480007_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental 06

TV N Not
NSP
� S- P, E�'.
U.-- N
Won

..
- Drvisicirt of Wuter Qri�lit;
p Division of Soil and Water Consen at op
m
4;�theaAgesc�.-.,
i ype or visit p uompuance inspecaan p uperarton meview p Lagoon cvaivarion
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: $/29/2002 I imc�: 11:30
Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted S Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Henry Harvey Farm County: Hydc................................................... WAR.O........
Owner Name: Henry
Harvey
Mailing Address: 19RO.H,yde.Sark.Canal..........................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:
Onsite Representative: .... . .. ...............................................
Certified Operator: H3en.ry.L................................ HaLyty .............
Location of Farm:
miles north of Hwy. 45
Phone No: 252-935-5267
P.an Lego..NC........................................................... 27.86d..............
......................... I ..... ..... Phone No:.................................
.... ...............
Integrator:Jndepeadent ............................................................
Operator Certification Number: 188.40. ............................
F,
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude ®• ©
Design urgent
Swine Capacity Population
®Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
I7 Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ay er [3 Dairy
p Non -Layer I I JE] on- airy
p Otlier
Total Design Capacity.,,, 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
u sur ace rains resent Lagoon Area Spray ie rea
Number of Lagoons E3 0 g L7 P Y
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps FRO Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes H No
Discharge originated at: 13 Lagoon 13 Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 13 Yes 13 No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes 13 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 N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes M No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) Iess than adequate? p Spillway p Yes N No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ................................. --•---....................................... ........................... -................................... .................................... ....................................

lFacility Number: 4$-7 Date of Inspection
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
l] Yes
p No
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
p Yes
p No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
13 Yes
©No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
p No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes
p No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA WMP)?
p Yes
p No
I4. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
13 No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
13 Yes
13 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
13 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
p No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
p Yes
p No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
p No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) p Yes p No
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes p No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? p Yes p No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) p Yes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? p Yes p No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? p Yes p No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? p Yes p No
In No violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no turther correspondence 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): Field Copy p Final Notes
*The farm has been recently sold by Mr. Harvey to a farmer named Huber.
�.
*The lagoon was pumped down to less than 1 foot with a waste analysis of less than 0.1 lbs.N/l 000gal.
*Closure plan by Carl Dunn and Rodney Woolard.
*I found than the new owner had pumped down the lagoon and was in the process of pushing in the sides of the lagoon to
help fill the hole. Very little water remained in lagoon. The new owner intends on farming the land now occupied by the lagoon.
*May this inspection server as confirmation of closure of this farm's lagoon. Sludge in pits remain under existing houses.
e new owner has no intentions of raising hogs and uses the houses soley for storage of farm equipment.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

os1os/ar
Continued
Facility Number: 48_7
Rate of Inspection
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 p 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 p No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, [3 Yes p 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 p No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes p No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes p No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes p No

Division of Water Quality . .
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation.
p Other Agency
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason far Visit ®Routine o Complaint o Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility dumber Date of x isit: 7/11/2002 I
10 Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......•.
Farm Name: Henry Harvey Farm County: Hy& ................................................... .WaR.Q........
Owner Name: Henry Harvey Phone No: 252-935-5267
Mailing Address: 1980.H,xde.P-arlt.Canal..................................................................... P:amtegta-mc.--........................................................ 27.86,Q......-----...
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:............. ... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: rt.n.Qn,e.ansite............................................................................... Integrator: Independent........................................................
Certified Operator:Hearlt.L ............... _............... Hamey .............................................. Operator Certification Number: 1884.3........................
..-..
Location of Farm:
miles north of Hwy. 45
® Swine ❑ Poultry Cl Cattle p Horse Latitude ©+ ©� © Longitude ®' © ®•
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
®Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
© Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
[3 Layer 13 Ualry
p Non -Layer [3 on- airy
Other
Total Design Capacity 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
Number of Lagoons !.� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present JJE3 Lagoon Area p Sprav Fie rea
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps oUquid Waste Managemenv System
Discharges & Stream Inipacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: 0 Lagoon p Spray Field 13 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) I7 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 13 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? 13 Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
......._..........
Freeboard(inches): ..............1.20..................................................................................................................................................................................................

