700001_INSPECTIONS_20171231

2 VR
NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

I
N-,'02�"
-s -'�• .S
E
u .ram::9
N� s- 'd!� � y �e I N
'3 -

0 Z
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 700001
Facility Status: Active Permit: AW1700001
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County: Pasquotank Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 08/18/2017 Entry Time: 10:30 am Exit Time: 1 OA5 am Incident #
Farm Name: Weeksville Farm
Owner Email:
Owner: William Keith Meads
Phone:
252-330-4791
Mailing Address: 776a Dry Ridge Rd
Elizabeth Cty NC 27909.
Physical Address: 774 Dryridge Rd
Elizabeth Cty NC 27909
Facility Status: Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36° 11' 31" Longitude:
76° 11' 47"
Take Nixonton Rd (SR-1100) from Elizabeth City.
Turn left on Dry Ridge Rd (SR-1118) and farm is approx 114 mile on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Justin K Davis
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary inspectorls):
Inspection Summary:
Could not see pond level. The water level was very low.
page: 1

Permit: AW1700001 Owner- Facility : William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 08/18/17 Inpsecticn Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Feeder 0 0
Total Design Capacity: 0
Total SSLW
page: 2

a
Permit: AW1700001 Owner- Facility : William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 08/18/17 Inppeclion Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
110
0
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
E
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑ ❑
0
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑ ❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (i.e./large
❑
❑ ❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑ ❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑ ❑
0
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑ ❑
0
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑ E
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

i
Permit: AW1700001 Owner- Facility : William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 08/18/17 Inpsection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑ ❑
N.
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
0
II& Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑ ❑
E
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑ ❑
E
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑ ❑ ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AW1700001 Owner - Facility : William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 08/18/17 1npsection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑ ❑
0
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑•
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑ ❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑ ❑
0
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑
0
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29 At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
E ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
700001
Facility Status: Active Permit: AW1700001
Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Pasquotank Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0210312016 EntryTime: 01:15 pm Exit Time: 1:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Weeksville Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
William Keith Meads
Phone:
252-330-4791
Mailing Address:
776a Dry Ridge Rd
Elizabeth Cty NC 27909
Physical Address:
774 Dryridge Rd
Elizabeth City NC 27909
Facility Status:
Compliant El
Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36° 11' 31" Longitude:
76° 11' 47"
Take Nixonton Rd (SR-1100) from Elizabeth City. Turn left on Dry Ridge Rd (SR-1118) and farm is approx 114 mile on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Justin K Davis Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Owner was unable to meet at last minute.
Everything appeared to be in compliance with Permit AWI700001.
page: 11

Permit: AVV1700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 02/03/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine - Farrow to Feeder 0 0
Total Design Capacity: 0
Total SSLW:
page: 2

L/
Permit: AW1700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 02/03/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
M
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ❑
0
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑ ❑
0
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑ ❑
0
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
❑ ❑
0
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
❑ ❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑ ❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑ ❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑ ❑
0
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
El
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
Cl
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AW1700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads
Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 02/03/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑ ❑
E
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
E
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑ ❑
E
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
E
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below_
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
[]
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
[]
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AW1700001 Owner- Facility : William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection pate: 02/03/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑ ❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑ ❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑ ❑
M
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑
M
Other Issues
Yes No No Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ❑ E ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ M [] ❑
page: 5

M Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 700001 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS70000 1 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ . Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Pasguotank Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 12119/2008 Entry Time:03:44 PM Exit Time:
Farm Name. Weeksville Farm
Owner: William Keith Meads
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 7 6a Dry Ridge Rd €Zabeth Cty NC 27909
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant integrator: Carroll's Foods of Virginia LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: °11'3 " Longitude: 76°11'4 "
Take Nixonton Rd (SR-1100) from Elizabeth City. Turn left on Dry Ridge Rd (SR-1118) and farm is approx 114 mile on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number:
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name William Meads Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Eric Newsome Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 1211912008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Farm has ceased CAFO since 2005. After 2008, the facility would require permitting as a brand new facility should it be re -stocked at
or above 250 head.
#5. Severe erosion seen in the following areas of the following impoundments. The concern would be whether the lagoon walls would
be overrun due to lack of sufficient freeboard: 1) The Recycle (eastern most) lagoon has an eroded area on its north end that places
the water level at 15 inches of the top wall; 2) The Front (western most) lagoon shows erosion on its east end such that rainfall runoff
can flow directly into the impoundment; 3) The Back (center) lagoon has erosion on its south end, placing lagoon water within 1 112 ft
of the surrounding path, The north end of this lagoon has a very irregular slope, which could contribute to a breach under a large
rainfall event.
V. Dike walls need to be re -built or reinforced around all three impoundments to eliminate the potential for breaching.
#8. Estimated lagoon levels were made for the Back and Recycle lagoons, as there were no graduated markers to read.
#32. At the time of this inspection, no point of contact could be found at the presumed Meads household. The current known address
was received from the attorney who handled the property sale from previous owners, Mr. and Mrs. Bobby Keaton. Pending
confirmation from DWQ HO that the current owners are subject to a "deemed permit' status, documentation will be sent to the Meads.
Documentation will include a copy of this inspection report and description of their ongoing requirements concerning lagoon
maintenance and record keeping.
Page: 2

14 .
Permit: AWS70DO01 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads
Inspection Date: 12J1912008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 700001
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 11500 0
Total Design Capacity: 1,500
Total SSLW: 202,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon
BACK
24.00
agoon
FRONT
36.00
agoon
RECYCLE
15.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads
Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 12/19/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Rine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
00011
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
11000
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d, Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
1 Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other
than from a Cl ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
■
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
■ ❑ ❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑ ■ ❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■ ❑ ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
■ ❑ ❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ❑ ❑
■
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ❑ ❑
■
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 12/19l2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > > 0%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Chapanoke
Soil Type 2 Perquimans
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management ❑ ❑ 0 ■
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP? ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads
Inspection Date; 12/19/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 700001
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN ? 10%110 lbs.?
�
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?.
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Ghapanoke
Soil Type 2
Perquimans
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
% Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: William Keith Meads
Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 12/19/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑
■
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
❑ ❑
■
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑
in
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑
■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑ ❑
■
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑
■
Other Issues
Yes
No NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
❑ ❑
■
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS700001 owner - Facility: William Keith Meads Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 12119f2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ❑ Q ■
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
■nnn
Page: 7

Soil Map-Pasquotank County, North Carolina
Map Unit Legend
Pasquotank County, North Carolina (NC139)
Map Unit Symbol
Map Unit Name Acres in AOI
Percent of AOI
ChA
Chapanoke silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
3.0
36.7%
GrA
Gertie silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
0.4
4.9%
PeA
Perquimans silt loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
4.8
58.4%
Totals for Area of Interest
8.2
1 100.0°k
LISDA Natural Resources Web Soil Survey 2.1 12J2312008
Conservation Service National Cooperative Soil Survey Page 3 of 3

Soil Map—Pasquotank County, North Carolina
36' 11' 32"
36' 11' 25"
}
i
Map Scale: 1;1,460 it prnted on A size (6.5' x 11') sheet. °1
N iv
N Meters
p 0 24 40 80 120 r°
N Feel
0 50 100 200 300
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 2.1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
12/23/2008
Page 1 of 3
36' 11' 32"
36' 11' 25"

