250024_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS,
INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS

r•�
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
250024
Facility Status: Active
permit: AWS250024
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County;
Craven Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
01/26/2017 Entry Time: 09:00 am Exit Time: 10:00 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Pig Paradise
Owner Email:
Owner:
Steve A Sanders
Phone:
252-523-1772
Mailing Address:
310 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Physical Address:
400 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Carolina Howard
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35' 17' 14" Longitude:
77' 23' 06"
Between Dover & Ft.
Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Operator Certification Number: 17045
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative[sy: Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Steve Sanders
Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspectors):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/26/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Soil test due 2018
Waste Analysis
11-25-16 M
8-23-16
.38
5-16-16
.62
2-25-16
1.14
Crop yield complete
Freeboard & Rainfall complete S correspond wl irrigation
Sludge Surrvey 11-5-16 Thick-2.9'
LTZ-9.1'
Pump intake-9.5' } 16% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 8-25-16 wl 14.2 gpm
15)Sprayfields wet need maintenance - contact state agronomist
7]Maintain lagoon banks - cut woody vegetation, grass vegetation encouraged
page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/26/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 988
Total Resign Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.50
29.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
Lagoon
SECONDARY
Lagoon
TERTIARY
page: 3

s%
Permit' AWS250024 Owner -Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/26/17 Inppection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5, Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.l large
❑
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
0
❑ ❑
❑
a. 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
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 10%110 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: 4

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility . Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/26/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
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
❑
M ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
M
❑ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
MEI
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the,CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
[]
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/26/17 Inppection 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑ m
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA 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?
❑
❑ M
❑
Dther Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑ ❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
E ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
250024
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS250024
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County:
Craven Region:
Washington
[)ate of Visit:
1210212015 Entry Time: 09:00 am Exit Time: 11:00 am Incident #
farm Name:
Pig Paradise
Owner Email:
Owner:
Steve A Sanders
Phone:
252-523-1772
Mailing Address:
310 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Physical Address:
400 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Carolina Howard
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35' 17' 14" Longitude:
77' 23' 06"
Between Dover & Ft.
Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor. & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders Operator Certification Number; 17045
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Steve Sanders Phone
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone. -
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary lnspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil Test complete 8-28-15 - lab put wrong crop on sheet - call tab get updated
Waste Analysis 8-17-15 '35
6-16-15 .54
3-23-15 .84
Calibration complete 8-25-15 wl 14.2 GPM
Sludge Survey 10-22-15 Thick-2.8'
LTZ-10.3'
Pump intake-9.5') 14% Sludge Ratio
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond w! irrigation
'Stay off wet spots in sprayfield (with irrigation)
'manage woody vegetation on lagoon bank
page: 1

t
Permit: AVVS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date. 12/02/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 908
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355.060
Waste Structures
❑isignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.50
27_00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
Lagoon
SECONDARY
Lagoon
TERTIARY
page: 2

A
Permit: AWS250024 Owner -Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number 250024
Inspection Date: 12/02/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
res No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
[]
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑ ❑
❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [Not applicable
❑
■ ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%110 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

0
Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility Steve A Sanders Facility Number:
250024
Inspection Date: 12/02/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
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 andlor land application site need improvement?
0
❑ ❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[]
N ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
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: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number.
250024
Inspection date. 12/02/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit.
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑N
❑
❑
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?
❑
❑ E
❑
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,
❑
❑ ❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DM of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(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 ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0 [] ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
page: 5

a
0
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 25DO24
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS250024
❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
County:
Craven Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 12/08/2014 Entry Time: 09:00 am Exit Time: 1030 am Incident #
Farm Name: Pig Paradise
Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders
Phone:
252-523-1772
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator.
Carolina Howard
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35' 17' 14" Longitude:
77' 2T 06"
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Disohrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Operator Certification Number:
17D45
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Steve
Sanders
Phone
On -site representative Steve Sanders
Phone
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 12/08/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Soil Test 8-6-13 wl highest lime 1.1 tons ) applied lime
Cu S Zn values Win range
-Next one due 2016
Waste Analysis 9-22-14 .48
7-14-14 .54
5-16-14 .33
3-3-14 1.43
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
-15ysprayfielda wet be careful w1 irrigation after large rain events
'Green algae in ditches by lagoon
Crop yield complete
Sludge Survey 11-10-14 #1 Thick-2.5'
LTZ-10A'
Pump intake-9.5' ) 12°% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 9-18-14 wl 14.01 GPM
page: 2

Permit: AVVS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection pate: 12/08/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine -Farrow to Wean 820 964
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355.060
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.50
31.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
Lagoon
SECONDARY
Lagoon
TERTIARY
page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 12/08/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 130
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
[]
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le.l large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
fi. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
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?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 4

Permit:
AWS250024
Owner - Facility :
Steve A Sanders
Facility Number:
250024
Inspection Date:
12/08/14
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application Yes No No Ne
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
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 5
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop andlor land application site need improvement?
E
1111
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes 02 Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
24. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, ptease specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit. AWS250024 Owner - Facility : Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 12/08/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yff
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
[]
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23, if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑ N
❑
(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
❑
N ❑
❑
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 Me
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the iinspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑ ❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 250024 _ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250Q24 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine „ County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 12/18/2013 Entry Time: (}$gip AM Exit Time: 10:00 AM
Farm Name: Pia Paradise
Owner: Steve A Sanders
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address. 310 Cobbtuwn Rd Dover NC 28526
Physical Address., 400 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Cargling HMgrd
Location of Faun:
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Phone: [phone]
Latitude: a5°1714" Longitude: 77°23'06"
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey
On -site representative Steve Sanders
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 17045
Title
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
Date:
Phone
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 121IM013 Inspection Type: Cvmplianoe Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Sail Test "-13 wl highest lime 1.9 tons I need lime
Cu & Zn values w/in range
Waste Analysis 1-30-13 1.09
5-8-13 .93
7-10-13 .68
9-24-13 .04
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
Crop yield complete
Sludge Survey 10-22-13 #1 Thick-2.9'
LTZ-9.8'
Pump intake-9.5') 15% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 5-22-12
'Manage weeds in sprayfield
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 1211812013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number. 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
O swine - Farrow to Wean 820 896
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Tvoe Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
28.00
agoon
PRIMARY
28.00
agoon
SECONDARY
28.00
agoon
TERTIARY
28.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility. Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection date: 1211812013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
Cl
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (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
11011
❑
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,
❑
■
Cl
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
Cl
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives 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: AW5250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 12/1W013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crap 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?
❑
■11
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS250024 owner -Facility. 5teve A Sanders Facility Number; 250024
Inspection Date: 1211812013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPD£S only)?
❑ ❑ ■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■ ❑
❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 12/18/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Cl ❑ ■ ❑
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? if yes, contact a regional ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ Cl ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewe N I nspecto r fail to discuss revi ewli nspecti on with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
in
Page: 7

t
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 250024 : Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 _ ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qompliancg,,_Insnection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Boutine County: Craven Region: Wgshinaton
Date of Visit: 03/12/2013 Entry Time: 09:00 AM _ Exit Time: 10:30 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Pia Paradise Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Qover NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd „ _..,.,,.._ „ .. . ,_. Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Carolina Howard
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35'17'14" Longitude: 77'23'06"
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Operator Certification Number: 17045
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Steve Sanders
Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 0311212013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Soil Test 7-25-12 wl highest lime 1.7 tons
Cu & Zn vaiues
wlin range
Waste Anaylsis
8-11-11 .53
1-9-12
.67
3-20-12
.70
5-17-12
.66
8-2-12
.45
10-16-12
.82
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
Sludge Survey 10-17-12 Thick-3.3'
LTZ-9.4'
Pump intake-9.5' } 18% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 5-22-12 wl 14.2 GPM
"Maintain wet areas in sprayfield - no irrigation till dryer
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 03/12/2013 inspection Type; Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 906
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
30-00
agoon
PRIMARY
30.00
agoon
SECONDARY
30.00
agoon
TERTIARY
30.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 03/12/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.aJ large trees, severe
Cl
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks andlor 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: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 03/12/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
0011
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all corn ponents of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page' 5