act tty um er: 48_�
Date of Inspection
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? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Com, Soybeans, Wheat
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 or other 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. FaiI 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?
p Yes a No
p Yes N No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
❑ Yes ❑ No
p No violations or a iciencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question 4): °Explain'dnyYES answers and/or any ri ecommendatior s or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑Final Notes
7) Structures could use mowing of taller weeds on outside walls of lagoon.
* Carl Dunn, NCDSWC, who along with Rodney Woolard, Hyde Co., are currently working on a closure plan for the lagoon.
* The farm has been sold. No animals have been onsite since 2000. Mr. Woolard is having new owner fill out change of ownership
forms.
* I called Ms. June Hoover, Mr. Henry's real estate agent, [phone], to see if she had Mr. Henry's current mailing address and
hone no. She only had his phone no. [phone], at which time I called and left Mr. Henry a message to please call me back at the
ffice to update me on his address and that of the new owner of the farm.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05103101
Facility Number: 48_7
(late of Inspection
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail tc discharge attor below 13 Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? 13 Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p 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? p 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.) p Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes p No
Ai
J

0 Division of Water Quality
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
P
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility NumberDate of Visit: 7/4/2002 'l jille: 1235
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
0 Permitted N Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Henry Harvey Farm
Owner Name: Henry Harvey
Mailing Address: 1984Hyde.Park.Canal ...............
Facility Contact: ................................................................
County: HYAU................................................... .WaRQ........
Phone No: 252-935-5267
...........I Paatego...NC........................................................... 27860 ..............
Title: ............................................................... Phone No:..............................
Onsite Representative: Heuxy.Hatrvey........................................................................... Integrator: RuntingF.aria............................... .......................
Certified Operator:Henxy.L................................ Harygy .............................................. Operator Certification Number: 18i843............................
Location of Farm:
miles north of HWY.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0• ©` ©" .Longitude ®•
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
® can to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
0 Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1❑ 0airy
❑ Non -Layer 1 1[3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains resent ❑ agoon rea ❑ prhy ie - rea
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste ManagMent System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: C] Lagoon 13 Spray Field 13 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, nt tify DWQ) ❑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 13 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? 13 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway 13 Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ............... .48.............. ......... .......................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................

lFacility Number: 48_7 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
Yes
N No
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
p Yes
® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
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
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat winter annuals summer annuals
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?
p 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
ENO
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & GeneraI Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ 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
ENO
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
p No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
ENO
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ 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?
p Yes
®No
p o violations or denciencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence a ou ►s visit
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any reconimendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): � Field Copy p Final Notes
* Farm has been depop since 12/20/00. Mr Harvey wants to remain on database. Farm is for sale at present time.
19. No soil test for 2001 crop year.
* There has been no application of waste since last DWQ inspection dated 12/15/00.
7. N/A
0. N/A
31. N/A
* Lagoon level is being recorded weekly.
(continued next page)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin McLa►vhorn entered by Della Robbins'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 48_7 Date of Inspection
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 p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes p No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes IS 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? p 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.) p Yes 13 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes p No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No
* Last waste analysis dated 6/15/00. Nitrogen is 12.2 lbs/I000 gallons.
* Remember to take waste analysis 60 days before/60 days after application with boney wagon.

Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit p Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 10/12/2001 Time; 8:30 am Printed on: 11/1l2001
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Henry Harvey Farm
Owner Name: Henry Harvey
Mailing Address: .010_1 yde.P.ark.Canal........................
FacilityContact: ........................................................................
Onsite Representative: Henry. to rxey ..............................
Certified Operator: Heu:r.y..L. ........... I., ................. Ha.rYgy
Location of Farm:
County: Hydr................................................... .W.aR.O........
Phone No: 252-435-5267
....................................... Pantego..NC........................................................... 17,96.0 ..............
Title: ............................................................... -Phone No: ................ I. ...... ............................
...................................... Integrator: .......................................................................................
....................................... Operator Certification Number: 18.8.43..........................
...
A
_ I�
® Swine p Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ©• ©' ©" Longitude ®• ©' ®"
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
® can to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
[3 Farrow to Wean
13 Farrow to Feeder
13 Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer ro
airy
p Non -Layer Non -Dairy
10 er
Total Design Capacity 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
Number of Lagoons ❑ u sur ace Drains Present rea JEJ Spray ie rea
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps F0 o iqui as a management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? E3 Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: Lagoon p Spray Field 13 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ® No
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? (ff yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
p Yes Is No
p Yes 13 No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? l] Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): .............. .1.20.............. ....................................