Soil Map—Pasquotank County, North Carolina
MAP LEGEND
MAP INFORMATION
Area of Interest (A01)
Very Stony Spot
Map Scale: 1:1.460 if printed on A size (8,5" x 11") sheet.
Q
Area of Interest (AOq
Wet Spot
The soil surveys that comprise your AOI were mapped at 1:24,000.
Soils
A Other
Please rely on the bar Scale on each map sheet for accurate map
Soil Map Units
measurements.
Special Line Features
Special
Point Features
Gully
Source of Map: Natural Resources Conservation Service
Vi
Blowout
Web Soil Survey URL: http://websoilsurvey.nres.usda.gov
®
Borrow Pit
Short Steep Slope
Coordinate S
System: UTM Zone 18N NAD83
y
Clay Spot
h N Other
This product is generated from the USDA-NRCS certified data as of
Political Features
the version date(s) listed below.
4
Closed Depression
Cities
Sail Survey Area: Pasquotank County, North Carolina
X
Gravel Pit
water Features
Survey Area Data: Version 11, Oct 3, 2008
Gravelly Spot
EJ Oceans
Dale(s) aerial images were photographed: 8/15/2006
(®
Landfill
Streams and Canals
The orthophoto or other base map on which the soil lines were
q
Lava Flow
Transportation
compiled and digitized probably differs from the background
... Rails
imagery displayed on these maps. As a result, some minor shifting
Marsh or swamp
of map unit boundaries may be evident.
R
Mine or Quarry
N Interstate Highways
©
Miscellaneous Water
US Routes
p
Perennial Water
Major Roads
v
Rock Outcrop
/v Local Roads
+
Saline Spot
Sandy Spot
Severely Eroded Spot
Sinkhole
Slide or Slip
o
Sodic Spot
Spoil Area
d
Stony Spot
USDA Natural Resources
Conservation Service
Web Soil Survey 2,1
National Cooperative Soil Survey
1212312008
Page 2 of 3

I
0 Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency --------
Facility Number. 700001 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWS700001 n Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Pasguotank Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04105/2006 Entry Time:12:45 PM Exit Time: Incident #i:
Farm Name: Weeksville Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Bobby Lynn Keaton Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 812 Andrews Crossing _ Smithfield VA 23430
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant n Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36° 1 V40" Longitude: 76' 11'58"
Take Weeksville Rd. from Elizabeth City turn left on Dry Ridge Rd. on left about 114 mile.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Bobby Keaton Phone:
24 hour contact name Earl Stallings Phone:
Primary Inspector: Joseph Gyamfi Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: Bobby Lynn Keaton Facility Number : 700001
Inspection Date: 04/0512006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
All attempt to get in touch with Mr Bobby Keaton failed. Mrs Carrie Keaton called on 3/31/2006 and spoke with David May. She said
she did not know the whereabout of Mr. Keaton. They have been divorced about 15 months ago.
Mr. Earl Stalling's attorney, Mr Herbert Mullen out of Elizabeth City is working on a foreclosure to restore the ownership of the land
back to Mr Earl Stalling.
I have spoken with both Messrs Herbert Mullen and Earl Stalling to request a copy of the foreclosure.
On a visit to the farm,
- No one was at the farm
- Farm seems to be abandoned long time, no hogs and houses in dilapidated condition
- Lagoon looks like fresh/clear water ponds
Will continue to track the person responsible for taking care of lagoon
Page: 2

Permit: AW5700001 Owner - Facility: Bobby Lynn Keaton
Facility Number : 700001
Inspection Date: 0410512006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
W Swine -Feeder to Finish 1,500 0
Total Design Capacity: 1,500
Total SSLW: 202,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
SACK
19.00
agoon
FRONT
30.00
agoon
RECYCLE
Page: 3

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: Bobby Lynn Keaton Facility Number : 700001
Inspection Date: 04/05/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? D ■ D D
Discharge originated at
Structure D
Application Field D
Other 171
a. Was conveyance man-made? D D D ■
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) D D D ■
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
D
D
■
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Doom
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
D
D
D
■
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
D
■
D
D
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
D
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
D
D
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6_ Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ■
D
D
D
or closure plan?
7_ Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑
D
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to rooted pits,
■
D
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
D
■
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
■
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? D D D ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? D
Hydraulic Overload? D
Frozen Ground? D
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? D
Page: 4

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: Hobby Lynn Keaton
Inspection Date: 04/05/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 700001
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
fl
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
n
Application outside of application area?
n
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
n
n
n
■
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
■
16. Did the facility fail to secure andlor operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
0
❑
■
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
■
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
0
0
Cl
■
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
U
0
n
■
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
n
n
n
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
n
Page: 5

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: Bobby Lynn Keaton Facility Number: 700001
Inspection Date: 04/0512006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? n
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
n
120 Minute inspections?
Weather code?
fl
Weekly Freeboard?
rl
Transfers?
n
Rainfall?
rl
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
F1
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
Crop yields?
Stocking?
n
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
n
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
n
n n ■
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
n
n n ■
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
n
n n ■
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
n
n n ■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
n
n n ■
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
n
n n ■
Other Issues
Yes
No _NA_ NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
DON
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
rl
rl rl ■
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
n
n n ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS700001 Owner - Facility: Bobby Lynn Keaton
Inspection Date: 04105l2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 700001
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
nnn■
nn■n
■nnn
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
a Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit •D Routine O Complaint O l=ollow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Bate of Visit: j — --� Time: -
Facility Number �
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 13 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: V V i!.. _5 l... ..... f.. �.'i. r"� County:...... 7t .. 5 �. '................ (......
-.................................
Owner Name:...---- :?,(��j .... Phone No:
+................................. ��........... ......... ...
MailingAddress: .............................. -•-............................... --•-••-•-.--•- - - - - ----........ ................................ ..........................
FacilityContact: ............................................................... Title:... ............................ .................. Phone No: _ _.........._..
Onsite Representative :"i`�,ti ........... ..................... Integrator:............i........°�.:__._.._.._..._._._.._�....
Certified Operator: ---.L j. �.......... .... ........... 21L`�� 5............ .... Operator Certification Number: -•--••-- 7 _........
Location of Farm: Jam. S
F1
[ I�
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �� r.�« Longitude �• ���
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
t�J ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
[I Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Discharges & Stream Impacts
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
[I Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
El Yes �f No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon [I Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade? ❑ 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 gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes El 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? [I Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure 1 Struc /ure 2 Structure Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier i r . G
� _F------ .. ......................................................... ....................................
hoard (inches):
112103 Continued

Facility Number: ' p — 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?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes IRNo
❑ Yes kJ No
❑ Yes kiNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
JjYes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Q3 No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding P PAN [IHydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type L r A aJ lei.
13. Do the receiving crops di er with those des grated in the Cerd
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?
Odor Issues
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below v{� �i( ❑
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes [ No
19. 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)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes No
Air Quality representative immediately.
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): XField Copy ❑ Final Notes
n/j"Yf A'i. 6�'f �Q�� n 1 tit f �/ fS-{ G L ) 15 f Y✓ 'f 4 I\ 7 �- _ i 1 4�i�[: �..
l %3 4 / „ `7 l l %em s �1 ; ' 4 C h + 2.,
3�,y� � 3 � r/13 ` 3 `l
5� ► 15 1, i'1
f 5 1 OKI � `+G+/D)))
J�j
01
_
r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Ltspector Signature: _ Date: 3 -1L t,'
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: `7 Li — Date of Inspection
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes,UNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
16'Yes ❑ No
:Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ,tj�No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
discharge, freeboard over
Yes 4 No
(ie/ problems applicatiop)
27_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes ;IPTNo
L
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
,P Yes ❑ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ YesIT No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
—�YI-
3I . If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
$Yes— ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form [I Crop Yield Form [I Rainfall [I Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comr ments and/or Drawings:
i"�r,E'a—►t� �- ►^�E� �� �,,� I�^ ` Icy
�l
A- cis s ` , �.. � i �-� L✓ (-� t t r^��r�,.,
3� �j" -ALL
v-t a cy-111f.
12112103