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Rate: 03112/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA WE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■
❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 0311212013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous foss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■ ❑
Qtherlssues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑
■
❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional 110
❑ ■
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 Vie drains exist at the facility?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
In
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency Facility Number. 250024 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 El Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Ins ion Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
rETt ii�l 1'10I16IF-117, 1111IrL•1►M
Farm Name: Pig Paradise
0�a E - zz I .Ia-
.
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd _ Dover N
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant M Not Compliant Integrator: CaMlina Howard
Location of Farm:
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
jjRecords and Documents
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
Latitude: 35'17'14" Longitude: 77'23'06"
6 Waste Cot, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
jj Other issues
Operator Certification Number: 17045
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Hate: 04/04/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Soil Test 7-28-11 w1.7 tons lime
Cu and Zn values wlin range
Waste Analysis
5-12-11 .70
8-11-11
.53
10-26-11
.75
1-9-12
.67
3-20-12
.70
30}'Faiture to notify OWQ of high freeboard level of 16" on 8-28-11
Crop yield complete
Sludge Survey 10-20-11 Thick-3.5'
LTZ-9.0'
Pump intake-9.6) 20% Sludge Ratio
Calibration due 2012
'SprayFields wet, don't irrigate until conditions permit
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 041D412012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 916
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
25.00
agoon
PRIMARY
agoon
SECONDARY
agoon
TERTIARY
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number . 260024
Inspection Hate: 04/04/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.1 large trees, severe
IJ
■
U
U
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6_ Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
110130
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
Cl
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematIves that need maintenance or
❑
■
Cl
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
Cl
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5250024 Owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 04/04/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 ibs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management,
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Cl
Page: 5

Permit: AWS250024 Owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 04/04/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Cl
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?
❑
■ Cl ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility. Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 0410412012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment {PLAT} certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application]
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? 1101111
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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

e
0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 250024 _ Facility Status: 8dive Permit: 8WS250024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: ComRliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit., Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/1212011 Entry Tlme:09:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Pin Paradise Owner Email:
Owner: SteveSanders Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd _ Dover NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: E Comptiant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Carolina,HoWarrd
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°17'14" Longitude: 77°23'0§_'
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment jj Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 17045
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Prone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number. 250024
Inspection Date: 04/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspectlon Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit in records
Waste Analysis 6-3-10 Al
8-13-10 .44
10-11-10 .50
1-4-11 .71
2-23-11 .88
Soil Test 7-26-10 wl highest lime 0 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
Crop yield Complete
'Make sure to get lagoon level weekly - only one reading October 2010
Sludge Survey 9-15-10 #1 Thick-3.6'
LTZ-8.9'
Pump intake-95) 20% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 5-14-10 wl 14.2 GPM }Next one due 2012
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sander;
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: D411212011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 849
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSL.W: 355,060
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed freeboard
F113oon
FINAL
19.50
30.00
agoon
PRIMARY
30.00
agoon
SECONDARY
30.DD
agoon
TERTIARY
30.D0
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number. 250024
Inspection Date: 04112/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
❑ischa es & Stream Im acts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ Cl
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ Cl
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■ ❑
Cl
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.l large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.]?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection date: 0411212011 Inspectlon Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 100/6/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Meggett
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
Cl
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
Cl
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18, is there a lack of properly operating waste app€ication equipment?
❑
■
❑
Cl
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?
Cl
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 0411212011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ Q
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Cl
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
❑ ■
0 ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey Q
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 04112/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concem? If yes, contact a regional
❑
❑
❑
■
Air Quality representative immediately-
34- Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge,
❑
■
❑
❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below -
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-complianoe of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

n
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
250024 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AW
024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type:
Gompliange Inspectign
Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Craven
Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit:
02/03/2010 Entry Time: 04'00 AM
Exit Time:
Incident M.
Farm Name:
Pig Paradise
Owner Email:
Owner:
Steve A Sanders
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address:
310 Cobbtown Rd
12gv_gr NQ 25526
Physical Address:
400 Cobbtown Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant N Not Compliant
Integrator: Carolina Howard
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35'17'14"
Longitude: 77'23'05"
Between Dover & Ft.
Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Discharges & stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment © Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey
On -site representative Steve Sanders
Operator Certification Number:
Title
Phone:
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone
Page: 1

Permit: AVVS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 0210312010 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
New COG and Permit in records
Waste Analysis 1-15-10 .53
10-22-09 1.0
8-18-09 .56
Calibration due 2010
Sludge Survey 11-15-09 #1 Thick-3.8'
LTZ-93'
Pump intake-8-6 }Sludge Ratio 19%
Crop yield complete
Soil Test 5-19-09 with highest lime .9 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
Freeboard and Rainfall complete and correspond with irrigation
'High Freeboard level - in future notify DWQ within 24 hours of high freeboard above 19.5"
"Submit 30-Day POA to DWO within 3 days
Page: 2

