090161_INSPECTIONS_20171231

r
Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
uutine O Com laint O Fallow -u of DW ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certified [3 Applied for Permit 13 Permitted 0 Not O eratioital Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name:..... Q. .!1! ..... U....... – 1.. County:....... / .L ..........................................
Z ................... Q r .............
r,
Owner Name: .6..r "' ^ p ... ro.{...�c.. .�y.G- .. Phone No. ZF 6e_--�_
f. ..........................................................
n � �� � No: FacilityContact: .....✓...e.w!+!! �. tYitl'...... N �.:....��`1 '.......... Phone ...................................................
�.�^..... ..
Mailing Address: ....1....�.....1� .....`t.. .. 7 ........................................... ............ .................. 2SP326..
Onsite Representative:.
+�.._ ........- ��....�.J..t ..... ....0}. 4 d .. lnte!; rator:..................................................................................._._
Certified Operator......... ..................... ... ......r. .2 ........ ................... Operator Certification Number ..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude • ` 04& Longitude • 6 «
Design Current. ` Designer Current: Desrgn Ctirieii3
Y -Swine `Capacity Population Poultry Capacity. -Population Cattle � 4 'Capacity ,P pulatic
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
—Bo 7
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other ,
Total. Design Capacity
Total' SSL.W
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon El Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/47
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 1 No
❑ Yes 4NO
❑ Yes O(No

Facitity Number. 0'7 —
4a'�xe t- - p
USo dtCawings of Y to better• etlatu:s�taiiiions. (use additional pages as rtecessary
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
XNO
Structures
laeoonsjlolding PaȢs, Flush etc.)
9.
„Pits,
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
�No
7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):..........
............................................................................ -•...........................................................................................
......
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
JKNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
M No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
P(—No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum Iiquid level markers?
❑ Yes
�No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
Wo
(If in excess of WM?,P, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type Iver g.. ...... .........
16.
1
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
0 N
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
F41No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
qNo
19.
is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
o
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
VkNo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
ONO
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
Wo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
No.violitioins°or defkiencies.werenoted-during this.visit.- You:willreceire-n&furi er
correspondehce about this'.visit: :
Vo»ts'(refir t$question lt} &EJ'MWn any YES atis veis anilinr aE y nimentlahcir�s'a any other conuven s.
x p,�yoa - £--'- �i"'aH`4.�Ts
4a'�xe t- - p
USo dtCawings of Y to better• etlatu:s�taiiiions. (use additional pages as rtecessary
r f r
S js Pilar' S?t,� S r7 -e a�►.�� t�aS �c55a..� 2. �� C+..1�S
�rDwntS Av, reg—es+ 44L-iS 4""rrk. be res"4414.
7125197
Reviewer/Inspector Name. g mp-
'
<E t �
7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
ii v If

e Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 7„ /jam )r
Facility Number Time of Inspection /G _' �' 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review 0
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Ins ection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:....._ ....�...... ... _ .... _.... --.... ..'? ............ _ ... ...............
Farm /`Tame:. ... .. Gd~....Z- _....—, _ .. ._ County:._....' .... ...., �.... _...... .
Land Owner Name: ��i�w,✓1` .-:�r�'i-''.a N ...... Phone No:
Facility Contact: ..... Sv Title:
J .. A.`. _ Phone No:
Mailing Address:. �....�/'- .... ! . �C... r. C�.!!�4.,� . l �'.. �... 2..Y/ .... _ .... _ .. ._...... _....... _ ..
..t
r -
Onsite Representative:.... S.a tilu.... _,..,.... .......... - .... Integrator:
Certified Operator: �...� .............. �. ;t'1 Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude �' �� u Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
e ` Design CUrI ent > w Design Cssrrent " D,estgn t Curr@nt !.
" �aoCWlAlin ai, . CattleCa acs Po $s
slahon"
ace >Po Matson _,
10Wean to Feeder ' ❑ ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -La er ❑ Non -
Farrow to Wean 4� ��'��` i-�- �s _
5�. Ae�6 4� R 3.
171 Farrow to FeederTo#al Design CartC1..
Farrow t0 Finish` p }s
0❑ Other
Number of Lagoons % HoldEng Ponds ❑Subsurface Drains Present
. < <': , ' ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Sps ay Field Area �.:
r
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a- If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes INrNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes iNo
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 )kNo
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? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes No
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
Continued an back