Facility Number: 48-7 Date of Inspection ® Printedon: 11/1/2001
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/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?
1 1. is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
13 Yes N No
p Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
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 or other Permit readily available?
I8. 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?
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes R No
p Yes ® No
p No violations or deficiencies were noted urmg this visit. You will receive no further correspondence 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): El Field Copy p Final Notes
* No pigs onsite since approximately October 2000.
* There have been no irrigation events this year.
Mr. Harvey inquired about filling the lagoon; 1 will put him in touch with Rodney Woolard and Carl Dunn.
Mr. Harvey has pits below his hog houses and does not need the lagoon.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1 ,

O51033101
Continued
acm i y um er: 48_7 Date of Inspection rTMMUM
Printed on: 11/1/2001
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
C] Yes
® No
28,
Is there any evidence of wind drift during Iand application? (i,e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p 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?
p 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.)
p Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
p Yes
ig No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes
p No

*Division of Wafer Quality
0 Division of Soft and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Vlslt C' Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 4&Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: a Time: •� 3t7
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0eertffied [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
r.,.-_. County: �O
Farm Name. �, .. h �.................................... �. ........
Jj r
Owner Name:........... ...................
.........
P'{................
I ......
................ Phone No: ............ A .k...-...
Facility Contact: .......... Title: ...................................................... ...... Phone No: ................. ..............
Mailing Address: r ..... , ..
4'­
Onsite Representative:......i.:........................................................... Integrator:......,.
�.... �_._._ Operator Certification Number: ...... ...
�.. .................... ......... ��. '`
Certified Operator:. _..�
Location of Farm:
0 Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 « Longitude • 6 «
Design Current
Swine CM&City Population
Wean to Feeder
1 5-0
(O
Feeder to Finish
a
0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID 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? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated av ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes Ij No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes @0 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 P No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [:]Yes allo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: — "7 Date of Inspection tc ,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes qNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 14 No
(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 q No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes QNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes IKI No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes P No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [!No
12. Crop type J�
13. Do the receiving crops differ w4 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?
::Rio vioiatibiis:oi• &flaen6es •were noted• diwing this*visit; ;Yoh wiil-t Oiye rio fui they
corresporideince: a'b' ' this visit. :::::
❑ Yes No
[I Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes $ No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes J�] No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes QNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes J�j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes D No
Comment§ (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other commments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
r, �- „-v �.ti u. J�a� cc bo•� �� �, I�W� � i a-�..` 1 1- w � t� P� Yt.+�'"'+ �'"
—} un,,4 `1 �A fr,I s� ►� �, ., -tea
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: Date: _ ltIzlx>� 5/00

Facility Number: &it - 7 Date of Inspection 10 ;. of
Odor Issues
26. 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?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes P No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ER 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 [n No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
5100

O Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 6/5/2001 Time: I115 Printed on: 10/10/2001
10 48 7
Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: 121241NO.Q..
Farm Name: Ue.UL S.kA1lYCyU..0.............................. ..... County: Hydr............................ ......... .......... .... WARO?........
OwnerName: aglk Y...................................... Hary7i..................................---.--------.--------- Phone No: 25.2-9,3S-$267.................................................... .... ...
MailingAddress: 12UU.Hy.d...r#A'.k..CAUA..................................................................... rutcgO... NO.......................................................... 2-700.....-----...
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title Phone No:
....................................................................................................................
Onsite Representative: UrjaKy..Ha.1:Kvy............................................................................. Integrator: L.M.AJIV.D.A.SmaJing......................................
Certified Operator:Hlglnrry..................................... Harygy.............................................. Operator Certification Number:18$43.............................
Location of Farm:
SR 1338, 2 miles north of Hwy. 45 +
I '*
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude 76 • 25 09
Design Current
Swine Canaeity Ponulation
® Wean to Feeder
1150
0
® Feeder to Finish
2350
0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 0 Lagoon Area I] 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? ❑ Yes 0 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 ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................................... .......................... .......................--.----........................... .............................-----...................................
Freeboard (inches): 120
05/03/III [continued

