310386_Plan of Action_20190313

�M605�3
PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number: 313B6
Facility Name: Edward Brock Farm
Certified Operator Name:
Melissa Wallace
County: Duplin
Operator Number: AWA 17319
1. Current liquid level(s) in inches as measured from the current liquidlevel in the lagoon to the
lowest point on the top of the dam for lagoons without spillways; and from the current liquid level
in the lagoon to the bottom of the spillway for lagoons with spillways.
Lagoon Name/ID:
Spillway(Y or N):
Level(inches):
Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
N
14 20
2. Check all applicable items
X Liquid level is within the designed structural freeboard elevations of one or more structures.
Five and 30 day Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
within acceptable ranges.
Liquid level is within the 25 year 24 hour storm elevations for one or more structures. A
30 day Plan of Action is attached. Agronomic balance is within acceptable range.
Waste is to be pumped and hauled to off site locations. Bolume and PAN content of waste
to be pumped and hauled is reflected in section III tables. Included within this plan is a list
of the proposed sites with related facility numbers, number of acres and receiving crop
information. Contact and secure approval from the DWQ prior to transfer of waste to a site
not covered in the facility's CAWMP.
Operation will be partially or fully depopulated.
'Attach a complete schedule with corresponding animal units and dates for depopulation
`if animals are to be moved to another permitted facility, provide facility number, lagoon
freeboard levels and herd population for the receiving facility
3. Earliest possible date to begin land application of waste: 3/13/19
I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information listed above and included within the
attached Plan of Action, and to the best of my knowledge and ability, the information is
accurate and correct.
Edward Brock Phone: [phone]
Facility Owner/Manager (print)
Date: 3/1 B/19
Facility Owner/Manager (signature)

PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): I Lagoon #1
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yc/24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) _
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
e, line ell x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
I. temporary storage period according to structural design
14.0 inches
19.0 inches
5.0 inches
64476 It
200950 gallons
180 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 71210 It
h. current herd # F 2598 certified herd # 2160
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g =
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k. (lines In + i + j) x 7.48 x 30 days/line f=
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I. current waste analysis dated 7/4/18
m. ((lines e + k)/l000) x line I =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00
85650 It
�ft3
39462.5 It,
155973 gallons
0.84 Ibs/1000 gal.
299.8 Ibs. PAN

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - ] O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency L'
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: I S1
q 11 kj
Arrival Time: 1 b
Departure Time: 'Z y County:
' l�
Farm Name: Vl)t � � CC
vvt 12tiyx'y_'
(.,
Vx Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: "(. t dfL"c Integrator:
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
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non--
La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Caoacitv Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
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 DWR)
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 DWR)
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?
Longitude:
Region: y 1, o
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: t j
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA t
E
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
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
I � NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
77��
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
❑ 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 environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
I)Q 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 IXI NE
maintenance or improvement? JJIJJJ`"`���''�
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? L
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. IXI Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
LLLJJJ 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)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA 4 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
�ffNo
❑ 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 X NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA `4,/ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �7I NE
Page 2 of3 21412015 Cof7tiinued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. 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 ❑ No ❑ NA NE
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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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?
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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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 an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ANE
❑ Yes
❑ No
)� NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA aNE
❑ Yes "X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
XYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 10 NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NANE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
p6yAd Vvacewa4' U (L4 i' 4,eJJc-
�1e
IlV6Y iv L �IrUv� lw l uk /CA
110 l'
I)q.WQu4z(@ h
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
I z4s -h
Gi Iosper eV�
cell W
-74Ct q,
Phone: ,�Ao i q (Q' 0 � 7
Date:
21412015

(ht1C01,n4 -� 01e0;_;I �
Cape Fear
xlgrinu
River Watch
August 9th, 2018
Ms. Morella Sanchez -King
Environmental Program Supervisor III
N.C. Department of Environmental Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
morel la.sanchez-king @ncdenr.gov
Re: Observed Waste from Flight
Ms. Sanchez -King:
A flight was performed yesterday (8-8-2018) in Duplin and Sampson County by Cape Fear River Watch.
During the flight we observed questionable waste management practices near hog farms. Attached are
time stamped photos containing GPS coordinates in its metadata and a Google Earth image of the
general area. The attached photos show ponding on an active spray field.
Coordinates: 34.8785855,-77.8785821
617 Surry St Wilmington, NC 28403
Phone: [phone]

Page 2 of 3
Photo I:
Photo II:
Cape Fear
River Watch

Page 3 of 3
Cape Fear
Ricer Watch
Thank you for your consideration on this matter, and please contact me if you have any
questions.
Sincerely,
Patrick Connell
Cape Fear River Watch
Cell: 910-728-3373
Office: 910-762-5606
[e-mail]

O
Ln
Ln
v
i
M
M
U
u
0
m`
M
E
ED
q
E
E LL
m
U
3 0
w
on

ADivision of Water Resources /
Facility Number - jQ f 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation V
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Lance Inspection 0 Operation Review Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: I V Aj ( R I Arrival Time: ®1 Departure Time: ® County: Region: Qf
Farm Name: W I k A!m L , m Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: qY yr L �-r—u(,kl—f — Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to I
Wean to I
Feederto
Farrow to
Farrow to
Farrow to
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
NNon--
La er
Poults
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 DWR)
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 DWR)
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes )4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? V Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: t— 2-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
JA 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
�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 environmental threat,
notify DWR
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
N 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. I there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes* 1,
❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
�64E
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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes No
[:]Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
NE
X
❑ NA
,
�x I NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA PNE
❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of inspection: Ott
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [—]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA KNE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
1`'
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [—]No ❑ NA lb 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?
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
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard pr over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes X'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
XYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 'kNE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA XNE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 9 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 paces as necessary).
1 wd w h a I44a
2 cw.d saw n-3 �v►-�
W �
&Sues
wac NN
�`s
�pt� i r VV � ,p-�e.wa.�ef-
Avg.
rh`� 4 evs we j -Uarl� Co vermA4 . A19d'o�y Per (\�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3 CeW T d, __ /i Z 0_ 4 q 6
Phone: n1 16 -%C1(Q - l 3 9 i
t ,1 ^Date: Q
��IlfII MainJ'2 iICL Vt{. 21412015
U ��J•