Permit: AVVS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
inspection Date: 0210312010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 897
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Hate Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
18.00
agoon
PRIMARY
18.00
agoon
SECONDARY
18.00
agoon
TERTIARY
18.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number. 250024
Inspection Date: 02/03/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
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 (I.e.l 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
a. 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
Cl
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application?
Cl
■
❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu. Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

A
Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 02/03/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN a 10%/10 Ibs.7
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Sail Type 1
Sail Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
Cl
❑
1B. 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?
❑
■
❑
Cl
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: AWS25OD24 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 0210312010 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 (NPOES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
❑
■
Cl
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
Cl
25. 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 property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
34. 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: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
inspection Date: 0210312010 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Vlsit: Routine
Other lssues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

0
0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250024 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance InsoQQtion Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: RoUtlne County: Srrayg-,n Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/09/2009 Entry Time: 07750 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Pig Paradise Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Physical Address: 4D0 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Carolina Howard _
Location of Farm:
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Phone: [phone]
Latitude: ,&17'14" Longitude: 77°23'06"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 17045
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit. AWS250024 Owner- Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 02/0912009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit 2009
Waste Analysis 3-14-05 .69
5-19-08 .58
8-12-05 .74
10-27-08 A3
Crop yield complete thru October 2008
Sludge Survey 12-4-08 #1 Thick4.2'
LTZ-B.6'
Pump intake pipe measurement - 6.0'
Calibration 5-31-08 with 79.5% uniformity} next one due 2010
Soil test 8-15-08 with highest lime 1.5 tons) applied lime in October 2008
Cu and Zn values within range
Rainfall and Freeboard complete and correspond to irrigation
Page: 2

Permit. AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 0210912009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 860
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date - Start bate Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
33.00
agoon
PRIMARY
33.00
agoon
SECONDARY
33.00
agoon
TERTIARY
33.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Fac11Ity: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance tnspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? 1101111
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
001111
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc-)?
B. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance aitematives 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: AWS250024 owner - Faclllty: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? Cl
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Meggelt
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the fadlity 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: AWS250024 ownor - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Q
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
Q
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after a 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form tNPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
Cl
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
Cl
■
❑
Yom
Nn
NO
IJF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-complianoe of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
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: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspectlon Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the faciiity fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

Ll
Division of Water Quality
Division of Sol] and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250024 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insoection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
bate of Visit: !fl1 2_ f209 Q8- Entry Time: g9 30 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Pia Paradise Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders Phone: 2 - -1772
Mailing Address: 3310 Cobbtown Rd __ ❑aver NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd Dover
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Oarolina Howard_
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°17'14" Longitude: 77°23'06"
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Discharges & stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders Operator Certification Number: 17045
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representatives): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chase Mackey Phone:
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/29/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit 2009
Waste Analysis 7-16-07 .35
10-16-07 .37
12-20-07 .32
'Sludge problem in lagoon 1 - want to conduct sludge survey combining all four lagoons into one big one. Cleaned out lagoon 1 and 2
three years ago.
Crop yield records complete
Calibration due 2008
Soil test 7-12-07 with highest lime .3 tons ) applied lime
Cu and Zn values within range
Freetmard and rainfall need to be recorded - daily for rainfall and weekly for freeboard
Irrigation records correspond with freeboard
Sludge survey extension till 2008
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 01/29/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 888
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Type identifier Closed pate Start pate Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
37.00
agoon
PRIMARY
37.00
agoon
SECONDARY
37,00
agoon
TERTIARY
37.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection pate: 01/29/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? [I ■ n n
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) n ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Doss discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
n
n
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
D
■
❑
[l
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
n
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.l large trees, severe
❑
■
n
❑
erosion, seepage, etc_)?
5. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
n
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
n
■
n
n
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? {Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
D
n
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
n
■
D
n
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
14. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
n
■
n
n
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
n
woo
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
n
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
n
Page: 4

Permit: AW5250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 01/29/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Ap lication
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.?
n
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
n
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
n
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crap Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Meggett
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 and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? n
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
n
■
n
n
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
n
■
n
n
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
Q
X Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
❑
Page. 5

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 01/29/2008 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
tf yes, check the appropriate box below
Waste Application? n
120 Minute inspections? ❑
Weather code? n
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Farm (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 (NPIDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25, Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
Cl
❑
❑
■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection date: 0t12912008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number : 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 7

S
Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ------- __--
Facility Number: 250024 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 _ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 0,3101/2007 Entry Time:08:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Pig Paradise Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A 5 nders Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 285213
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd Hover NC 28526
.Facility Status: n Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Between Dover & Ft. Bamwel$ on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Latitude.35°17'14" Longitude:77'23'06",
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders Operator Certification Number: 17045
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
24 hour contact name Jimmy Pollock Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
inspection date: 03/0112007 Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit 2009
WUP 4-17-96 j Need to update
Waste Analysis 8-28-06 .32
11-8-06 .70
1-31-07 1.1
Sail test 6-14-06 with highest lime 2.6 tons - need lime
Cu and Zn values within range
Irriation records complete
Sludge survey extension till 2008
Rainfall and freeboard complete
Calibrations complete 11-15-06
Crop yield complete
'Contact Dianne Farrer (Regional Agronomist) for weed management. #252-830-1718
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 0310112007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 898
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
37,00
agoon
PRIMARY
37.00
agoon
SECONDARY
37,00
agoon
TERTIARY
37,00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 03101/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ 0
b- Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
0
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection Stara e & 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 (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?
n
■
❑
n
8- Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
I]
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
n
n
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance a
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
0
❑
If yes, check the appropriate fox below.
Excessive Pending?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number:
250024
Inspection Date: 03/01/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
n
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crap Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop "type 6
Soil Type 1
MeggBtt
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?
■
n
n
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
■
n
n
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
n
n
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
D
■
n
n
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
D
■
n
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
D
■
n
n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

permit: AWS250024 owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 03101/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA N E
El
n
n
n■nn
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
Weekly Freeboard?
n
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
n
Waste Analysis?
in
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
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?
❑
❑
■ it
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
n
■
n n
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
n n
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
0 ■
Duality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AW5250024 owner - Facility. Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 03/01/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
r)fhar Iodine Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewtinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0 ■ Q Q
Page: 7

R
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250024 Facility Status: Actiye Permit: AWS250024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: CompHance Inspection Inactive or Closed date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 0211312006 Entry Time:Q1:00 PM Exit Time: 02.20 PM _. Incident #:
Farm Name: Pig Paradise _ . darner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Physical Address: 400 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm- Latitude: 35°17'13" Longitude: 77°23'12"
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 17045
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
24 hour contact name Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Dale:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 02/13/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
WUP 4-17-96
Soil test 7-5-05 with highest lime 0 tons
Cu and Zn level within range
Waste Analysis 8-17-05 .25
11-1-05 .36
1-11-06 .32
IRR-2 Forms complete
Calibrations complete 2005
CDC and Permit covered through 2009
19. Make sure to initial by rain events a 1"
Sludge survey not due until 2008 - cleaned out sludge
Maintain spray fields at all times.
Pag e: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner -Facility. Steve A Sanders
Inspection Date: 021f 312006 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Facility Number: 250024
Reason for Visit: Routine
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.50
39.00
agoon
PRIMARY
39.00
agoon
SECONDARY
39.00
agoon
TERTIARY
39.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250024 Owner • Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 02/13/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
I7iscfiarges 8 Stream Impacts
Yes No NA NE
1, is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWG)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWD)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
Cl
■
❑
11
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 Panding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number. 250024
Inspection Date: 0211312006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vlslt: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Maggett
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
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?
❑
■
0
❑
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: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number. 250024
Inspection Date: 02/1312006 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? ■ 0 0 ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > > 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)?
n
■
0
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
'❑
❑
■
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
❑
❑
■
Quality representative immediately.
Page. 6

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 02I1312006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
f1thpr fasiEat Yes No NA NE
31. aid the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ Q
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewfnspection with on -site representative? 0 ■
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
n■nDl
Page: 7

01
0
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250024 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250024 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/2812005 Entry Time: 09:00 AM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Pia Paradise _ _ _ _ Owner Email:
Owner: Steve A Sanders
Mailing Address: 310 Cobbtown Rd Dover NC 28526
Physical Address:
Phone: [phone]§
Facility Status: E Compliant ' ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Carolina Howard -
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°17'1 " Longitude: 77'23'12"
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
Question Areas:
Q Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
® Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Steve A Sanders
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 17045
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Steve Sanders Phone:
24 hour contact name Steve Sanders Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Soil test 7-2-2005
Waste analysis:
8-5-04 = 0.87
1-7-05= 1A
4-12-05 = 0.72
B-23-05 = 0.32
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 0712812005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
® Swine - Farrow to Wean 820 764
Total Design Capacity: 820
Total SSLW: 355,060
Waste Structures
Tvoe Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.50
35.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
Lagoon
SECONDARY
Lagoon
TERTIARY
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number : 250024
Inspection Date: 07/28I2005 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Doscharces& Stream Impacts Yes No NA NF
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 00130
Discharge originated at -
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ 0 ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0000
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
0 ❑
No NA
❑
NF
Waste COltection_ Star3geA Treatment
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 erasion,
❑
■ ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0 ❑
0
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ Cl
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Nat applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
M ❑
❑
and/or wet Starks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No NA
NF
Waste A11e10cat9on
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or Compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
M
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
11
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 100/.110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurels€udge into bare sail?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of app€ication area?
❑
Crop Type 1 Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

a
Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders
Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 07/28/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NF
Waste AnplicaL=
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Sail Type fi
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? Cl
0
❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
0
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0
❑
❑
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
Yes
❑
No
0
NA
❑
NF
❑
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?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0013
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?
0
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ 0
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ 0
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ N
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250024 Owner - Facility: Steve A Sanders Facility Number: 250024
Inspection Date: 07128/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherisguos
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Yes_
©
No NA-
0 ©
NE
❑
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
00
❑
❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fait to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
32. Did Revi ewerli nspecto r fail to discuss revi ewTi n s pe ct I o n with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ON
❑
❑
Page: 5

�,FK•-5.. E�•'r �:,TR q.«C�.,•_;' `:- - •r:v .�: :�_'�; "' �:;�;.i: ••';sue r.7e;�••;-
: �lS'E'iy: '�'�`. •. _ Sri -: n_.- _:'�+4.. _{?-r?`
���=� • Division"iif:Water. iiiitli - s;.=,�;���:� �•�-��=_��.:��" "i'� _ _ �i� :i` _;� a ..ii'- - :: �i . _ Y.. �_•�.i�?'.'e...rp � : KrF.:: - S.r ikZw.��:i��,._'..::� � �..�... yy
- - -
1.. ... ......_ �t�s*=`f•:;�.. ,--.�,-....'"��.-..-::�L'. _An....�..... �r.c:::s....,a,cir..se.::l+::,.e........�:.....:.-�.<:-..s�-�:: a:.-_....:?':'::.w..f.._-:,��rsiF��°.._-�...
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit D Routine Q Complaint Cl Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 25 24I L Date of Visit: 9-2-2Ud4 Time: 94U
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted N Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Pig.Para:dju.................................................................................................... County: CrjRx.Clj......... ..................................... WARQ..._..
OwnerName: Si ye..............-......... ................ Santigm................ ..................................... phone No: SZ3.-.1,7.72 ....................................................................
MailingAddress: 4Q.QX9 b1aw.lx.RRaci..........................................................................Dum-NC .............................................................. 10.5Z6............ --
Facility Contact: ............................................ . Title. Phone No
Onsite Representative: S)ttr. A S.alalders............................................................................. Integrator: Cal gJ111.....................................................
..................
Certified Operator:5>xexe.&................................. SAade-ra ............................................ Operator Certification Nnmber:.17.A4S..............................
Location of Farm:
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
L�V�
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 17 ' 1366 Longitude 77 • Z3 6 1Z
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Cal)261V Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
® Farrow to Wean
820
732
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
I I
Total Design Capacity
820
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
L 355,060
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 4
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gailmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify D WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............Final ............ ---....................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 31" >24" >24" >24"
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 25-24
Date of Inspection 1 9-2-2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel 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 as
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? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N Na
❑ Yes
N N❑
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
13. 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 ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N No
19. 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)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments;(refer`to question_#): Explain _ariycYES ans►vers'andlor`ariy recommendations or,aity nthe' comments: - r: .
Use drawings of facility -to better explain -situations. (use`additional pages as necessary): -'[] Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Records available
Waste Analysis:
6-2-03 =
0.71 lbs
8-18-03 =
0.92lbs
11-19-03 =
1.5 lbs
2-25-04 =
0.66lbs
5-26-04 =
0.62lbs
8-5-04 =
0.87 lbs
oil analysis dated 6-3-03 & 7-19-04
reeboard levels are recorded weekly.
rainfall data is recorded - rainfall was recorded every week this year - meaning it has rained continuously.
4ortality records are kept.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: Z5 224 Date of Inspection 4-2-2004
.Required Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? .
❑ Yes
N No
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
N No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
N 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
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
N No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fait to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crap Yield Form. []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12/I2/03