Facility Number: ... ap_ l
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?
Structu res_fLagoon5 and/or Holding. Pond.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
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?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
[:]Yes CTio
❑ Yes J!J�No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of W11M__P, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ............. ......_ _.. _....__._....__.... _ .............._ ...._
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
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?
Eel Catified Facilitie5 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 ANo
❑ Yes R"No
,'Yes ❑ No
AYes ❑ No
❑ Yes �KN`o
❑ Yes 15No
❑ Yes kNo
Ayes ❑ No
Yes A No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes)KNo
❑ Yes O(No
❑ Yes XNo
,Cbinmeats refer to estion '�Ex many -YES ;answers `and/or`any recommendatidns or any other"comments ,. `
Us' .drawings of facility to better exp latn,situatrons." (use additional pages ryas necessary):f
R T777 -17 -NO
Reviewer/Inspector Ncme x''RUM :Z''.. •_<,..
Reviewer/inspector Signature: � �� Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Wafer Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97
R T777 -17 -NO
Reviewer/Inspector Ncme x''RUM :Z''.. •_<,..
Reviewer/inspector Signature: � �� Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Wafer Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

:.. ❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review.
F
3 ®DWQ Animal Feedlot Qpeiratlon Site Inspection v
® Routine 0 Com laint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DS%%'C review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number Time of Inspection /U Lam" 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (eY:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:�/C �rr,� -• -. - �Z �., _ County: �..G"� •�-�
Land Owner Dame: ��.���''"���c �i�* Phone No: .i (2/0
Facility Conctact: Title: Phone No:
Al ailing Address:. daX 7 Ga.f?4., N C. 2 �Yy/
Onsite Representative:�. ._----.. -- Integrator: �d.1na
Certified Operator:,- — ----- Operator Certification Number-.. 2- v
Location of Farm:
Latitude 6 EEK Longitude • 6
of Uperation and
.S►nne 4
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ OtherIT . <S
Current ., Design . 4. Current :,.; Design ',;Current --.
Po ulatioa :>Puultry Ca achy Po "uiatton Cattle ,, Cs aci Po uiatioti
10 Laver ❑ Datry
iI Design
Capacity
�.
,
Latitude 6 EEK Longitude • 6
of Uperation and
.S►nne 4
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ OtherIT . <S
Current ., Design . 4. Current :,.; Design ',;Current --.
Po ulatioa :>Puultry Ca achy Po "uiatton Cattle ,, Cs aci Po uiatioti
10 Laver ❑ Datry
Number of Lagoons./ Holding Ponds Subsurface Drains Present }k
Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
x; -
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
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?
. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes )Q No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 91-fNo
❑ YesNo
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes XIs'o
Continued on back
iI Design
Capacity
,
Number of Lagoons./ Holding Ponds Subsurface Drains Present }k
Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
x; -
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
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?
. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes )Q No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 91-fNo
❑ YesNo
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes XIs'o
Continued on back

Facility Number:
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes A No
i
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 93 No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes f$No
Structpres jj,agoons and/or Holding Pgridsj
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes fStNo
Freeboard (ft): Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
— 2 .2� 11.
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
,LNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
PjNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
O -Yes
U No
20.
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes No
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
For
22.
Certified -Facilities Qnly
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Yes
❑ No
W85tg
A1DRliC2tiQj]
❑YesNo
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
O�No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type eK
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes A No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes I kNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes ❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes No
For
22.
Certified -Facilities Qnly
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes *o
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑YesNo
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):
�� !vim /,as• �,,.� ,�,A,c%,e� iti /��-J
.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: _ Date: —7- /
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility, Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Brown's of Carolina Inc
Farm #82
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
E) E 9--I IV R
November 12, 1996
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Brown's of Carolina Farm #82
Facility ID#: 9-161
Bladen County
Dear Farm Owner:
RECEIVED
NOV 12 1996'
FYIp� EAFr.F
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on-going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 919n33-0026.
Sincerely, n
A. Preston Howard, Jr.,., irector
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, 14C FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 An Equal Opportunity/Affirrnative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 Xrm7a 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper