste
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No No -No
19. Did the facility fall to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility : Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Crop yields?
120 Minute inspections?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Surrey
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance,
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No Na No
El
11
❑■❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
Yes No Na No
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
i
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
page: 5

ID Division of Water Quality
ri Facility Number - ® 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit; ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: JO Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: pir,� _ Region:
Farm Name: /< - :Z���,r�, Owner Email:
Owner Name:Phone:
/j
Mailing Address: �Q� C��-�(�/(�� /V-c.�(
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ej,4;&, , OztAl Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
'jl y - �S"5 d s� ti aG
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
L
ayer
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Pouets
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Ycs VNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes 2;0
❑ Yes 7NO
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: —
*aste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes LIB No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in),�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes Q7/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmen I threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside ofApprovedArea
12. Crop Type(s): G = ifloyll SsQ = //lQ/2Y_ Y= TSB
13, Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps [:]Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes a, o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [] Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit,0Number: 411 - 140 1 1 Date of Inspection: 5"- .3,1 - i
2`4. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes d o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. jj'w r3O/a , !o,%p
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? [:]Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes 6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [�f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes WdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 94T _446
Date: ;L-, 5( — / 3
21412011

Division of Water Quality
I `Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation `l
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:1 County: Region:
� U if%
Farm Name: owner mail✓� C Ad x ri 5f i c-,
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: S- f r� 2 5 Flo — / 7;G
Facility Contact: d� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
M
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current') �1 U Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er I I Ed
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ YesV�,
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili � Number: 4id - Date of Inspection: — —
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes � N ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Ed No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
Vj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmen l threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop TYPe(s)• G = /j9 `-{�/ /9 r c,— 961104 �_�.LD_d/ate /� ��9 . ;5
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number -:_ Date of Ins ection:
14. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes F�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. a0/1 i 1&20
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑
fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
ElYes7No
o
❑ NA
[3 NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional owes as necessarv).
7-27-11 ; , 7-3
Reviewer/Inspector Name: /(s���y ``�� /,� Cf
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: %YFr_ •_5r �
Date: 4 /s% la'
21412011

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/28/2011 Entry Time: 10:00 AM Exit Time: 10:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Three Little Swines. LLC Owner Email:
Owner: ,Steven F Dail Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 120 Ered Harrison Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: _
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Latitude:35°23'05" Longitude:77°40'29" _.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Steven & Kristie Dail Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: Soil was tested in May 2011, no soil test in 2010
4-6-11 = 1.4 Remember to get a soil test every year that you irrigate.
12-6-10 = .44
7-13-10 = 1.4
Date:
Cotton was grown, not in WUP, however it was in an old plan (2006) and Eve H. was consulted/ advised to use PAN of 78 lb. - Eve is
in the process of inclulding cotton into new plan.
IRR records are complete and balanced out
SS due 2011 and calib. due 2012
Page: 1

k
Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection Date: 07/2812011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number:400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 1,600
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Desianod Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon 1 01/31/95 19.00 60.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number. 400140
Inspection Date: 07/28/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ MOO
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5, Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner- Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection Date: 07/2812011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat,
Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain
Overseed
Crop Type 4
Cotton
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Q ■ ❑
Q
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ Cl
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Ell
Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 07/28/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yea No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

=I
Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number : 400140
Inspection Date: 0712812011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yea
No NA
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA
NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report
❑
■ ❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑
■ ❑
❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e„ discharge,
❑
■ ❑
❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
10
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 _ Facility Status: Active __ _ Permit: AWS400140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Data of Visit: 09/24/2010 Entry Time: 09:15 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Three Little Swines, LLC
Owner:
Incident #:
Owner Email: K.dailO)vahoo.com
Mailing Address; 201 Hunter Trace 50ow Hill NQ 2e580
W=T-W4f41rZ,t91-1<IN�
Physical Address: 120 Fred Harrison Rd _... ,.. ow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC _.
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail
Secondary OIC(s):
Latitude: &23Q5" Longitude: 77°40'29"
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 16512
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F pail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09124/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste Ananlysis: Soil Test:
7/13/10 = 1.4 11/2009
4/06/10 = 1.5
1/20/10 = 1.1
"Calibration dtie 2010**
Freeboard range: 2/14/10 = 19" - 7/4/10 = 50"
C = 104/119, W = 96/104, SB=100/124, BH = 269, SG = 25/50
Looks Great!
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/24/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine -Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,500
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 01 /31195 19.00 48.0E
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/24/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage $ Treatment
Yes No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
$. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
Cl ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
ONOO
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection pate. 09/24/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
Cl
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crap Type 2
Coastal
Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑ Cl
Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/24/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
Cl ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
21 If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑ ❑
❑ ■
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ Cl
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
.26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection Date: 09/24/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

N Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 09/01/2009 Entry Time:09A5 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Three Little Swines. LLC
Owner: Steven F Dail
Incident #:
Owner Email: K.dailna vahoo.com
' • • � �fZti.`lRiita'i - ��TP�7:1113:CeY��: �
Phone:
Physical Address: 120 Fred Harrison Rd Snow Hill NC 28580 _
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown. LLC
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Latitude:35°23'05" Longitude: 7Z°40'29"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 16512
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
4-13-09 .84
B-1 B-09 .86
1-22-09 1.5
soil tested 2009
looks Good.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection Date: 09/01/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 40014D
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 2,450
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deelaned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon 1 01/31/95 19.00 28.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/01/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■ ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■ ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other
than from a ❑ ■ ❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
00100
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
ONOO
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
11000
improvement?
Waste A lips cation Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
ONOO
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? Cl
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Inspection Date: 09/01/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yea No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ ❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/01/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑ ■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑ ■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ IN ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Steven F Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 09/01/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other issues Yea No NA NE
31. Did the facility tail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

u
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 4001AQ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qgmoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Ro0ne County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/27/2008 Entry Time:Q90356M Exit Time:
Faun Name:
Owner: Billy Dail
Incident #:
Owner Email: dailfamilvfarms0_aol.c
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 201 Hunters Trace Snow Hill NC 285801871
Physical Address: 120 Fred Harrison Rd _. Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator: Murohv Family Farms
Latitude: 35°23'05" Longitude: 77°40'29°
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kristie Dail Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Billy Dail Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s);
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
one pulled mid August
2-6-08 = 1.7
10-18-07 = 1,1
Please watch closely the dates for pulling samples.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail
Inspection Date: 08127I2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,612
Total Design Capacity; 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 01/31/95 19.00 46.00
Page: 2

0
Permit: AWS400140 Owner - FaclIIty: Billy Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 08/27/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason forVislt: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ONOO
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
a. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
B. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? Cl
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail
Inspection Date: 08127/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400140
Reason forVislt: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Other
Crop Type 4
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
ONDO
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Penult: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 08/27/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑ ■ ❑
❑
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Other issues
Yes No NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 08/2712008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

® Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: a v Arrival Time: �,`� Departure Time: County: z& Region: klwflL
Farm Name: 15 �' I` ��l� _r 1�u.[J• Owner Email:
Owner Name• __�5]�_r lY p 1 ___ �--� Phone:
Mailing Address: _ _ r 1491
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: -,,,-
Back-up Operator: _
Location of Farm:
Title:
�o
Latitude:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
=" Longitude: = ° =, =
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder a
CR Feeder to Finish ,3
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA LI N!✓
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ N
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA �rNE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -- Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA O NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? []Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
L <E
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
�,/
ld NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D�W,QQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
El No ElE NA
NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
L/1 NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
EJ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
2reNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
16-11-07
$ -// f! V I
•
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name Afa toy e- `y e/- Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
6/ 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: d — Date of Inspection®
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
❑ Yes 2(No [INA ❑ NE
ClYes 2rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
UNE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
DINE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
❑ No
El NA
,EINE
L�J NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
dNE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
eNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
2NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
YNE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E!(NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
dNE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
/�
V ew A) �� �Dd
a
2� 0. e
A
310
1,7
-aS"- a 7
12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 __. Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/11/2007 Entry Time:10:00 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Dail Farm #2
Owner: Billy Dail
Incident #:
Owner Email: dailfami yfarms ol.c
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 201 Hunters Trace Snow Hill NC 285801671
Physical Address: 120 Fred Hilydson Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117 on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Latitude:35°23'05" Longitude:
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues Technical Assistance
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On-Slte Representative(s): Name Title Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
' Waste Analysis:
5-25-07= 2.3
8-28-06=1.1
2-26-07=1.7
# Soil Test- 2007
Looks Goodl
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Billy Dail
Inspection Date: 10/11/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 4,923
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
1
OV31/95
19.00
30.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail Faciiity Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 10/11/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400140 Owner - Facility: Billy Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 1011112007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 10/11/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Cl
❑ ❑ Cl
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
❑ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

i
Permit: AWS400140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 1011112007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? 0 ❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 00.00
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400140 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA240140 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/20/2006 Entry Tlme:Q8030 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Dail FgLM #2 Owner Email:
Owner: Billy Dail
Mailing Address: 201 Hunters Trace I Snow Hill NC 285801871
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant I Integrator:
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1117; on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 268.
Latitude:35°23'05" ' Longitude: 77°40'29"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steven F Dail Operator Certification Number: 16512
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative kristy Dail Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name kristy Dail Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil test 2005
Waste analyses:
1-31-06 = 1.4
8-22-05 = 1.5
4-26-05 = 1.3
1-24-05 = 1.2
IRR complete for 2005, no irrigation events have taken place in 2006 as of today.
Looks Great!
Page: 1

M
0
Permit: NCA240140 Owner - Facility: Billy Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 04/20/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason far Visit; Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,600
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720,
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 01/31/95 19.00 25.00
Page; 2

M
Permit: NCA240140 Owner -Facility: Billy Dail Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 04/20/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Stora e $ Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. is storage capacity less than adequate?
Cl
❑
❑
Cl
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? '
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
❑
❑
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management 00130
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
11000
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
❑
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste App ipation
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
Cl
Page: 3

�,
Permit: NCA240140 Owner - Facility: Billy [Jail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 04/20/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205? -
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Fescue
(Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain
Overseed
Crop Type 4
Cotton
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑ `
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
0
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA240140 Owner - Facility: Billy Dail
Facility Number: 400140
Inspection Date: 04/20/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
Q
Q
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
Q
Weekly Freeboard?
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
Q
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
Q
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
Q
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fall to properly dispose of dead "animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA240140 Owner - Facility: Billy Dail
Inspection Date: 04/20/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
a
Facility Number: 400140
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
00011
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
00,00
Page: 6

r j']6�
vlloO4f,yDadt<
/� W
Other Agency
F• ..rr f
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: f� Time:
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...............
FarmName: .....f......................................................... County: 1►„ ,lN`......................................................,
OwnerName: ....ael.0...........................................Phone No:.. 1..�ti 1.................................................
11WiGngAddress: .......r•''�4................................................ 4nRk.7X.-.......................1.
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:....................................................................... Operator Certification Number:.A-4��.............
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 4 46 Longitude • 4 «
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ( io
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b, If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of'the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
[]No
Flo
❑ Yes
F�dKo
❑ Yes
No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):_
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: 2/t? Date of Inspection1 `
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.) /
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes WNo
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes To
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes EKO
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes Vo
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 2<0
11, Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Rio
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
E2o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 0-Tro
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Zwo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ZW°
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes io
Air Quality representative immediately.
Use drWwtngs�of,facxLty to better explain situations. (use additional pages asinecessary) �r, `0'Field Copy ❑Final Notes
.� r 3 1..- aj� rr & � j o —rv€ J 3 t a� ag d a s:.:'3i , s ,., �.�.... ... _ ;�� .. .i.. k F._ _ f w�..,s.. _ I- .. �s�...._. ^rf .. -1�.� .: � 7 t .d.��, e._.F_lr. ilrr;4 r �^r � f �N,°-•,,�i �.., nF .,: �, e�i�.�t'`:
0/io Z) lodoat 9 '.'� ��
ev
'Y161-4-3 Y
Reviewedlnspector Name 1
ReviewerAnspector Signature:
Date:
a.V ...-M.P.