O5143101
Facility Number: 48-7
Date of Inspection 6/5/2001
Continued
Printed on: 10/10/2001
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 Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat WA SA
❑ Yes IS 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 or other 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes "® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence 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): Field Copy ❑Final Notes
*Facility has been depop. since 17120/00. Trying to secure integrator.
+_
*There have been no waste application since last DWQ inspection dated 12/15/00.
*Soil test dated 11/02/00 for crop year 2001. Lime was applied on field AP153 at rate of three tons per acre. There has been new land
cleared with lime required. Lime will not be applied until fall.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit.
*Need to secure new waste analysis before applying waste with honey wagon. Waste sample needs to be taken 60 days before/60 days
after broadcast event.
Reviewer/inspector Name Martin McLawhorn
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

0576WOr
Facility Number: 48-7
Date of Inspection 6/5/2001
Continued
Printed on: 10/10/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [] 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 IN 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 N 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

QrDivision of Water Quality
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit ('Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 041outine O Complaint O FaHow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
F_ Facility Numberher
17ate(it Visit: i2-/5-OCR Time: �� ES Printed on: 7/21/2000
'7
r Nat O erational Q Below Threshold
Mermitted 0"Certified 13 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........... ...........
FarmName;........''.11�Y!.!r`.................Y..,.......v'................... County:..........................................i.�1 c ..
Owner Name :.._...H'�Y`.._.............................................................. Phone No: .......... ........
Facility Contact:
........ Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: .... I.axp....... t ... a'!�.. V`...... :? '�.............. ..... ............ .. .................... .......}..— - �o
Onsite Representative:.,. r ............. Integrator: t� vt (►
1 ` ..........................................................................9
Certified Operator: ....... N-Q�Y�..V. L-: .... .04UAV Operator Certification Number-..... l }-
Location of Farm: i
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 « Longitude • 6 cc
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish
3
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagnon Ares ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 9Vo
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon El Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'' ❑ Yes ER No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �0
c. II' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/mitt? rr.(15L
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes &&o
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 3-flo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes W-No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes Rl; o
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: ...................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): / ,
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: — ' j Date of Inspection _!S od Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ®-NM
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 04-NO
(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 [moo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 0"7q-o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings'? ❑ Yes RNo
Waste application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 3-M
11 _ Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes Q-No
12. Crop type 1 l
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? [I Yes B-No
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? _
Renuired Records & Documents d
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? a irrigatio freeboard, aste analysi 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?
violaiioris ;oi def eiencles were poked dirrtrtg i. s. visit; • You wi11- . eceiye a: fuirther;
.. correspondence. ahi f this visit . ....... ... ....:. ..... . . ..... . .. . .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes D'5o
❑ Yes P�Ko
❑ Yes [ to
❑ Yes 2-N—o
[-'es ❑ No
❑ Yes [; o
❑ Yes Rffo
❑ Yes UNO
❑ Yes ®-No
❑ Yes [}No
❑ Yes [ KO
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use d-rawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
- Gip yr- _249e R1TrtLQL
� I
- - _4,4 13
1 f I! Z- 4UPLA— =C, , JINAt-01^ IA-% i I M AJRt.,<` AA "_L.11AID- Ir
Reviewer/Inspector Name (_* ftLLLLfVi
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: _1�2-- �.�—�lj 5100

Facility Number: 44� — -1 Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. 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?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes G;No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes U-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 [9No
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 MNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
.e .
s/o0

....... ......
Q Division of Water:Qualih
Division of Soll,an.d Water Conservation
Q OtherAgenc
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection OO Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
---._.. _ _--- -- s Date of Visit: 7/12/2000 Time: 1034 Printed on: 1129I2000
Facility Number 48 7
...................: — —, Q hloi Operational Q Belo'o Threshold
Permitted M- Certified ® Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........�....
Farm Name: Heq:�y. Arnie .FArm................... ...... County: xl�e.� _........ ' ........
Owner Name: Hey...................................... Mryex_............... _..................................... Phone No: M-93.s.-5167........... ......
_
Facility Contact:
Title:...,
Phone No:
Mailing Address: j9.8Q.Hyde..P=1LCanaJ..................................................................... Pankgo.AC.......................... -.............................. 178.69........ ..
Onsite Representative: Herlxy..Ha1CY.!~y.......................................
Certified Operator. Hmry..J................................. Kwxey ........................
Location of Farm:
SR 1338,2 miles north of Hwy. 45
Integrator: B untitq;.FArws.......
Operator Certification Number: I&M............................
AL
® Swine []Poultry ❑ Catite []Horse I, atitudc 32 27 Longitude f 7 76 ' ° 09 K
Design Current
swine Canacitv Ponulation
® Wean to Feeder
1150
600
® Feeder to Finish
2350
800
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 10 Non -Dairy s
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,500
Total SSLW 351,750
Number of Lagoons l I❑ Subsurface Drains Present JLJ Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream lmliacts
L 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)
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
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .........
Freeboard (inches)...............JLJ0.............. .

5/00
Facility Number: 48-7 Date of Inspection 7/12/200 Printed on
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 4fi was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate puhlic 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
Con&ued on back
11 M/2000
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
[:]No
[:]Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Graze) Summer annuals Winter annuals
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?
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 Iack 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewhaVection 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?
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You wdl receive no further
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
■ ►Z4
Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
w(,eneral permit on site.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit. Measurement recorded in ft. Mr. Harvey stated that waste has not entered
lagoon in three years. Honey wagon is being utilized for waste application- Pits under house. Pumps directly from pits.
*Waste plan dated 5/13/99.
*Tact 1272 fields 1-6 have been changed in waste plan from 39.6 acres to 49.5 acres. Crop was fescue and fields converted to corn, wheat,
*Waste analysis dated 6/15/00. Nitrogen is 12.2 Ibs/1000 gallons. I
*Soil test dated 2/28/00. Lime is being applied as fields are worked. jl
Reviewer/Inspector Name

Reviewerlinspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number: 48-7 Date of Inspection 7112/Z000 Printed on: 11/29/2000
Odor Issues
26. 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?
27. Are there any dead ammals 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
34. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fm(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
Additional Comments and/or DrawinVv.-
9.N/A
*IRR2 calculated on spread sheet and record book.
7. There appears to be two tunnels on rimer dike wall at present liquid level. Need to eradicate rodents to prevent damage. Need to
continue to remove weeds from outside dike walls.

Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
1 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
13 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
0 Other Agency - Operation Review
Q Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow -tip of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
' Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 12 OD 24 hr. (hh:mm)
❑ Permitted 18 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered [] Not O erational iDate Last Operated:
Farm Name. f�!x.. �a..re �1irs..�................................... County:
ff.......... t'..1.............................................. ..-..-...-....-....
OwnerName: .................... E61.' ........... .... .... ........ Phone No:.............................................................--.................
Facility Contact: .... .... G i P•v✓e. ......Title: ................. Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ............................... ....................... 7 P•,,.C...........Cs.!...................................................... ........................................ ..........................
Onsite Representative:. ............... ... ... /. Integrator:......... .���.....................................................
Certified Operator:...... .-.. { `,��a' ......................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of .Farm:
............................................................................................................................................................... ...•-..-----.----..........................................--..--•-......
Latitude `t 46 Longitude • i 04°
Swine Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
IYO
0
Feeder to Finish
[ pb
124 1
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSL W
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance nian-made'?
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any 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?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ............ . d $..........-- ............. ......
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
I,No
Structure 6
1 /6/99 Continued on back