_49 Division of Water Quafity
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency.
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
acility Number
Date of Visit: 09/25/2003 Time: 1Z:00
F7D -. 1
O] Not —operational Q Below Threshold]
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: W'.Celt&Aa1P.Xaxm.......................................................................................... County: 1' SJ IxQx+ 4li..................................... WAR .......
Owner Name: D9blbY.1<.yng........................ Kg.7tRm........................................................ Phone No: 257-3;56.- 14............ ..............................
Mailing Address: 1 Z. P►lu r. .GxQs i�g..................................................................... 5xithf gad...Y..A...................................................... x.43. IM..
FacilityContact: ............................................... ...............................Title:..............................--.-----.................----- Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: int2..Qin.Q10.Sii............................................................................... Integrator:C,�Cxull'.S. oQsdS.Qf..'�1.,.S��.............................
Certified Operator: l,xtw9!?.d.Ea1d..................... StwungS........... ......... ............ ........... Operator Certification Number.1,93.7.6 .............................
Location of Farm:
rake Weeksville Rd. from Elizabeth City turn left on Dry Ridge Rd. on left about 1/4 mile.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 11 l 40 fL Longitude 76 11 5$
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
1500
❑ 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 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
Number of Lagoons 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray )Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Stnicture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
Identifier: ................................... .....................
Freeboard (inches): 16? 12?
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 7fl-1
Date of Inspection 09/25/2003
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? &I 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 minirrnim 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
❑ Yes ®No•
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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
[3 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
* Emergency site visit conducted as part of Hurricane Isabel's damage assessments.
Received notification that there was evidence of possible discharge from farm by Carl Dunn, DSWC, on 9/24/03.
& 8) There is the possibility of a prior discharge, however there is no waste being discharged today. The joints to the irrigation
pipe have been leaking, especially near the lagoon/pump where the angles at the joints are too great, The joints need to be sealed
properly before any further irrigation takes place.
The lagoon marker looks to read approximately 19", however after walking the perimeter of the lagoon the waste level appears
o be around 12". Have a new gauged marker appropriatley installed in each lagoon. Notify me of the day this is to happen.
14) A 30 day POA is required be of the high freeboard. A message was left for Mr. Keaton describing these problems and requirements,
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: - Date:
05103101 Continued

Date of Inspection
Facility Number: 70-1 0912512003
Odds sues
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
29. 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 Iand application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
J
05103101

Division of Water Quality's
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OPRoutine O Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visil: Time: D
rO Not Operational OBelowThreshold
Permitted Certified ConditianallY Cc oiled 0 Registered pate Last Operated or Above T eshoid:
Farm Name: County
Owner Name: — �--��. �r o'l� Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Lam,
Facility- Contact: -I itle;
OnsiteRepresentative: L. �-+r1
zz
Certified Operator: _�wo� rLLB
Location of Farm:
Phone Nu:
Integrator: A)
Operator Certification Number: 17
lfjf] Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 F 11 4, Longitude F---]0 1 1.
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer I
I
❑ Dai
Feeder to Finish
SZa2
ILI Non -Layer I
ILI Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Managen
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? {If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? '(If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillwav
Structure I h-� 0 Structure 2 �Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: -JS eS�11`��
Freeboard (inches): l
05103101
Pray Field Area)
❑ Yes
r No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
(&No
PO XY Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 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? ❑ Excessive Pending El PAN ❑Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type ( .11, N./Jr3r.. =5 11 / L.
❑ Yes [@ No
❑ Yes I4 No
❑ Yes [@ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ALNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
13. Do the receiving Aps differ with th edesignated in e Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ONO
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General 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.) / /1'
❑ Yes
XNo
19.
'
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
14No
22.
Fail to notify regio f emergency situations as required by General Permit?
44�
(ie/ disehar reeboard probs, over application)
JW No
23.
Did Reviewer nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
E� No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0 No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
11] No
0 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 Copv El Final Notes
5-Jul ox 16 0 Ym'O
0z ld.2,
-t° =�_ s + Ck4 I I 1s 40
Reviewer/Inspector [tame
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: G
05103101 Continued

&0
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 7FRIOT
Odor Issues
20. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at'or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours`'
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue an neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted" (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan bladc(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Cl Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes a No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
1
` 0
sic 11-1
g '^ C� t^'y y'
P�0�a��,
T"C_ �
^ L • 4
� � �Ay
rV ;t'G e, >rj
05103101

1ter' us€"""DivisionO
! Division of Soil. and Water Conservation
p Othewgenry=_
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit © Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number DAQ of 1 isit: 2/6/2002 I inie: 400
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Stallings Wholesale Meats Inc County: P.asquatank..................................... .WARO.......
Owner Name: Linwood E. Stallings Phone No: 252-335-4741
Mailing Address: III.Lune.Dr....................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title: .........
Onsite Representative: Liuw ud..Ear.ISYallui.gs.........................................
Certified Operator: Liu w ud..Earl..................... Stallings............................
Location of Farm:
Llizaa>Seth..C:ity..NC............................................. Z79.09 ..............
.................................... Phone No: .... ........... --...............
Integrator: Carroll'&-Foads..of.YA,.In c..............................
Operator Certification Number: 19,3.7.6.............................
InKU VVUV"VlllV 1XU. lrUlU r JKZUUCLII 1.1LY LUlll ICLL UIL 11ry nlUgC -MU. Oil ICIL UUUUL 11Y UILC. y
T
® Swine ❑ Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ®s © ® Longitude ®• ©�
Swine Capacity Population
[3 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
❑ GIlts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ayer
p Non -Layer
p ter
Total Desgb t Capacity 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
Number of Lagoons 2 ❑ u sur ace rains Present p Lagoon Area 13 Spray Fie rea
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps [3 No Liquid Waste anagemen 'System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field I] 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) I] Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® Yes p No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 0 Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......... primary ................ segandary....... ........... ecy-cle........... .......... ......................... ........... ....................... ...................................
Freeboard(inches): ............ ..30.......... ..-.......... ...... 24...... .......... ...... ......... 3Q.... ........... .--... ......................... ..................................... ........................... --.......

[Facility Number: 70-1 0aft• of li}SIit cl ion
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
p Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding p PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
p Yes
® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
1I Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N 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
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Reuuired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General 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.)
❑ Yes
®No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21 .
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
R No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
,_.
C.omieh#s efer fo uestion E Iainn ]LIES answers Anil/or.an "re coiepdations or an otbeis�ommeiits °°_
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as n essa€y) 1 Field Copy p Final Notes
....� . ..,. _
NP
7. Building #1 has small leak at corner of building near flush tank. Small amount of waste leaking. Needs to be caulked immediately.
7. Leaking flush pipe at house 42 by flush pit. Needs to be caulked.
2. Ditch behind house 42 has evidence of past animal waste discharge. From flush pump that had leaking seal. Due to dry conditions,
appears that waste did not leave farm site. Seal has been repaired.
7. burial
*Tractor ruts around secondary lagoon have been repaired. Need to veg. this area.
`Remember to take soil test for 2002 and follow lime requirements.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin Mclawhorn
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

O5103101,& Continued
ac, ity Number: 70_1 1)me (El' lnsj; ctjwl
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 0 Yes 0 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? 0 Yes ® No
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, 0 Yes 0 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? 0 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.) 0 Yes 0 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? 0 Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? 0 Yes 0 No
1
goon levels are recorded weekly as required by permit.
aste analysis dated 10/15/01 nitrogen is 1.5 lbs/1000 gallons.
:cords are complete and balanced.
ke walls have been mowed.
:member to take waste analysis 60 days before/60 days after irrigation events.