Fac' ity Number: Q — 0 Date of inspection 1-� �7-0�
Required Records & Documents
21, Fail have Certificate Coverage & Permit Permit
Yes
Rio
to of General or other readily available?
❑
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑410
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
L1d�o
Waste A pp � ❑Freeboard ❑Waste Analysis [I Soil Sampling
Application ❑
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
W4410
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
MI
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
mq o
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
2<00
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
Erfe-s
❑ No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
<o
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
R<p
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
2<0
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EKO
�70'
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ Stocking Farm ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation' Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 40 -
140
Date: 10/23/03
Time: 1 1030
Time On Farm: 90 WARO
Farm Name Dail Farm #2
County Greene
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 336 Pridgen Road Snow Hill NC
Onsite
Representative Billy Dail/Christy Dail/Steven Dail Integrator Imurphy Brown
Type Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last.Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
INSwine ❑ Poultry []Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
0 Routine
O Response to DWQIDENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaintllocal referral
O Requested by prod ucerlintegrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
0 Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Ca aclt Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
0 Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to. Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
3672
3672
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
28580
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes 0 no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, []yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
6• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes IN no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 28
CROP TYPES ICotton /Coastal inter Annuals 1com Soybeans Wheat Fescue -graze Ismail grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES AuB St
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 - 140 Date:
10/23/03
PARAMETER
O No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list In comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
34-'Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Reculatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
El
El
❑ Other...
system
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
purchased irrigation reel
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4'
64. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
56. Waste operator education (NPDES)
5'
56.Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 _ 140 7 Date: 10/23/03
(COMMENTS:
5. Discussed NPDES and transferring information to new forms.
foil test dated 9/10/03 Coastal bermuda pasture should have been listed as Fescue crop on soil test. Cu Zn and ph within
jidelines.
Haste analysis dated 9/15103 nitrogen is 0.93
5/29/03 nitrogen is 2.4
1110/03 nitrogen is 1.4
8/22/02 nitrogen is 1.6
Jeed to verify crop window for cotton list in waste plan. Contact tech spec.
Haste plan is up dated annually to row crop rotation. be sure to include date on most recent waste plan.
RR2 records were made available for review.
.agoon level is recorded weekly however, on 512103 lagoon recorded at 26" and on 5/7/03 lagoon recorded at 36" difference
10" without any irrigation events recorded. Be sure to record all irrigation events.
Aake records available for 5 years.
iecure reel calibration and lagoon sludge survey before March 2004
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered:
10/28/03 Entered By: 1wartin McLawhorn
03/10/03

'r
i I..fa
WATF9
Q
� -4
� `C
To: Producer
From: Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2002
Michael F. Easley
Governor
WE= G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe. Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility
by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it with all other
documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the
farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, 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; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff:
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the
General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum, maximum waste
level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24 hour storm
event plus an additional foot of structiaal freeboard.
cp An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least
within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
T The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenancx, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation records.
These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three years.
(p Land application rates sball be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant Available
Nitrogen (PAN)rate for the receiving crow orresult in runoff during any given a licatiom
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet can be
another vegetated charnel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
It is suggested, not a repnirernent, to keep crop yield information for futuue use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact meat 252-946-6481, eat.
321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: aRO
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mali Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

��s t
- �:
%
+
"t
• n i
y
rig ,
.f s
e Y
A ..
� m ..
LI•V tlrl` _ .._.,g :���`.
..�:'.97,:�1„
.. :. � �. Y' l.� x _.e 2�'f
.i
ri
Type�of Visit, g Compliance Inspectionp Operation Review': p Lagoon Evaluation ,•
`1^7.r.
s
^^il —s - r,- '� '�
Routine Com faint Fallow u Eme en i4oii i iion Other DenieLArxcess
Reason for Vislt�' ®. . O p �O p O r9.- cY O p
•
t1r. 1 � ♦ _ ..f4b j x-Y. }- jw �� i- - _
w • r • LL .:. �
. ijy,.:..:. +•>
- -
Facility Number '
.� w.
Date"of Visit:
,4
1/9/2002.'
Time:
1:45 pm
-
.'
p o perationa „ p Below Threshold
Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified
►
p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Dail Farm #2
County: Gr.................... ...:.:.................... . !AZ4.......
Y Owner Name: Billy Dail
Phone No: 252-747-3956
Mailing Address: 33b�.Pxidgeia.Rnad..`................ .................................:.........................
SuaK.HilI..NC.............. ....................................... 2858.0 .....
- '
FacilityContact:..:............................................................................Title:
............................................................. Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative: Sheen!Billy.Dail..................................................................... Integrator: Murpjhy..F8.mi1y.Farms.................. ......................
d
•. ...... Dail,
-. Certified Operator: SSaven.E ........................
..•.........................._.... O .1
Operator Certification Number: .65]2......4...................
z Location of Farm:
on right side of r oad after turning off of wy. 25M. A
R Swine p Poultry p Cattle p horse Latitude ©• ©' ®" Longitude ©• ®� ®u
jWrlle� a:
r
p Wean to Feeder .
® Feeder to Finish
[3 Farrow to Wean
13 Varrow to Feeder
t3 Farrow to Finis
13 Gilts
p Boars.
Holding Ponds) Sc
Design Current " ",'" r Design ;Current"$ ,
s�Poultry
' . CapacityPopulatron,` Cattle^Capacity
_Popula`t�on
p Layer
I p�Da�jryp
on-
ayer „ p
s
Total Design Capacity.
3,672
Tota1SSLW
495,720 ,
Subsurface
rains Present[3 Lagoon Xres p spray Me rea
13o rqur
Waste Management sysfem
S'
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated ht: 0 Lagoon 13 Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 13 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) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [3 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches):...............45................ ................. ................... ......................... .......... ............ ........................ ....... ....... ...................... .......... I ................. I.......

�JS
K. •v` —ry�.� j F-'i1`
�J]' 1t.`�rT'
1' Z { `rr 'L F "" •! S•.- C'Y L �'nli L�3l.1 p ��i 7Ji S(J� 4�. I 4 'F !. 'Fi,
S" 4
'W• a. - r4 i. -
_....�Ya.,ri.fib
3 aci i um er 40=140fy"s
J r > r 1•
�� �e.r1 rv.::.
a Date of InspectionS� 3�. ` ^
•✓ J
.y ?'� - �.. Aiw�StV�•:w•!W-i':r L.y`n$:Y.£'Ae JS
,A
_
A 1aY }f -Y�!'• f. l- ,,....i ; [ 1•
-Are there any the - -of the observed? (ie/ trees; erosion,' "
ere im�rnediate,�threats"'i mtegnt of any � severe
b
CjYes ®No
7 w , �..: �•
..� �•-� a- k �� F :Y- - � �- :. �� a - ,. � �
-�
6 Are there structures on'site wh�ch`are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure pl 7 r. ' ' a 7 y ,.
p Yes ®No
<< ,.•�F (I[ny of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
k'
€ . • immediate public health or environmental threat; notify DWQ) _'
Prr` !r x,m• i L-:�. .i:. 'C. ei, - i.. ..M P-•-. :.e...
ra.
y 7.' Do any of the structures needrmainteriance/iritprovement? - vim- -
p Yes ' ® No
; A ;•-.
4• . . - .. . -
'Does
-
' , • 8. any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes ® No
.; .,..., I ;. :. .
9:. Do any stu'ctures lack adequate; gauged'inarkers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
t elevation'niarkings7 •-,
p Yes ® No
Waste Application'
{ 10. Are there any buffers, that need maintenance/improvement? -
p Yes ® No
11 Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN' p Hydraulic Overload -
p Yes ®No
l2, Crop type Corn, Wheat,•Soybeans' Cotton' : ' Fescue
Do the receiving crops differ. with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? '
p Yes ® No
_13. 14
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes p No
�- c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents .
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other 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.)
p Yes
® 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
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. pail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
f (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
I Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[3 Yes
®No
p o violations oraficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Comments refer to. uest�on, atn an answers an or an reco men at�onssor,an of er eommen s
� �i .�• p �"
Use d,irawtri" s of factlt to'be Ater a la�q srtua#ion y) ' otes
Field Co Final N
� P �l; . _ � p Py t7
_
Soil Test/Analysis - 12 10 01 - lime tickets on file.
Waste Analysis 12/7/01 - 1.9 lbs/1000 gals; 8/14/01 - 1.3 ]bs/l000 gals
Waste Utilization Plan is amended each year to specific crops for ]eased land.
Freeboard levels recorded weekly.
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance.
Reviewer/Inspector Name an 'line Bi`CullontiE z a' entered liy AnnTyndall t t �g ; ' `,V ,
-i
4
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur : Date: I- 1A - b Z