F1cility Number: Lj$ — -7 Date of Inspection
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 top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings'?
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes 91 No
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes jg No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Ycs �No
11. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen El Yes A No
12. Crop type cor" bFa.+t .V!JV_ VJJV_../ .'T' )5...........................................................__......... .............................................................. ........... ........ ....................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes J!�No
14.
Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
❑ Yes
19No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fait to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
$J No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
El Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
M No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
19 No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
M No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
M No
. N:o.VlalatlOilS:Or. defciericie5:were ritabed titirirtg tliis:visit:: Yoti uvi�l:receive t1atirther :::
1P... ..
• eorresb6 idehee; A66f this visit.. • • • . • .. • : • : • :. • • • • ; .:.:.:.: .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or anyrecommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
00 WAO d�c 4a konty vtoc­ appv(J"-'.
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name �'� � A.^
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1 _3o—.79
11/6199

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality m1pai
Washington Regional Office NCDENR
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary NORTH CAROLfNA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
May 24, 1999
Mr. Henry Harvey
Rt. I Box 82
Pantego NC 27860
Subject: Annual Compliance Inspection
Facility Number 48-7
Hyde County
Dear Mr. Harvey:
On 4130/99, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
conducted an inspection of your swine operation. Please review the enclosed inspection form.
This inspection form should be maintained as part of the records for your facility. Please note any
items that may be marked with a yes answer and make every effort to correct these deficiencies. The
Division of Water Quality will be conducting an inspection of your facility sometime during the
calender year of 2000. You are advised that you must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in your
lagoon(s) plus a storage volume sufficient to accommodate the rainfall and any subsequent runoff from
a 25 year 24 hour storm event to remain in compliance.
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have any questions in regard to this
letter or if I may be of any assistance, I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208. Please do not
hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
&�� C-�—��
Carl Dunn
Environmental Engineer
cc_ WaRO Files
943 Washington Square Ma11, Washington. North Carolina 27BB9 TEL [phone]B1 FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr, Henry Harvey
Henry Harvey Farm
Rt.l, Box 82
Pantego, NC 27860
16W,C.W;W,A
A947MIL
MCDENR
NOFrrM GAFtOL1NA E)F_�PAF7TME.NT OE
ENVIF20NMENT ANE> NATLJFiAL R5_'sc>uF24z_Es
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
October 9, 1998
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Henry Harvey Farm
Fac. No. 48-7
Hyde County
Dear Mr. Harvey:
On September 24,1998, I conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the
referenced facility. Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A
copy of the inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP), (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the
State Rules 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,
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27B89
Telephone 252194M481 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page 2
Henry Harvey Farm
October 9, 1998
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,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist IT
CC' Hyde County SWCD Office
C. B. Bunting, C. B. Bunting Farms
WaRO

y
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted p of Opera Date last Operated:
Farm Name: Henri:.Harxjkv.Earin_........................ .......................... ..„................... ......... County: Hyde WaRO
OwnerName: He ry...................................... Hairuey...... .................................................. Phone No: 252-935-526.7..........................................................
Facility' Contact: ....„„„„„„„„.„............. .Title: . Phone No:
MailingAddress: RL.2BRLB1......................................................................•.... ...... P.an rgo-Ac........................................................... 27864..............
Onsite Representative: RankHate:ei...................... ....... ..... ....... —.................................. Integrator: �3.uof� Farms......................................................
Certified Operator: Hein.L................................ Hamel:............................................. Operator Certification Number: 188.�.............................
Location of Farm:
................................................................................................................................................................................................. I A�
Latitude Longitude ®• ©®L
Swine Capacity .Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity. Population
®Wean to Feeder
® ee er to k finis
❑ Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
13 Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
❑ Boars
p Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer p on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,25
Total SSLVV 225,000
Number of Lagoons 114olding Ponds 11
❑
Subsurface
Drains
Present 1PLagoon
rea
❑ Spra),;ield Area
p
No Uquid Waste
Management
system
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