Facility Number �—� Uate of Visit: 9!2$/2001 Time: 9:50 am Printed on: 10/5/2001
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted N Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: Stallings Wholesale Meats Inc County: P.asgm.Qtan.k....................................... ARO.......
Owner Name: Linwood E. Stallings Phone No: 252-335-4741
Mailing Address: 11.f.L,ame.I?r............................................................................................ Elizattelk.0ty-NC ............................................. 27909 ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:.................. ... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Ea.rl.,SWIi.ugs............................................................................. Integrator: Carrol1's.F.oads..of.YA,.Inc..............................
Certified Operator:Ling+vond ............................... staIlings ........................................... Operator Certification Number: I9.3.7.6.............................
Location of Farm:
Fake ee svia Rd. trorn Llizabeth City turn left on Dry Ridge Rd. on left about 114 mile.
r
N Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ®� ®� ®u Longitude ®• ©° it
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® ee er to finis
p Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
p ayer
p Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
Number of Lagoons 2
p
u
sur ace
Drains
resen
❑
Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Fie rea
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
system
o
Liquid Waste
management
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 13 Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade? p Yes ®No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) E3 Yes ®No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? na
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ®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? E3 Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
.... .........- ........... ......... ....... ........................ .... ........ I ..................... I.....
Freeboard(inches):...............28...............................20...................................................

aci ity Number: 70_1 Date of inspection ® Printed on: 10/5/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
]a No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
p No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N 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 1? Hydraulic Overload
[]Yes
N No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
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
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ 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
®No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General 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
®No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
®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?
p Yes
®No
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
25_ Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes H No
Ip No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comment§ (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
Records available for review. AL
�7. Need to shrub the vegetation around the lagoons, especially the smaller one.
Tire ruts in various places around the lagoons need to be addressed to prevent ponding of storm water.
Waste analysis - 8/22/01 = 1.3 lbs.; 6/19/01 = 1.8 lbs.; 3/9101 = 1.4 lbs.
Soil analysis - 2001 available.
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Hadn't planted winter crop yet. SEE PAGE 3
IReviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison; i entered by Ann Tyndall I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: , �, 4-41),41 (r y,, Date: 10-pr--e 9

05103101
Continued
Facility Number: 70_1 Date of inspection ® Printed on: 10I5/2001
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
E3 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?
p 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?
❑ Yes
IN No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No

-..
[ ypV A rti
Michael F. Easley
r._ Q
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
© Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
To: Producers
From: Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Off"icc
_�r
Date: October 11, 2001
Subject: Animal Compliance Routine Inspection
Year 2001
Enclosed please find a copy or copies of the Compliance Site Inspection(s) (as viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the
referenced facility, by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and
keep with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal. Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator_ (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage. erosion. and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following wluch are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the general
permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
cp The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAVAIP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for Iagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that proxides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
T An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually.
q) The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility- owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
m;n;,num of three vears.
cp Land application rates small be in accordance with the CAWMP_ In no case shall land aWlication rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during anygiven wplication.
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated charnel, an earth ditch. stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suggested, not EMgMA to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
cp The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance wRth the CAViW and General Permit by properly
managing, supervising, and documenting daily operation and maintenance. The OIC also has the responsibility to certify
monitoring and reporting information. The failure of an OTC to perform his/her duties can result in a letter of reprimand,
suspension of certification, or revocation of certificates.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1.2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact your Technical
Specialist or meat 252-946-6491, ext. 318_
Cc: WaRO
LBH Files (inspection form only)
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

O.Dh ision of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Foliow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
- - - F:Icilit% Number !kite of Visit: 6/8/20t11 Time: 1300 Printed ow 9212001
70 1
Q Not Operational Q Belo, Threoholll
Permitted 11 Certified Q Conditionally- Certified ® Registered hate I a,,t Operated or Abu►r Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: St>�Il~n a.Wblttle9-a1e.11��at .�lx+k........ ......... Count%: >Pa�glunxistt.................................. W�i tS?.......
Owner Name: UnlY.(HId.E,............................ Stalhztzs................
Phone \,,: ?.5Z.73..3,547.4...........................................................
Mailing Address. Il1La. c.Dr.......................................................................................... lali7.altie h.C.ilX.--NC............................................. 179.09 .............
Facilit- Contact:................................................_............................7-itle.................... Phone No:
Onsitc Reprerentatis e:a1ClS1taUjM.._..................................................................... integrator: Carr' FaaattVA�
..............
Certified Operator: J.elavgad.................... „..,.... �1,allttf�;S............................... ........... Operator -Certification Number: �,��.....�.....
Location of Farm:
Take Weeks ffle Rd. from Elizabeth City turn heft on Dry Ridge Rd. on left about 114 mile. AL
® Swine [:]Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Lalitude 36 ' 11 'L Lo"AtudcF 76
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulaiion
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
1500
1300
❑ 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 -Davy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,500
Total SSLW 202.500
Number of Lagoons 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area © Spray Fiell Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Sr -stem
Diwbar%eti & Siream 1111paci'+
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprkv Field ❑ Other
a
❑ Yes
❑ No
h. If discharge i, ohsurvvd. did 11 reach Water of the: State'? (II'ves. n►oliti, DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge i., obse:rve:d. what 1, the a Zlffliale:d llm% in P-al/mi n'.'
d. Does discharge hspa;; a (It'ves. aotih- DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M No
3. Were; there any adverse impacts or potential adverse itnpacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
M No
wa-,te Collection & Trealment
1. 1s storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
M No
111n1-1111-L: I S11-11C1n11-C 1. i "1111i1111e t
sirlielllrC ()
111cuu1i�1 ..........putuazy._...--•-•........ swnUdary......... ......................................................................................................................................_........
32 30

05103101
Facility Number: 70-1
pate of inspection F 6/8/2001
Continued
Printed can: 9/21/2001
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 Aulication
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
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 Pon -nit 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 an_y 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, fr=board 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?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
CommmU (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of fact7ity to better explain situations. (use additional pages as nocessary): ❑ Field CoP), ❑ Final Notes
19. General Permit not on site. Will mail copy to producer.
*Waste analvsis dated 3/9/01. Nitrogen WKUL= 1.4 lbs/1000 gallons
*New waste analvsis taken on 6101/01. Results have not been received_
*Discussed IRR2/waste analysis schedule_
*Soil test dated 5123/00 and 4/19/0 L Lime not required.
*Row crops are planted by third party.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin McLawhorn
RnL-6wnr/1nanrr4nr Manahirw• Dame

OSIO3101 Continued
Facility Number: 70 -t Date of Inspection G1812t1(il Printed on: 9/21/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation_ asphalt.
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
3 l _ Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
June 5, 2000
Mr. Linwood E. Stallings
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
111 Lane Drive
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
SUBJECT: Notice of Deficiency
Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
Facility No. # 70-1
Pasquotank County
Dear Mr. Stallings:
�Ctg Qcu+M v���
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (as it is
viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility by the Division of Water
Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm is complying with
requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 21-1.0217, Senate Bill 1217, the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and/or General Permit; (2) determine whether the waste
utilization plan is based on total or actual wetted acres; (3) the farm operation's waste
management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator;
(4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or
runoff. The following deficiencies were noted during the inspection.
cp In accordance with condition III, item 3 of your general permit, you are required to
conduct an annual Standard Soil Fertility Analysis, including pH, copper and zinc.
cp The irrigation events in November were in preparation for the winter crop of which was
never planted by the land owner. It is very important to make sure there is a crop in the
designated fields that will utilize the applied nitrogen.
In addition, it is suggested to contact your Technical Specialist to check the accuracy of the
lagoon marker in comparison to the lagoon wall.

Page Two
Stallings
# 70-1
As a reminder, please note the following which are conditions of the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and the general permit therefore these items must be
implemented:
cp The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in
the.CAWMP. At a minimum, maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage
ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24
hours storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard
cp An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to
the time of application as practical and at least within 60 days (before or after) of the
date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually
cp The following records are required: rainfall and lagoon level data, off -site solids
removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation records. These
records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and
legible form for a minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land
application rates exceed the Plant Available Nitrogen (PANS rate for the receiving crop
or result in runoff during ankgive application.
cp keep lagoons/storage ponds free of foreign debris including, but not limited to tires,
bottles, plastic products, light bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solids waste.
cp The lagoon areas should be kept mowed or otherwise controlled and accessible. High
grass does not allow you to conduct a thorough inspection of the lagoon area for
seepage, rodent damage, etc.
9 It is suggested not required to keep crop yield information for future use to update your
waste management plan. You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan
can be updated.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 252/946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
7 �
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: Pasquotank MRCS
Non -Discharge Compliance Unit (w/out attachments)
NCDSWC-WaRO (w/out attachments)
WaRO
v-LBH files
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 70 1 Date of Visit 1 4/19/2000 1 Printed on: 4/20/2000
Q Nat O erational 0 Below Threshold
© Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..................
Farm Name: Statli�tFg&.kYllAlsr �lilr. tr,�IYS.�tI.0.............................................................. County: Pal .q toU.n(..................................... �'. Q.......
Owner Name: Li,a.W.AQd.,E............................$1alfillo ..................................................... Phone No: ZSZ-33.S-4.7..4X ....................... ........
Facility Contact: ........................
Mailing Address: 111.,1i gXj.C..Dx......
.... I ....... I.......... Title: ................................................................ Phone No:.................................
Onsite Representative:,axl..11lli�tgs....................
Certified Operator:Ujim.od.Eaxl..................... StIllltgS.......
Location of Farm:
Fluffheth.CRY... NC ..........................
Integrator: G,�rx011'.S.,Fllad;x.of.Y. Pr,.l�1±Y..............................
....................... Operator Certification Number:J93,76
-................:: ..............................
N Swine []Poultry ❑ Cattle [] Hor Latitude 36 • 114 F 40--IL4 Longitude 76 • ll 5$ °�
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
1500
❑ 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 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
Number of Lagoons 1 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes N No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes N 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 N No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..............................................................
Freeboard (inches): 26 26

Continued on back .
Facility Number: 70-1 late of Inspection 4/19/2000 Printed on: 4/20/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® 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 ONO
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
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? (:1 Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [:]No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard., waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did 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?
D.. Nwvio 666 ns or deficitneies-were noted during -this visit: You will receive n_o further
correspo-ndence abort this visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
Cntnm nts (ri fer to question #) Exptam any. YES answers and/or_any recbmmenclatrons or Any' other eom-ments
Use d#a qs of facility to better explain sitaaiionsc (use additional"pages as necessary);
Records available for review.
Waste analysis- 8-27-99 - #1 = 1.1 lbs; #2 = 0.87 lbs.
2-10-00 - #1 = 1.8 lbs; #2 = 1.2 lbs.
Soil analysis not available for review.
Pumped in November '99; prepping for wheat, but farmer (third party) did not plant wheat.
Continue to practice weed control.
Male sure to have all records (permit, freeboard, irrigation records, etc.) available for review.
SEE PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn Hardison Entered by Ann Tyndall

�Reviewer/InspectorSignature: Date: _ I
Facility Number: 70--1 Date of Inspection 4/19/2000 Printed on: 4/20/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes N 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 N No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N 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 N 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 N No
ontlnue to manage the stormwater diversion areas.
you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, extension 318.

x vmston of non ana water conservation - uperauon meview
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
p Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
I* icouiine p k.ompiamt p miaow -up of uwtl inspection p Poiiow-up of vawv. review p Vtner
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 Iir. (hh:inm)
p Permitted E Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered lo Not Operaripo_na7l Date Last Operated: ...........................
Farm Name: ............................................................... County: Pasgaotank WARO
Owner Name:U.P.W.040..E........Phone No: �5.Z315-47..4.1...........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: X1.1..one..P..r................................................. ... Elh4.bg#>!i.QiX ..1.............................................Z9S1$............
Onsite Representative: Earl.Stallings.............................................................................. Integrator:CarrolLs.EkoAs.af.Y.A,.Inc.......... ...................
Certified Operator: .................... rtg,..._..,.,._„_.,. Operator Certification Number: Q
...........................
Location of Farm:
Take.�?E!eeltsxille Ind..iratnat.Elizalt�exb.Citx.turq.Irfk.nm.Dry Ritdge.I�tl..An Ieft ak�nxtt.I14. mill,e....................................................................-_......
Latitude ®• ®- Longitude ®• © ®*
Swine Capacity Population
❑
Wean to Feeder
®
Feeder to
Finish
1500
1500
p
Farrow to
Wean
p
arrow to
ee er
❑
Parrow to
Finish
❑
its
❑
Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ airy
p Non -Layer I ❑ on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
Number of Lagoons 1 2 I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Ip t.agoon Area Ip spray Meta Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ o LiquidWaste Management System 1
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes M 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 p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......r�eS.f.Llar�eJ...... ...... tw.1.(.SxrWb.......................... ..
Freeboard (inches) ............... �.3...............................26.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
Continued on back
Printed on 10/2219�'
3/23/99

Facility Number: 70_ 1 Date of I nspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type wheat, soybeans
Printed on 10122/99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A W MP?
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes H No
pYes ®No
pYes ®No
Comments (refer to question ft 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):
Questions 14 and 17 nonapplicable
* Waste plan dated 10/20/97 with an overall PAN deficit of 3346 lbs.
* Last waste analysis dated 3/l /99 with structure 1 at 1.7 Ibs/1000 gal
* Last soils report dated 3/12/99 - for future testing, need to note crop related to sample (wheat or soybeans) when submitting sample
to lab
7. Lagoons have good grass cover and in need of routine mowing to allow for visual inspection. Mr. Stallings has sprayed broad leaf
weeds - continue efforts to control
19. Had not balanced wheat IRR2 for 1998-99 crop - no over application has occurred. No waste has been applied to soybeans this
season. Worked with Mr. Stallings on setting up IRR2 for next wheat crop based on wettable acres and on a per tract/field basis
Reviewer/Inspector Name Pat Hooper 252/946-6481
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Frinted on MM9
Facility Number: 70_1771 Date of lnspertion
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 ® 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.) ❑ 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? ❑ Yes 11 No
AA
Printed on 10/22/99

- BivIsM"pn dSckanil Water Conservation --Operation Review _
13 Division of Sgii and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
- 7ltvion of -Water Quality - Compliance Inspectioq _
- IfitheAger cy Qiscr,>Q:.Revn w
0 Routine Q Complaint Q Uolhni-up of DVVQ inspection Q Fulloxr-u of DSWC re. ie" Q Other
1'il l'ItiTN Number74 1 Da t e of l n s peetion 6-4-i9
-. - Time of Inspection 12:I5 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E3 Permitted M Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Nut O crational Dale Last Operated:
Farm Name: ............................................................... Count, PasgnQtanh........,......................... .- Vl?.R.Q.......
Owner Name: Linvrao............................ 1tt,llittl=-..-- - ... Phone No: 3:35-,7.47.41. ...
Facility Contacl:..............................................................................Title:............................ ........ Phone No:
MailinLyAddress: J-11--Lane.Dx........................................................... :.-............................ ElUattrAx.CiU..NC................ ............................. 179.09.............
Onsile Representathe: Karl.8.1a linga-..................................... ........................ .--........... Inlegratur:CAf�OIl'.x.lrQvsls.�If..Y.r�..1me,...............................
Certified Operator. L'tnmundkart ...................... StAIlliM.....-.
IAwation of Farm:
Operator Certification Number: 19.3.7.6.............................
[AIce.!'i:'.eekwiUte-Rd.:ft�r�tn Eli�a�e>rl�.C�it�:.lutrn lelt�n.l?q.11itdge.Rsl.:ant.lefit.abaul.�(�.nalile,............................................................................
-.----•--.....----•---•........----..- .......................................................•----•--------•--------.............------•--•----.........------•---•-...........-----.............-----•--------.........--------•----•--•-----••---••--•-------..........
........................... ....................................................-----...................................................-•---•...................................................
Latitude I v 44Longitude F 76 • ll 00
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Ca acity Population
Poultry
Capacitv Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
I
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder- to Finish
1500
1300
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
10 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
1,500
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
202,500
Number of Lagoons 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Sprat Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps I0 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharg s & Stream Impaeis
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discltaree originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ® Other
a. I[`di d,aruc: is ob,en c:d. +:1 the 4;ouveN-uwt; Tuan-rnadu''
h If -die: hares is oh,en ed- did it reaclE v,"11cr of tlrc State'? (!1'}`Cs. notirl- DWO)
c. II'discharLc: is ob vn ed- w hat is Itic estituated flow in calhnin'-)
d. Do.:s dischargc; b.Npa,s a lagoon sNslem'? (lfy-cs. Elotif 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?
Wa-,te Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) Iess than adequate? ❑ Spillway
5[luctl,rc 1 Structure ' SIru411,rc _ Structure .I 41.E'uuture
kIL:111111ur........................................................................................................... .............................
....... ....................................
] r.ct7u:,rcl tiE,c•hcsr ...... ......... M............... ............... 7................ ................... ................. .... ..................... .......... ...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees. severe erosion.
seepage, etc.)
3/71AN
® Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes % No
❑Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
tiff lOMV 6
...............................
❑ Yes
® No
Continued an hack

Facility Number: 74-1 Date of hispeetimi
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 maintenancelimprovement?
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?
l l _ Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pond in g ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Wheat Soybeans
6a-ss
❑ 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 peaded 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 Record, c.V 1)ocumeni.
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 w4rich cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ® 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):
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance:. A�
Facility exempt from WA Determination due to irrigation design.
1. FIushtank line clogged and animal wastewater was overflowing from the flush tank. The pump was turned off and the line repaired.
Animal wastewater did not reach Waters of the State. This facility will receive an Notice of Deficiency.
J
Reviewer/Inspector Name Daphne B. Cullom
Reviewerllnstiector Signature: Date: _ 4 __Cf r

3/23/99
Facility Number: 70-1 Date of Inspection
Odor k. ucn
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 ® No
roads. building structure. and/or public property)
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts. missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters. etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes Z No

Facility Number 70 1 Date of Inspection 913/98
Time of Inspection 1000 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered U Certified ® Applied for Permit E3 Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: St�tllinga.W..bcal al A �a�ta.lm�............................................................... County: Paxilmolank .................................... WARO.......
OwnerName:>,inwuod.L............................. staoings ..................................................... Phone No: 335- 47.41....................................................................
Facility Contact:...................................................................... ... Title:....................... Phone No:
Mailing Address: 111.Lague.Drr. .......................................................................................... 1E Uzabcth.G'.iu..SIC............................................- Z79.09 .............
Onsite Representative: Eairl.S.Wings.............................................................................. Integrator: Willi&ms.La=.of.XC..1.u.c..........----.......---
Certified Operator. l.au.WuadEa 1............... ... S.t a................. ... p ..,. ,alllhRg ........ ............... Operator Certification umber:.1932G
Location of Farm:
�y►'xi�.i1�i..f�n�m EF.lialn��tla�.City.Xu�t1�lan.l?udga.l;cl...atl.J,fit.att►ut.il!1.aail� .............................
Latitude 36 • 114 F_4_0_- Longitude 76 • I16 F S8
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
1500
1000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
�� I❑ Non -Dairy
Ai Design Capacity 1,500
Total SSLW 202,500
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes CK No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field jI Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes © 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 % No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? [I Yes X 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? ❑ Yes g No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes Z No
7/25/97

Facility Number: 70-1 Date of Inspection 1 9/3/98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (LaL-oons,Holdina 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): ..............2: 4...........................1113............................... ....
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)
15. Crop type.....................aQybc,=.......... .......... ....... ................W..11QAt........................
Q Yes . No
CK Yes 0 No
Structure 5 Structure 6
[3 Yes 9 No
Q Yes 0 No
9 Yes E] No
[j Yes No
D Yes No
......................................................................
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 Iack 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 beeping 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?
-No. violations: 6rd'eiiciendeg•w6te oted'duribg � 4is-visit.. �'-b1t v�i�I "weive no forther• -. - .
:cvzres:pQnde�ce aihok!his.vjs ti ::..... .
❑ Yes Z No
El Yes 0 No
Q Yes O No
[] Yes X No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes N No
9 Yes El No
[] Yes 0 No
E] Yes 0 No
9. Need to land apply waste as soil and weather conditions permit and in accordance with the certified waste management plan. Lagoon
I can be pumped down 6.0 feet from top of dike and lagoon 2 can be pumped down 5.0 feet from top
12. Walls were mowed around 3 weeks ago - need to mow again to allow for visual inspections. Need to shape, stabilize and vegetate
are wall section on south wall of lagoon 2 and north west corner
22. Need to take soil samples annually - has not samplcd. Did spray waste on wheat in spring 1998 but did not record - need to record
all applications. Has not received waste analysis report - pulled around 8/15/98 and sent to Raleigh 9/1 /98
* Has two small recycle ponds at end of each house which are connected by transfer pipes to lagoons 1 and 2
* Lagoons 1 and 2 operate independently
Reviewerlinspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

wa l")
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
January 4, 1999
Mr. Linwood E. Stallings
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
1 I 1 Lane Drive
Elizabeth City, NC 27909
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
Facility No. 70-1
Pasquotank County
Dear Mr. Stallings:
* `rPRIL 11.1r• �
On June 4, 1998, I conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the Stallings
Wholesale Meats, Inc. in Pasquotank County. A copy of the inspection report is attached for
your review.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan (CAWMP); (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 following deficiencies were observed during the inspection
♦ The waste plan must reflect the farming activities of which you are doing. Any and all
crops to be planted on the designated fields in the plan must also be listed with the
correct plant available nitrogen. Make the necessary corrections to your plan to include
the correct crops, tracts of land and acreage ASAP.
♦ It is suggested to install a gauged marker with six-inch increment markings which also
illustrates the lowest point on the dike wall and the start and stop pump marks. This
form of marker will prove to be efficient to you when you receive your general permit,
which requires you to record weekly freeboard levels.
♦ As a reminder, you are required to pull waste analyses within 60 days of application
therefore it is suggested to pull samples quarterly.
♦ Continue your efforts to improve the vegetative cover on the dike walls. A complete
vegetative cover on the dike wall improves the integrity of the dike wall.
♦ Practice weed control on the dike wall and in the spray fields. Consult with the
County's Extension Service for guidance.

Cont. Page Two
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc -
Facility No. 70-1
January 4, 1999
In addition to the aforementioned deficiencies, it is suggested to determine the wetted acreage in
each irrigation pull and map these patterns out in relationship to your waste management plan.
The IRR-2 records can be kept by irrigation pull and the computations completed by wetted
acres.
It is very important as the owner and the Operator in Charge that you resolve these
aforementioned deficiencies and any other problems that may arise, as soon as possible. For
additional assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist. Nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and liability of any violations that have
resulted or may result from these deficiencies. Failure to comply with your Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and General Permit could result in civil penalty assessment and/or
revocation of your General Permit.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection- Should you have further
questions or comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call at [phone], ext.
318.
Sincerely,
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
cc: Pasquotank County SWCD Office
DSWC-WaRO (w/out attachments)
Compliance Group (w/out attachmcnts)
WQ Central Files
,-AJaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled 1 10% post -consumer paper

13 Division of Soil and Water -Conservation -Operation Review - -
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation Compliance Inspection
Dtvtstoa of Water ualt C'om Lance Inspection -
.a.:` p
T Other A en ' O eration"K iew
IS Routine C (:omplamt p hollow -up of D%NIQ inspection p he
Facility Number
13 Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Stallinga.V!`.holesale.Meats.luc................
Owner Name: Linwaod.E........................... S.tallings......
Facility Contact: ......................
Title:
-sv-up OI t1JV\'C review O tVtner !
Date of Inspection - _v
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Not 0peratlona Date Last Operated:
...._....... County: Pasquotank WARD
Phone No: 2.527335-47.41..........................................................
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 111.Lane.D.r..................................... -........................................... ......... Fliaaheth.C:ita:..NC.......................... .................... 279.09-------.......
Onsiite Representative: SaarLStallinbs............................................................................. Integrator:F.rank,W.illiams.ofNG.......................................
Certified Operator: Limood.Earl..............._... Stallings ........................................... Operator Certification Number: 19.3.7.6............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude ®• ©= ®�
Swine Capacity Population
p can to ee er
® Feeder to F oils
p arrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer p Dairy
p Non -Layer [3 on- airy
p other
Total Design Capacity 1,50
Total SSLW ,5
W
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 2
JE3
Subsurface
Drains
resent EILagoon
. rea10 Spray Fie rea
p
No
Liquid Waste
Management
System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a_ If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in aal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
13 Yes ® No
p Yes M No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ONO
n/a
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes M No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes ® No
Continued on back

8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons. Holding 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(11):............. 225....... ....... ........ ...... 325..... ...... ....... ......... 42........................... 3-0 ...............
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?
I2. 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)
13 Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
N Yes
❑ No
© Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
15. Crop type ....... Corn.(Silage.& Grain)......... Small.Gxai�L4..D�e�af_.Barley.....................Soybeans....................................
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?
- . u:v, o t ells-¢r` . e bietrties'welre •nwe u • pig t s v t: - . oft- w ryeuive 0q _ t*t er` -
:.. correspon�erice aCrotit t is.Visit:...:::::::..:........:.::.:. :
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
B Yes p No
❑ Yes N No
Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® 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): .
Need to. complete the irrigations records-- Use IRR I and tRR 2 form AL
Need to collect waste analysis ASAP
eed to get your annual soil analysis by Dec.19.98
16 =Revise waste plan to include all crops you plan to grow mlcuding the tcorrect.tracts and acreage: .
Control weed on the lagoon wail - Trash noted in lagoon. Should be removed regularly
I2 -Some bare spots noted on_the dike.wall Need to establish grass on the bare..spots. -
pon receiving your general permit you will_ be required to record weekly freeboard It is sugested to install a gauged'marker with
ix inch increments that Ulustrates the lowest point on the dike wall and the minimum and maximum pump mark 9- `
arkerwilf allow you to record the -freeboard more actually. If you have any questions; please contactIme at252
Reviewer/inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: " f
(: -JL

.M7DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
❑ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Routine Q Comnlaint Q Follow-ut3 of DWQ inspection O Follow-un of DSWC revietiv O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number `7
Time of Inspection ]34 hr. (bh:mm)
Total Time (in friction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.'_5 for I hr IS min)) Spent on Review
aCertified ❑ Permitted or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Td%C• County:
dwner :game: Lr ; ; !kc�(, � S D-- j 1 n�$ Phonetio• ) 3
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No: 3 s `'i 7 14
Mailing Address: J_E_ 1 —CL ? �
_ � r Ell- z-c-6, f h
cr c
Z-7 `7L
Onsite Representative: Li L''�"�` -- — S'� r' S ii
Integgrator:
6
_ ' ._.
Certified Operator: ��L✓OC�
C to
S� (� . S
4
Operator• Cemfication
-) ^.,
Number: .
Location of Farm:
0 r /I 4 1 'f
Latitude 136 *I IF4-0 " Longitude `76 • i1 4'S
ype of OpMdoa .
Swine - Design n Ctzrreflt Design Current y - Desrgtt current
Ca acity Population Poultry Cat3aciry Pouttiation Caere Canscity Po 61atfo6-`
❑ Laver 1 ❑Dairy i
El Non -Laver IONon-Dairy
Total Desi6n `Capacity
Cl Other Total SSL. -Q -6 DO tis
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish L 0
Farrow to Wean
Farmw to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Number of.Laaoaas [-Holding Ponds' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Sprav Field Area
General
i. Are there any buffers that need mainteuanceArnprovement?
?. Is anv discharge observed uom any part of the operation?
Disc'- rue originared at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obse.ntd, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is obse:yzd, did it reach Sut ace'A'arer? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in salirnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, noon, DWQ)
Is rhere evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there anv adv.:rse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
`. Docs anv part of tshe waste management system (other than iagoonsftlding ponds) require
maintenancelimprovement'
❑ Yes [ o
❑ Yes x o
❑ Yes Ee<
❑ Yes 2<0
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �[R�-o
❑ Y" s iJ l`lo
❑ Yes <1;o
Continued an back

racility dumber: Q — „. �._
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ YesK10
'. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Yes
irrmctures FLanoons andior Hoidin-Pondsl
9. Is less
storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) than adequate?
❑ Yes
2rNo
Freeboard (ft). Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? _
❑Yes
M<O
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Io
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
<0
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
irmrnediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do liquid level
any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum markers?
❑ Yes
9INo
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
21<0
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ) *'
IS. Crop type
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWIVIP)7 ❑ Yes No�
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes t_y'No
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 0
20. Does facility require a follow-un visit by same agency? ❑ Yes NO
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes [�No
For Ce'fied Facilities Onl-v
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ffNO
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes io
Comments (refer to question 9): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations.orany other comments -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional -pages as necessary) :
W EGG -7-)l fl -R t 1( --�
i
—eviewer/Inspector Name w
ReviesverAnspector Signature:
cc_ Division of Wxuer Quality, kyr
Date:
Quality Section. Faciliry Assessment Unit • , 4/30197

V J (1( Z.t)
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 19, 1997
Mr. Linwood E. Stallings
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
111 Lane Drive
Elizabeth City, North Carolina 27909
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Stallings Wholesale Meats, Inc.
Facility No_ # 70-1
Pasquotank County
Dear Mr. Stallings:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection conducted on July 15,1997 at
the referenced facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read
this inspection and keep it with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CA WMP); (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.
Please be advised that farms with 250 animals or more are required to obtain a Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan by 12/31 /97 and if this requirement is not met then the farm is in violation and is subject to
civil penalties. The following items are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and are
conditions of the general permit therefore these items must be implemented:
- Keep lagoons/storage ponds free of foreign debris including, but not limited to tires, bottles, plastic
products, light bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solids waste.
- Pipes discharging wastes into the lagoon should be extended beneath the surface of the lagoon to avoid
releasing gases from agitated wastes_
The lagoon areas should be kept mowed or otherwise controlled and accessible. High grass does not
allow you to conduct a thorough inspection of the lagoon area for seepage, rodent damage, etc.
An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of
application as practical and at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This
analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
Soil analysis is required annually
All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding
damages. The outlet can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other
suitable outlets.
It is suggested to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
Lagoon levels must be maintained within the permanent and temporary storage and at a minimum must
always'1.ve n;ne e-cn inches of fr-eboard.
A gauged pump marker must be installed upon certification.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Aff►mmaWe Action Employer

Cont. Mr. Stallings
Page 2
In accordance to the Senate Sill 1217, all animal facility that fall within the requirements of State Rules 15
NCAC 21-1.0217 must be inspected twice a year. The Division of Soil and Water, a local Soil and Water
Conservation District or the federal Natural Resources Conservation Services conducts an operational review
and the Division of Water Quality conducts a compliance operation site inspection.
If you have any questions, please contact your local Technical Specialist or me of 919/946-6481, ext. 318
Sincerely,
Lyn Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: WaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affim7ative Adion Employer

0
4
p DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
19 Routine p Complatnt p o ow -up o inspection p o ow -up ot DSWC review p Other
Facility Number
Farm Status: 0 Registered p Applied for Permit
p Certified 13 Permitted
p Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Stallings Wholesale Meats Inc
Date of Inspection 7I I5-97
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
County: Pasgwtaak,..................................... .WAR.Q.......
Owner Name: 1jawaotl.E,...... Sxallings..................................................... Phone No: 3354I41....................................................................
Facility Contact: Earl.StalliW..................... .......................Title. owner ........... .......... .......................... ... Phone No: same .........................................
Mailing Address: 1.11.L ne.Dr........................................................................................... ElizabtethCity...NC............................................. 279.09.-....... •
Onsite Representative: nn.Qne.(gn1Tbr.permissianfrnm.Mn Stallings)... Integrator: bdependent.................. ............ ......... .....................
Certified Operator:Liawaod.Earl..................... SwRogs ........................................... Operator Certification Number:193,76............... ..............
Location of Farm:
Latitude a 4 fi° Longitude • 1 .4
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
p Non -Lay r
❑ can to Feeder
13 ee er to mts
❑ Farrow to can
❑ Farrow to Fee er
❑ Farrow to Fmts
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Total Design Capacity 3,0
Total SSLW 1,299,000
Number of Lagoons I Holding Ponds ❑ u sur ace Drains Present p agoon Area p Spray ie rea
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes E No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: 13 Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes 13 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gat/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes ❑ No
3. Is there eviden-e of past disc'.;a, gc from ai,, part of the { peratiot•1? ❑ "es If NO
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ■ Yes p No
maintenance./improvement?
4/30/97

ac: sty um er: 70_1
r
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
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes N No
Structures_ (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? U Yes ❑ No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
2�....... ...................20...............................3.5............................... L25....................................................................................
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
I I. 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)
15. Crop type........CAzn.4Si>ag.(..&.Grain.).......
p Yes ® No
p Yes R No
® Yes p No
® Yes p No
13 Yes ® No
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes p No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? p Yes ®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? p Yes ® No
19. is there a lack of available waste application equipment? p Yes ®No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? p Yes ®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? p Yes ®No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? p Yes p No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? p Yes p No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? 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): .
is telephone Mr. Stallings authorized the inspeciton and a follow-up review of the inspection was conducted via of telephone I AL ii
pprox. ?50 animals on site feeder to finish
pray irrigation witrh portable irrigation system onto 35-40 acres
5 - Heavy vegetation around lagoon and houses which made it difficult to observed for holes, rotten grain under Hog slat causing
vector problem
9 Small lagoon had less than 19 inches
12 some erosion noted along lagoon and fresh sand without vegetation on one area of lagoon. The heavy vegetation needs to be
13 - no minimum and maximum irrigation markers in the lagoons
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,Lyn Hardison
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ` Date: rf — r 5-

❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
® DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site inspection
0 Routine 0 Com faint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DS% C review 0 Other
I Date of Inspection
Facility Number io I
Time (if Inspection 24 hr. (hh.mm)
Farm Status: 11 Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted
Total Time fin fraction of hours
tes:1.25 for I hr 15 min}} Spent on Review
or Inspection (.includes travel and processing)
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ....................... _ ...........................................................................
`J-� li;R�� e. Count
Farm Name: .............R.........9......W........5..............�;1............................ ti41`.4?., . 1- .
Owner Name:.. L� n JCc�Q. J) .......... ..4. ..clj (y,� s................................. Phone tio:..Q.!. .....'�3��..~.. ..... lt....................
.......
Facility Contact: ... '............................. Title:.... . .................................. Phone N-o:........" ar�...........................
btailinn Address:.... �..�.... Lt ?� 4.. r vG... ........ .................................... .�► a..... it. % ....................... ...Z-1 M.9...
Onsite Representative: ................. Integrator-,,. .(
Certified Openit[tr:..�a.... e) ?.k....... ar..........s���......%..................... Operator Certification Number: .... .q. -� ..& ..
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 C Longitude 0
Type of Operation
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
❑ Wean to Feeder
RN Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSL W
0
'a
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non-Dairt
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEI Spray field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance: man-made?
h. If discharge is observed_ (lid it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galintin?
d. Does discharge bypass a laumon system'? (.lf yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
4 Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge'?
7. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ZrN0
❑ Yes 2`Yo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Q'No
❑ Yes ,Fz:--Mo
Yes ❑ No
Continued on back

Facility Number: o- 1
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures I lagoons and/or Holding Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
r 3 5` .... /.r]...s'.`.......
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Aonlicatian
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes .B No
❑ Yes eNo
❑ Yes A3NO
zles ❑ No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type ......a!!!.......................................................................................................................................................... .
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?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes ,�o
dTrfes jf No
.[TYes ❑ No
10.11fes ❑ No
❑ Yes 2rNo
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes EfrNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes _014o
❑ Yes E�rNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #):' Explain any YES answers and/or any r . koffiinendafions or any other comments.
Use drawings. of facility to better explain situations. (use additionalpageg as nece ary):
V (A Vk".,- - n5 �Z_C"1�tJv, W DCAJ hl S �rtSe-„<e?
S�S►'".1 1 r r. dL � � QOi^�stj71� b r ri�.�-lp�-r J�, `��.. P-r�9� � !>5 ' 4-0 rts=
7� S Ur OS —�t^l iffcttx`rti' . GI T1Y UG.� / — rGG�lll�
�L Erca5i^, iu�+crac (+ f c.�c[ — Veje-4`A
ru�
��5�u�p1�be-rrceS k'-�-��- c� i►Y.5�
haEps .mom c�h �--�
Reviewer/Inspector Name L�' - 5vy,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Facility Number: - o — f I Date of inspection
Additional Comments and/or Drawings,
rv�4�e
AA
sJ `ram Irlu Ice- use b ,
4110/97

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. -10-a}
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERA IONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: fQ, 1995
T ime : _ LD IY.t.L
Farm Nam
Mailing
County:
Integrat
On Site R
Physical
me- iel
Type of Operation: Swine All Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 2noc) No. of Animals on Site: �OQ
DEM Certification No.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Ft + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) Yes or No
Actual Freeboard: 3 Ft
/ = 1 �d . S. lQ°e'er°°" `1
Was any seepage observed from the lag n(s)? Yes ar
Was any erosion observed? (fe;l or No
Is adequate land available for spray? es or No 6-Z) Qe__
Is the cover crop adequate? 6;;%r No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS inimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? es or No 100 Ft from Wells? s 6r No
Is the al waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or�
Is animal wastend applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-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)? Yes or No
inspe or Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

00md
¢I M LTJ
to H x
(D M
C'
H
O fJi
M
H
H
O
O