05103101
-Mi
Facility !4umWer. 4q 140­- Date of. Iiispectioa
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
13 Yes
13 No
liquid lev el of lagoon . or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
[3 Yes
a No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
E3 Yes
g No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
13 Yes
g No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
[3 Yes
®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
C1 Yes
M No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
[3 Yes
E3 No
W
u.
PF7
N
�4
15
04-"�
M Aeg Pg�J�
� XX4
"Ar
t, �'• ''�+'3� � �^•'>1' tir 3x ' - & �Y�...,x ,r .'1ri i.Y -� , � T ` . � F HC � a �rr's"f� 'rii 3,^f-3,'x� �_xr:: �. ��
"Z4
-M ---; MAt
5
N
TV "T, '"-V 5-4M
"Y y• Nx 6
-:J -4
-E
-Me Vw - -0i
®r's
IN
5
MIAMItli. Z;
KZ
�Vw' W;V-
I.M "M47"i R
IL
0), -MC
M 9
Pill t� 3.
t
gv
V
ei
...... ......
4
S

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 140 note, of Visit: $l10/20D1 Time: 1030
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 1)�w11. #ix A .................... Coant)':..MFJQR......... ...................................... WARO.......
............................................................................
OwnerName: Billy ............................ . Duil............................................................... Phone No: 252.:14.7.:1QSfi...........................................................
MailingAddress: 336..1.'rMgwA9.ad............................................................................... Snow.M.AC ....................................................... 285BO .............
Facility Contact:
Title: ................................................................ Phone No: .........
Onsite Representative: ,Seem..Dail..................... ......... . Integrator: Murpity..k:uWly..Fa.l'.m�9......................................
Certified Operator: ,Sleyi..................................... RUA .................................................... Operator Certification Numher: lb5J2.............................
Location of Farm:
SCSR 1.117; on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258. t
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Worse Latitude 35 ° Longitude 1 77 10
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
it. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance rnau-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (Ifyes_ notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmm?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence; of past discharge from any part ol'the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Sinicture 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Ident i fter: ............ ...................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ............... 3.0............... ..........................................................................................................................................................................

O5103101
Facility Number: 40-140
Date of inspection 1 8/10/24101
Continuer)
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvcmc ut?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Graze)
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? N Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available'?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a Fallow -up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes N No
[]Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
aste plan dated May 08, 2001.
�frcit is -61 lbs.
-igation windows for fescue can be changed to year round irrigation. Need to consult with tech. spec for change in waste plan.
�scussed IRR2/waste analysis schedule.
ills #I I and #12 have been separated according to waste plan.
►i] test dated 5121101. Approx. 1000 lbs of lime has been applied per acre in .fall of 2000. Suggest keeping lime receipts. Lime
uirements for 2001 was less than one ton per acre.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerlinspector Signature: Date:

05/03/01 continued
Facility Number: 40-14b Date of Inspection 8/10/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ❑ No
19. Soil test for 2000 not in record book.
*Waste analysis dated 5/15/01 nitrogen is 2.6 lbs/1000 gallons
2/26/01 nitrogen is 1.7 lbs/1000 gallons
*New waste analysis taken on 8/01 A) I . No results at time of inspection.
*Need to mow lagoon inner walls to allow for routine inspection.
13. IRR2 has overseed for matua. This crop is not in waste plan dated 4/26/00 however matua has been deleted from waste plan dated
May 08, 2001.

of wArF,�
`02 0�
=' r
Date: April 16, 2001
To: Producer
From: Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2001
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Qualfty
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included 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 1217, 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;. and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
cp The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for iagoons/starage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour stone event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
(p An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsoil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Ntroaen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any Given application.
cp AD grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
9 It is suggested, not a rpguirement, to keep crop yield information for fidure use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: c 90
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Type of Visit O* Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 140 Date of Visit: 4-t9-2001 Time; 2: iS pm
NNot Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted IM Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified [j Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .•.......•....
FarmName. aia.il.FArm.0.................................................................................................. County:.=mc...........................,................... J3�.P RO......
OwnerName: My ......................................... MU.............................................................. Phone No: 252-7.47.-395.6 ..........................................................
Mailing Address: 3.3ft.Plriidgen.liaW................................................................ ........ &o.. !.Hill.M........................................................ 20589 ..............
Facility Contact: ........Title: .................. Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative: Billy -Dail .................... .... Integrator: Muirphy.Fataaily.Fa ms....................
Certified Operator: Stp.Y.eiti.................................... D.ad..........
Location of Farm:
INCSR 1117; on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258.
Operator Certification Number:1,65..11............................
® Swine El Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 23 ' 05 " Longitude 77 ° F 40 29 46
Destga ;
Swine :.:Cat aci
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3672
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Aren ❑Spray Field A►ea
Holdipig Potads 1 Salt 'Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge origic►aced at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. (lid it reach Water ofthc State? (If yes, noii(ti, DWQ)
c. If discharge .is observed, what is the estunated flog .in gal/mni?
& Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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

UI/ULUl
Facility Number: 40-140
Date of Inspection 1 4-19-2001
Continued
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Struchre t SbFuctare 2 Stricture 3 Siniclure 4 Structure 5 Sinicturc 6
Identifier:.................................................................:...................................................................................................................................I.................
Freeboard(inches): ...............3.8...............................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pouding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed Matua
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.' Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
H No
17. Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Is there a water supply well withiu 250 feet of the sprayfield botmdan_", ❑ Unknown
❑ Yeti
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records_& Doctimen_t_s
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
H No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
H No
21. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
22. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
23. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
H No
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
H No
25. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
H No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
H No
Odor Issues
29. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No

.01/01/01
Continued
�! Facility Number: 40--140 1 Date of Inspection 4-19-2001
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
Printed on: 4/24/2001
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
7
Reviewerllnspector Name Da' �k
p "Cullonn � �.. �•. ..., .:�,:,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. 4 0 Date:

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection p Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
F
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 4U 140 Hate of Visit: 9/2]I20o0 Time: 1t00
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
93 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Rail.F.am.#2................................................. County: GMCjCtlr............................................... W. ARO.......
OwnerName: 51ft......................................... Ds111............................................................... Phone No: 25Z-747A956 ..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title: .
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 336.PraW ttRuad ............................................................................... SenQW.jGiii.NC....................................................... 7.850 .............
Onsite Representative: ...............
Certified Operator: ;attexfn.F .................... Dail .............
Location of Farm:
............ Integrator: Muxplty.Ynnfly..F.Ar s...........
Operator Certification Number: 16512 .............................
VCSR 1117; on right side of road after turning off of Hwy. 258. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Lutitudc 35 ° 23 ' U5 '� Longitude 77 ° Di , F29 I'
Deslgq Current Design Current ' .....]Design Current
Po uiatton....;Poultry:: . Capacity:.:Populatioottle Capacity:Population '.
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3672
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. 11'disc
harge is observed. was the conveyance inan-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Sian;'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c, li'dischargc is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon sy:slem'? (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 Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..........plCiluiM .................................................
............................... ................................... ................................... ...................................
Freeboard(inches) ............... _18............... .................................... ................................... ......................... ............ ......... ........................... ....................................

5100
Facility Number: 40-140 Date of Inspection 9/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation pones an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Matua grass
Continued on back
[:]Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WLTP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis &, soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in .compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 ,N6 violations;6r"d'eficiericies were:dot6d:duHing tlib'irisit;, You will:r'&_ e' e'noff' ther:-:-
correspondence about this.visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes ® No
ote: address change
Last waste analysis dated May 31, 2000 at 2.7 lbs/1000 gallons. Previous report dated February 21, 2000 at 1.8 lbs/1000 gallons.
Last soils report dated April 20, 1999 with minimal lime needed.
Lagoon level records complete.
Waste plan is updated each year. I -lave technical specialist checked pulls 1 l & 12 (529/626 tract). For IRR2 combine as one pull until
chnical specialist can check. No corn in any fields.
entinued on next page)
T� Tf� rTt Y o 17�a !II.T.
Reviewer/InspectorName a�,.-11 lE- � .Ei' f �!. tl; .a77 .� .I F 1,11.'.,:'. 1I..��1.,�� �..!..T,11,���1..,Gli ,'1f. , I�, ,1�. 1�.

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number: 40-140 Date of inspection 9/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. May want technical specialist to list cropping options in narrative (can be done if overall PAN deficit stays in a deficit). Farm is in
all soybeans with no corn as is listed in waste plan.
* Current waste plan dated April 26, 2000 with an overall PAN deficit of 1,372 lbs.
* Stop pump elevation is 48" from top of dike according to design
0
Irl

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit © Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of 1'isit: 5/25/200D Time: � Printed on: 5/31/2000
4t1 l40
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ■ Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
FarmName: DAjj.FittM.#2............................................................................................... County: Gr.ccjtc.......................................... ..... WA$!.?_.....
OwnerName: Dilly ......................................... tDalil........................................................ ........ Phone No: ..........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: Rt.,Z.B.RX.4&.......................................................................................... Sum.]AILAC ...................................................... MAD.............
Onsite Representative: S rygnj}.a1L.D1 y..XDW1............................................................ lntegrator: M.vjrpllly.,F.gmAl3'•.FR11>Jl�.....................................
Certified Operator:Stex............................... laAil ......................................... I.......... Operator Certification Number:J.6,512 .............................
Location of Farm:
.........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.............................................................. I!ISl3.l 1.> .xA 1.Sh�fr..R�.1lD&tl.Atlt�X.ttt1C[lAD . Ulj1 Of, fl . .,.5......................................................................—
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 23 OS Longitude 77 ' q0 29 K
� Ym's �,ry�+r. S ,.eV pfi 7 � �:�:
$u"Destgn�,. Cnrrent� ', �y'lr cr . t <`,c. )IieSlgn r., CnrrCnt.; - �. 'DCSIgnCtlrl'CIItY ? r
cam, ._ ,� Ca aci Po ulattona P ry`..�,�ss�. Ca" sei "i'o uiatio Cattle ,.C$" aci To ula op'
Swtne> E r. Dolt
❑ Wean to Feeder s ❑Layer.; ❑Dairy
® Feeder to Finish 3672 3672 ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
� w,
❑ Farrow to Feeder Other Y Y'
❑ Farrow to Finish Y7 Total Design Capacity, 3,672
,.
❑ Gilts
[I Boars ; = _�' S -Total SSLW _ 495,77.
�_.' k ..... ,.
Discharges & Stream lmoacts
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 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 IN No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ............................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 35
❑ Yes IN No
Structure 6

Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-140 Date of Inspection 5/25/2000Printed on: 5/31/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.) .
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Small Grain
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® 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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage& General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis& soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not'in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 19 No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
- 24: _Does faciliry te4iur"e a follow-up visit by same agency? _ ❑Yes ®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
13- IN,0•viplatiaos:or deficiencies-wot!e:rioted'during this *Bit. *Iron: will receive pbPortlier'
Corresnooc�ence about this.visit.::::::.::::..::.::
Soil analysis 4/99; waste analysis 2121/00 - 1.8 lbs./1000 gals.
* Maintaining weeklyfreeboard levels as required by General Permit.
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance_ .
* Adequate freeboard level.
Reviewer/Inspector Name fr'D--j
- i tA.
F% _�_. r_- , S , w'-

1
LReviewer/Inspector Si _ Date:
Signature: -� YY Y_�lYYY��YY,,,Y�YYYY�lI IYYYY�II IYYYY��YYYYYYYY�IYI IIYYYYYY��y
Facility Number: 40-140-1 Date of Inspection 5/-25—/20- 0-0-1 Printed on: 5/31/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ®No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes -® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No

Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
13 Other Agency - Operation Review
le Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Fallow -up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 40 140 Date of Inspection 11/22/99
Time of Inspection 2:15 PM 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: DAII.FatM.#2 ............................... .... County: Greciae ............................................... !'.!'.t RQ.......
OwnerName: Daly ......................................... D.4il............................................................... Phone No:;Sjr.7,4.7.-3.950...........................................................
Facility Contact: .................................................................. ........Title Phone No:
MailingAddress: tit..l(tx.4S1.......................................................................................... ...................................................... 28.5aQ ..............
Onsite Representative: Bj4„pajL......................
Certified Operator: Stcy p.�,............................... DAil..
Location of Farm:
..................................:.. Integrator: ]YjuxAhy..t aIDlx.atrpls,......................
..... Operator Certification Number:a.0;512 .............................
Latitude 35 ' 23 6 OS « Longitude 77 ' 40 1 29 64
Design Current
Swine r.nnsirlty Pnnnlsatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Imnacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
A
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches):...............25...................................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed an 12/20149

.
Printed on 12/20/99
Facility Number: 40-140 Dale of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Anplicalion
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda Small Grain
11 /22199
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Nb 0) atiofis:or'deficiencies•were:noted:d'uring•tliis visit::Yo>a:will:receive nb further
. , correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comrnerifs (refer fio question #j: EXplain a'ny YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
,Use dpowings-of facility to better exniain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
19. Need waste sample.
Last sample 3/16/99 = 2.7 Ibs.
Cannot use 35% reduction due to improper waste sample.
ReviewerlInspector Name lCarl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date:

.
[3 Division of Soil and WaterConservation - Operation, Review
t
. 4 [3 Division of Soil and Water,Conservation Compliance Inspection
v
i L a
ij
3
( I®Drvision of Water Quality Compliance Inspection r `; '
E -
" '�
F
I
Other Agency_- Qperatioii Review`'
l �.
E
0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number C7 fJ Date of Inspection 22'cIg
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
JUPermitted © Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
,I
Farm Name L FG' � 2 County: G�.�'"�
......................... �'..'........................................................................................ ................,.,......,.......................................................
Owner Name: ................ Phone No:
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title: Phone No:
MailingAddress: ............................... ....................................................................... ............... ...................................,................................................. ..........................
Onsite Representative: .............. y li%c.i Integrator:..............."..'tip
'........................................................... ...
Certified Operator: .......4.u.E"... D...!.1 .... .. Operator Certification Number ...........................................
Location of Farm:
A
..........................................................................................................
Latitude 0 6 •4 Longitude • 4 «
Swine
3
Design Current
Capacity Population
El Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
36%2
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry_ Capacity Population Cattle -Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non-Layu
— JCJ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
TotaI:SSLW
I Number of:Lagoons j ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
„ •.. �;
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a, If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/tnin'?
d. Dices discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ....................... I.... .......................................................................................................... ...........................
.......
5. Are there any immediate'threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes bg No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes N No
Structure 6
❑ Yes N] No
Continued on back
3/23/99

. Facility Number: H0 — 140 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes t9 No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes 91 No
12. Crop type fix" co",\ V_4j Ler_nh gig,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a} Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample'reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: �'Vo yiola�tc}ns;or defieienc�.. were pied during phis;visit= y0i� will•taoWe 0 #:utthor
'Comes' otideitce: ab' k this visit. ..........
❑ Yes 1!5 No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes (5 No
❑ Yes [9 No
❑ Yes 14 No
❑ Yes ® No
99 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes IS No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes RNo
'Comments!(refer to question#): "Explain'any YES'answers and/or any recommendations of any other comments:
,Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) ,
165 • I y
CA, K2�_ K 35 °�9 �c��t- Wn CIIA- mho i...��o�er .Iws C •'•�p4, -
u
C
Reviewer/inspector Name
l
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: A j 1-22-1 1'
3123/99�;

'W6 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
p Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
le K01111ne 0 t_omplalnt 0 P011Uw-up OI i)wq inspection 0 ronow-up or u�Pwk. review 0 tuner
Facility Number �" [),tic of Inspection
i'ilne of hnspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted M Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered in Not Operatrooa Date Last Operated:
Farm Narne: D"..Earm.Al................................................................................................... County: Greene WARD
Owner Name: Billy ......................................... Dail .............................................................. Phone No: 252-.7.4.7.-3956..
FacilityContact: ...................................................................
Mailing Address: M.2-ftoY.4.51.......................................
Title: ................................
Onsite Representative: ...........
Certified Operator:S.tR.Ven.F...............
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0 ©� ®fil
..., ,.
.. Dail ..................
Swine Capacity Population
E3 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
E3 Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Fec2er
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
.. Phone No: ...............................................
...................... Saow.Hitl... C................................................... -.. 28580.........
....I ................. Integrator: Murprhy...Family.Farms.................................
...................... Operator Certification Nuinbcr:1f5.1.2..........................
Longitude ©9 ®; ®6k
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ayer 113 Dairy
p Non -Layer 113 on- arty
p Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons 0 0 u sur ace Drains Present Fro- goon rea 113 Spray re rca
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps E= C3 o rquid Waste Management Sys em
Ilischarges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? l7 Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 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
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes M No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? o Yes ® Nit
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes M No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure d Structure 5 StRIChrre G
Identifier: ...............#.1...................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ............... 52................ ................................... .................................... ................................... ..........................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 13 Yes M Ni
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on hu.

F'acifity'Nu~ ber: 40-140 1 late of* lnspectioll
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? p Yes n N(i
(If any of questions 4-6 was.answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
R N, �
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® N(i
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
p Yes
R M,
Waste Application
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
11. •Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding 17 PAN
p Yes
®Ni,
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Matua grass
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® N(i
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
n No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
® N(i
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
n No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® N,i
Reuuired Records & Documents
17. Fail 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.)
p Yes
n N(l
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
H N(,
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
N N(,
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
N N-1
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
H N"
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 Yes
® No
N•o.vi0'1itions:or. ode kieilcies.were• doted.diurilig. this visit.: You: will.receiv$ no. further. :
• • • ... . . . . .... .
• �c6rxes�ande�lce: about this:visit: - . . . . .. - . . - .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Kecommend signing up for local Neuse Kule options by S/ 1199 with the Greene Soil & water t:onservation Uistrnct
* Given Integrator Registration card
* Last waste analysis dated 3/16/99 at 2.7 lbs/1000 gal.
* Soils report dated 4/20/99 - no lime needed
* Keeping lagoon level records and is calling in to Murphy Family Farms
14. Operation has map, calculations and D I information with waste plan based on wettable acres. IRR2 kept by pull.
* According to waste plan, for tract 615, field 1 is growing straight Matua grass at 100 lbs/I000 gal
1
Reviewerllnspector Name Pat Hooper 252/946-6481
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date:

p Division of you ano water Conservation - uperation tcevtew
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
19 Routine 0 o,�ompialnt 0 morrow -up of uwV inspection 0 ronow-up of i»wk- review 0 Vtner
Facility Number Date of lnspection
F nre of hispection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted M Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered InNot UF—MaMo—naTj Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Dlail.Farm.it2.................................................................................................. County: Greene WARE)
Owner Name: BiUy......
Facility Contact: .......
.......... I ... I..... Dail.............................................................. Phone No: 252-.7.4.7.-395fi..................
..............................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt.2-flax.4.51 .......................................................................................... Sao.w. bill...NC....................................................... 2858I1.........
Onsite Representative: Billy..D.ail...................................................................................... Integrator•:1. iLrp:hy..Fanvily.Farms.......................
Certified Operator:Sxryem.F................................ bait..................................................... Operator Certification Number: 16512 .........................
Location of Farm:
Latitude
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Longitude ©0 ®` ®"
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ayer 1 1p Dairy
p Non -Layer p Non -Dairy
0 Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons
0
13
u
sur ace
Drains
Present 1113
agoon Area
113 Spray Field A re.r
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
System
p
No
Liquid Waste
Management
Mscharges & Sireant Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes a Ni
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field 13 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? l3 Yes p Nil
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water ofthe State'? (if_ves, notify DWQ) Yes p No,
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
.d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p N,�
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® N"
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes a No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes a Ni,
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 StrUCtUre 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
...............................................
Freeboard(inches): ...............2.5...............................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 13 Yes a M
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on &

Facility Number: 40-140 Date of 111s'pe Lion
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? p Yes a N(+
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
n Nt ,
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
17 Yes
a N(
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
n N
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
13 Yes
a N,�
II. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding p PAN
17 Yes
a No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
a No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
a N(i
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
13 Yes
p N(i
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p N(�
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
a N,i
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
a N, �
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
p Yes
a N(l
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
p Yes
a N(,
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
a Yes
© N(�
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
a No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
n N(,
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
a N"
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
n No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
13 Yes
a No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
13 Yes
a No
�io.viatatiofls.or. defiowncres.were'voted -during. this visit. -You- will -receive na further. ' .
.......... ............ ....... ......................
Cur.6s�oidegCe. bou>f #his visit:
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
19. Need waste sample.
Last sample 3/16/99 = 2.7 lbs.
Cannot use 35% reduction due to improper waste sample.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

l
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
NC'DENR
NORTH CAROI.._INA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANp NATURAL. RasOURCes
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 3, 1999
Mr. Billy Dail
Dail Farm #2
Rt. 2, Box 451
Snow Hill, North Carolina 28580
SUBJECT: Notice of Deficiency
Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Dail Farm #2
Facility No. 40-140
Greene County
Dear Mr. Dail:
On October 23, 1998, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
at the Dail Farm #2 in Greene County. A copy of the inspection report is
attached for your review.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) and the General Permit; (2) the farm
is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill
1217, the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the General Permit; (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 following deficiencies
were observed during the inspection.
➢ The CAWMP should include a copy of the lagoon design, operation &
maintenance plan, site evaluation, hazard classification, and the irrigation
design & parameters..
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page Two
Dail Farm #2
Facility No. 40-140
February 3, 1999
➢ Failed to have the required waste analysis. The wastewater must be sampled
within sixty (60) days of application. It is suggested to collect a sample for
analysis every 120 days to meet the requirement.
It is very important as the owner and the Operator in Charge that you resolve
these aforementioned deficiencies and any other problems that may arise, as
soon as possible. For additional assistance, please contact your Technical
Specialist. 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
these deficiencies.
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 at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
cc: Dr. Garth Boyd, Murphy Family Farms
Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES Office
DSWC-WaRO
_.r Compliance Group
WaRO

Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 7r 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit 1111 Permitted In Not operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: D.ail.Farm..#2.................................................................................................. County: Greene WARO
OwnerName: Bf1Iy......................................... Dail ............. _............................................... Phone No: 2S2-.7.47.:39Sfa..........................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title: ... Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rs;.2..1Dax.45.1........................................................................................... Saox-HilLAC ....................................................... 2858I1..............
Onsite Representative: Hilly-D.ailA.Slevea.D,ail....................................................... Integrator: Muxphy..FamjIyFarms......................................
Certified Operator:Strven.F................................ D.ail..................................................... Operator Certification Number: 1651.2.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ®" Longitude ©• ®� ®"
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p 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
maintenan celimprovement?
b. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes H No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes N No

J
Vaeffity Number: 40_140 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes N Nor -
Structures (Lagoons,Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): 3.8
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes H No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? 0 Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 13 Yes H 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 N 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. Crop type ......Coastal.BermmuAL.Grass....................... ...Soy1211EM................... ........... Malua.4ayersezd�.......................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes N No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
E3 Yes
® No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p 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?
13 Yes
®No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Onl
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
®No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
H Yes
p No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
® Yes
p No
I. 'o'via 1ons.or erencies'were.noa g.t nrinis visit:. pawl .receiveno further.*.
ooricespoo nee about t#�iS Yisi ::
Cbmzplam any=YES answers and pr any recQmnendattons at any other comments' _
�Use�drawings of facilityy #aFlietEen explai � atua tons. {ase.additional pages+asnecessary] ;f
Reviewer/Inspector Name E,,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Date of Inspection {p •� .
Facility Numb
e
L— Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Registered Certified 0 Applied for Permit Permitted JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:.........
Farm Name # Count ..
..... a .-... -� ±'!ra................................................................ y: �= .
Owner Name :........... .!. ....................................................................... Phone No:...c��]a..-...'.:3�.��. ..........................
Facility Contact: ..... Y. ........ �DTitle: ..... Q.�,}�(1,QrS...... ... Phone No: S c� ' 7!-�'.1.- 3 S
...............
Mailing Address:..... ....... .QX..... r`�..�................................................... n '.. i.. �G ag ... ..�................ ...... l
Onsite Representative:.. ..... .. Integrator:.��r�.r:�� .... +..1...............!r!!!'............
Certified O erator•..... t �'�
p �:T4�................................:....................................... Operator Certification Number:... �..��,.
Location of Farm:
... ..�....�.....1............................................. .. .......... ............... ..... .. F
Latitude 0 1 66 Longitude "
a Design a
v Capac�ty}'
❑ Aean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
7
❑ Farrow to Wean
Cl Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area #0 Spray Field Area
No Linuid Waste Manaeement S
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 ❑ 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?
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
❑ Yes (R No
❑ Yes 1k<0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes P-Ko
❑ Yes K;Vgo
❑ Yes [210
❑ Yes [3] No
❑ Yes ER'go

Facility Number: ' — 14C)
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
um (Laggons.1191dingPonds Flush t tc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: l I
Freeboard(tt): ............. `1.5..ux.s..................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Anulication
❑ Yes
93'1�o
❑ Yes
01�o
Structure 6
......................................
❑ Yes
�No
• Yes
EI No
❑ Yes
Gll�o
❑ Yes
alto
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes 631�0
(If in excess of W�, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ........ ..� .L7Ll_.�& .... !? 1 1!1tiN. ................ .. 5�4-!n. S.........................
} r
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes _'!R"NNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? El Yes LNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
Lv] No,
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�To
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
, _
L�d' 0
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
MIKO/
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
ER"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
[No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[I No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
,[_/Yes
E2 Yes
❑ No
lvo.vitilations•or d6riciencies.wt're.natetl,during this:visit.- :Yoa,will receive•no.fiirtlier,:
. '-correspo�dettceatioutthis'visit:•:�;-:;::�:.:. ;.-.:-.•:-:•:�. ;�. ;�:.:.:.�:.�, :�:::•
ZCVS
a-v`- Yt2.cO4'5 — ►rrxcx oa tjr JCQ i,S l� C.�S��� zz�.
u ` � 21/97
b6 Y4 A� a-uv . t I (Y5 I bs , � acn � _ V o M►i 1 1 C7� 1 bs.tL
1 crc
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Date: lU -_Z3— 9 6

Division of Soil and Water Conservation p Other Agency
p Division of Water Quality
19 Routine p Minplaint p Follow-up of DWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection © 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not Op=
Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Dail.Farm.#2................................................... ............................................... County: Greene WARO
Owner Name: Billy ......................................... Dail.............................................................. Phone No: 9.1917.47.-.3956 ..........................................................
Facility Contact: Steten..lflail ......................................................Title: owner .................................................. Phone No: 9.191141-.11315 .......................
Mailing Address: lit. Box 451.......................................................................................... Snow -Hill ... C....................................................... 2858.Q ..............
Onsite Representative: Billy.Daia,.Sxexen.Bs.lGbrisxX.»i11.................................... Integrator: Mtrphy-Family.F,armi.....................................
Certified Operator: S,texenX............................... hail..................................................... Operator Certification Number, 16512.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•©6 ®66 Longitude "
esign Eurrent Design Current 7; Design, 7 A urren
Swine Capacity Population Pott{try "Capacity, 'Population Cattle Capacity, Population
13 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Fin -RE-
13 Farrow to can
[3 Farrow to ee er
13 Farrow t0 Finish
pGits
Boars
Nt iitber d;'Lagootis /`Holding` Pond's p u sur ace rains Present
„ . !�'.r. J, PA,. ;:�
0 ° . i quia W as a anagem
u i
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p 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)
e. 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?
Area1p
spray riew Area
G
�n
p Yes
N No
p Yes
N No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
b. 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
13 Yes N No
p Yes ® No
13 Yes N No
13 Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No

,Facility Number: 40_1 0
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Laaoous,Holdina Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier: .....................
Freeboard (ft): 3.8
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 6
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes H No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
15. Crop a Cam.(grain) ......Small-Grain.02xersead........................Cottw.............................Goastal.Hestnuda. ha
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? Cl Yes H No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
IS. 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?
q . o•vta ions.or Crencies•were.nnn Wring Ys vist -You will.rereive nofurther.*
ceKe's�ioReae� is:: . .
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
0 Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
omments (refer to juest on ); Explain any Minswers,an or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings gf.facility to.better explain, situations. (use,additional pages as necessary):
" No subsurface drainage on site according to Mr. Dail
Not required at time of certification but will need for General Permit: odor control, insect control and mortality checklists
* Greene District to provide Mr. Dail with design information including Operation & Maintenance Plan
Reviewer/Inspector Name I`a ooper
�
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date:

' State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 19, 1997
Mr. Billy Dail
Dail Farm 92
Rt. 2, Box 451
Snow Hill, NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Dail Farm #2
Facility No. 40-140
Greene County
Dear Mr. Dail:
On September 19, 1997, 1 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 PIan
(CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, 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. 321.
Sincerely, (1 t-Y�(�(�
OA._ .
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike 12egans, Greene County NCCES
Dr. "'arch Boyd, Murphy Family Fanxis
aR'O
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

•
p Division of Soil and Watel
■ Division of Water Quality
O
O
Facility Number
p Registered M Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
13 Other Agency
up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection'�"i
Time of Inspection r__r177T_, 24 hr. (hh:mm)
in Not 0peratiaaa Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: mail.EaritUl.................................................................................................. County: Greene WARO
OwnerName: Silly ....................................... I?aii..... » .. » ........................ ......... Phone No: 919-747.:3956..... .....................................................
FacilityContact: ....................... ..................... .. ....... .......... .......... Title; ............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
MailingAddress: RU.Box.AR.......................................................................................... Saox..Hill..A.0...................... .. ............................ .. 285811..............
Onsite Representative: )Evilly..Dail.&.Sxevam.Dail....................................................... Integrator: Mu.tp4...Famity.Earms......................................
Certified Operator: SUven.E............................... Hail..................................................... Operator Certification Number: 1156 .2.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• Longitude
r< esign urren esiga {. urr n r esignCurrent
-f r Swine. ' Capactty Popblation .Poultry="'M ° Capacity 'Population `:_' Cattle Capacity Topulation
p can to Feeder
® Feeder to mis
p Farrow to can
13 Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
Gilts
p Boars
pLayer p Dairy
p Non -Layer p on- any
p Other
JOW'Design Capacity'
310,12
_Total SSLW I ,720
resen
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. 1f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. 1f discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (1f 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 :han lagoonslhulding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
5. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes N No
Cl Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes N No

aci y um er: 40-140
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......»........ ................. ................................... ...................... »............ ............... ............. ....... ......................................................................
Freeboard (11): 3 ft.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes N No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes .N No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N 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 N 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. Crop type ......Coastal3crmudi Gmss............. C,out.(SilageA.Graan)....... .,..................................... ...............................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes N No
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?
R . t�oviolations.or ne=fencierwere.noted .danng tots visit:. Ton will Xeceive na turmer .
:cei.........o about t�iis•v.. .
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
t3 Yes H No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
13 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 6.
,�ff r . ram, r a
Date: el