!u`I itv Number- dR 7 1 n.f. of lncno� fine 1
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (L42oons,Holdinj! Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ......................... ...... .
Freeboard (ft): 7
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 Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
r
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes
® No
p Yes
N No
Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
15. Crop type Cc mr.VamatlSnyheana....................... xjascua.(hayl................ ..... Sum=.Annetlsl..M.illet.............-Winter.Anmialsl.Rye........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes H No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. 1, 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?
p Yes
® No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
p No
Q. O-violations.or .. lerencies.were.note urrngt is visit.. You will receive nofurther.:.
.e eSpoAdCRe� �iQitt .tills Yis� : . . . . . . . . ...... .. . ... .... .
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ap7ph-e B. C7 0 --
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: y Date: G— aLA 1 B

INIVrrision o 01and water "O,nserva ion - operation KeV1ew -_ :;
CI Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
p Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
13 Other Agency - Operation Review
16 Routine p Complaint p Follow-up of DWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review p Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered N Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted In Not 0perationa Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Heary-Hamelt.Earim............................ ........... ......................................... County: Hyde WaRO
OwnerName: Hrairy...................................... Harxey.................... ............................... .... Phone No: 93_16_5U7..................................._..............................
Facility Contact: Mnk Haryey.............................................. -Title: owner ....................... Phone No: 252J935-5Z67 .......................
MailingAddress: ..................................................................... Pat> rgo..NC........................................................... 27861%...".........
Onsite Representative: Huk Hatt:ftry.............................................................................. Integrator: RuittingZarna ......................................................
Certified Operator: EVjmy.L ............................... Elouty ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 188.�.............................
Location of Farm.:
Latitude ©s ©C ©6
4 Longitude ®• ©6 ®u
Swine
Population
® Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
© Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to FeeFeF
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
esign current Design"Current
0i�ltry Capacity I'op0a"tion Cattle Cap'A6y Population
Layer p any
[3 Non -Layer lo Non -Daffy
er
Total Design Capacity 2,250
Total SSLW
0
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes N No
7/25/97

Facility um er: 48_7 Date of Inspection
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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure
6
Identifier: 3
Freeboard (ft): 8.0
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
ll 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?
r3 Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
®No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... CornlSoybcansl.. eat........................1=',escuz.(hay) ............... .... Sutntner. Annuals,.(millat).............WimeL_aunuals..(ryel........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
IT 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 ...o.via tions.or crerides•were.note . nrjng t rs visit:. ou Win.recer�ae no rter . _ .
.
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
13 Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
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);
* Certification was revised by technical specialist Rufus Croom for 750 wean to fee -der and 1655 feeder to finish; need to submit
recertification to DWQ to adjust certification number (WUP for 750 wean to feeder and 1655 feeder to finish)
* Mr. Harvey pumps waste from pits under houses versus lagoon to capture nutrients for crops; lagoon used as back up only
12. Once rye seeds out, need to mow dike walls as part of routine maintenance
13. Recommend installing a readable, gauged marker in preparation for General Permit - current marker adequate for certification
2. Mr. Harvey is keeping records of application amounts but needs to transfer to SLD2 forms to balance € itrogen to assure no ov .
pplication occurs. Need to pull waste sample (last taken 1/97) and then pull every 120 days for compliance
Reviewer/Inspector Name Tat Hooper
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency
p Division of Water Quality
19 Kouttne p t omptatnt p rotiow-up of l)wV inspection p t o
Facility Number
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
-up of uNwc. review p vtner
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Henry-Har.Yr,}.Farw...................................................................._. County: Hyde WaRO
OwnerName: Henry ..................................... Haryey ....................................................... Phone No: 9.35:57.h7...................................................................
Facility Contact: Henry-Harxay................................................Title: o.waer .................................................. Phone No: 9191935-5267 .......................
MailingAddress: RL 1..Hax.AZ...........,............................................................................... Paritega..Xc ........................................................... 2786.0..............
Onsite Representative: Henry.Harvey............................................................................ Integrator: Bumkiug.F.axtins.................................. .....................
Certified Operator:Rv&U..L................................ Elmzy ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 1Q843................... .........
Location of Farm:
: r....:............W..t.. Q..:...:H-::....::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::............::::::...... 3
Latitude ©•©� ©4� Longitude ®• ©4
Swine Capacity.Population
® can to Feeder
® Feeder to nits
p arrow to Wean
p Farrow to Fee er
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Soars
Poultry Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer Ip airy
p Non -Layer I Ip on- airy
p ter
Total Design Capacity 2,250
Total SSLW225,0=
Number of Lagoons / Holding PondsSubsurface rains Present13 agoon --Tr-ea p pray ie Area
p No Liquia Wasie Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? []Yes N No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) © Yes ® No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes H No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? 0 Yes N No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes N No
7/25/97

IlPacility Number: 48_7
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
N 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: .................L..................................................................................................... _........ .......
................................_................................
Freeboard (ft): 7-8.0
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
© Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
[]Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .............. Corn;.saybeans............................... E.escue.(hay.)................ .......... .............wheat.............................. summer/wintex-annuals......
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q .. a.viar Lions. or icrencies-were.note raring this visit:. oa .receive no further .
�or�espapdene� aaut #his vs�t:
p Yes N No
n Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes 11 No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
Comments (refer to question 4). 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):
Keeds to update waste analysis report (last 6/11/97)
7-8 feet freeboard in lagoon
9Vi
IReviewer/Inspector Name Brad Alligood (Data entered by O Hooper)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
December 1, 1997
Mr. Henry Harvey
Henry Harvey Farm
Rt. 1, Box 82
Pantego, NC 27860
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Henry Harvey Farm
Fac. No. 48-7
Hyde County
Dear Mr. Harvey:
ME
On September 5, 1997, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the Henry Harvey
Farm in Hyde County. Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the
inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 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 ay 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, f�
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Hy0e County SWCD Office
aR0
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirrnative Action Employer

t
19 tcoutine p comptamt p roiiow-up of uwV inspection p eonow-up of uswu review p Vtner
Facility Number
13 Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time or Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p at Operationa Date Last Operated:
harm Name: Henry-Harviey.Farrm ............................ ......................... County: Hyde WaRO
OwnerName: firmry. ...................................... Har.ey........................................................ Phone No: 93-5.5167 ...................................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: RL 1..tiax.81........................................................................................... Pantega-Kc .......................................................... 27.851t..............
Onsite Representative: Hank.lUmey.............................................................................. Integrator: Runting,.Form ......................................................
Certified Operator:Heary..L................................ Hat:ygy..... ........................................ Operator Certification Number: 188.43...................... ......
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0©4 ©L4 Longitude ®• © ®C6
ne
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
ee ere
Keanto
er to ernsrrow
to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finis i
❑ Gilts
10 Boars
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Lay r
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,250
Total SSLW 225,000
t
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 ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. Ifdischarge 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? (Ifyes, 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?
rea
I❑ spray Pietp Area
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
p Yes
p No
❑ Yes
❑ No
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
13 Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/97
p Yes ® No

f Site Requires Immediate Attention: iy
Facility No. 4P,-- 7
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: _I W . 1995
Time: 70 0
Farm Name/Owner: O Y O E {�� � Ka , ,vk / 1-f 00kV H �K y
Mailing Address: L.T- _ tgy- 82- )0'r..j7r:-_ "a
County: r- -
Integrator. Tisp C-"j0 Phone:
On Site Representative: _ _-9 ND2J_& 5� Hf+4.j W Phone: Q 3 G
Physical Address/Location: SR 1- � i1 ,— .r�1ts nJ � ,} X 4,,3
Type of Operation: Swine_ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: / S C'c Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ' ' " Longitude: ' ' To
Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) r No Actual Freeboard: 'S Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or ti -Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? V-or No Is the cover crop adequate? � No
Crops) being utilized: I+� 1 t c_rT, s� , �, 69ba . -. lcG(-, ` ins oo
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? for No
100 Feet from Wells? VZer No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within IQO Feet of USGS BIue Line Stream? for No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or N�2
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by roan -made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or � If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? r No
Additional Comments: �i zc klt J L. QKKLq6 OA) w JTtl S.4..
b ffC 1,S /A) G GCO (_4 wPj Ira J,
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.