�0� WA �, rT-9z Michael) E
.OA Governor
co r 4 William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
5 Department of Environment and Natural Resources
❑ "C
Plan W. Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Qu aGty
October 9, 2002
Mr. Steve Sanders
Pig Paradise
400 Cobbtown Road
Drover, NC 28526
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection &
Request for Information
Facility No. 25-24
Craven County
Dear Mr. Sanders:
On September 25, 2002, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection at the referenced facility. The
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) was not readily available for review at this fadlity. Therefore, the
records and documents of the CAWMP could not be reviewed during the inspection.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated property 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.
You are requested within 10 days of receipt of this letter to send a copy of your last two waste analysis reports, the last soil
analysis report, freeboard level records and complete copies of your IRRA and IRR-2 forms for the last receiving crop and
current receiving crop. Once this information is received in the Washington Regional Office, it will be reviewed and the
Compliance Inspection completed. If this information is not received within 10 days by the Washington Regional
Office. this facility will be in violation of its General Permit and sublect to an agarouriate enforcement action. The
requested information should be mailed to the following address:
Daphne B. Cullom
Division of Water Quality
943 Washington Square Mall
Washington, NC 27889
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment section of the attached
inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any rioted concerns, as soon as
possible.
Thank -you -for your cooperation and assistance— Should -you have further- questions or- comments regarding this _
inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
CC" aA 06 Animal Compliance
uoti. i nca
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, TIC 27889 252-946-Ml {'Telephone} 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Facility Number Date of Visit: 91Z512002 Time: 10:44 am
Q Not Operationalp Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:...-- .........................
Farm Name: Pig Paradise County: Craven ................................................WARD......
Owner Name: Steve Sanders Phone No: 252-523-1772
Mailing Address: .40,Q.!`rohhtuwjLRxad................................... ........................ ...._........ Dover..NG............................. --...-............................ 28526 ..............
FacilityContact:........-------------................---------.........................------..Title:.............................................. ................. Phone No:........................ ..
❑nsite Representative: N,a.nm.oasistc.................. ........................................................ ... Integrator: Cargill.----.....-.---.------....... ...... .............. --.........--
Certified Operator:Steve.A.................................. Sanders. .................... -....................... Operator Certification Number:1.T.(145-..-....-....................
Location of Farm: -
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse
"Swine
Latitude ©• ©' ©" Longitude ©• ©_ ©u
p Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
820
13 Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Funs
0 Gilts
Boars
.: Design ;f - Fsc:urrenvz _g . 1
Ca'pacify:. Popal$tian; = Caftle .° :: C
s - 'Total.De
in
i_Capaeity , 820
W-ssLW 355,060
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: [3 Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 0 Yes 13 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) Yes 0 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the e$timated 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? 0 Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 0 Yes 0 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.. Is storage capaciiy (freebaarCplus siorm storage j less ri adequate? p apillway=T= _ - T --------- p,Yes:_®No ` --
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6
Identifier: ......... himuy.................Secondary ..........Ei >Oe...................... Final..-.........
Freeboard(inches): ...............20...........-....................24...............................4.0..............................24................

Facility Number: 25-24
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 maintenancelimprovement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/i nprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
11 _ .r
p Yes N Na
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
17 Yes N No .
Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes ®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will -receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Ennimeats' refer o=muestion' .Eit-isin�a -vYE5 siis►ers.°°auaaa ;=recomz�eudativius`ar'an `€#}ieidmments = l 3""
.-
IIse drawut of facile to.better'ea Ia€nksituatiu s�use!gddtho l --� _
Copy p Final Note
Fieldj.5:...:YS"�`�N.i
11., 18., 19. Please send e following records to the DWQ Washington Regional Office for review: IRRI & IRR2
orms, waste & soil analysis for 2002 and freeboard level records.
15. Receiving crop should be cut and baled to prevent weed growth and to have an active/good stand of the proper
receiving crop (fescue). Improved condition of receiving crops will be reviewed at•next inspection.
17. General Permit & Certificate of Coverage not yet issued to facility from DWQ Central Office.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ..._:::.:.:...:.-_ ....::
Da hae.B. Cullom..,.eatered.b Ann.T ndal[.. aa.
_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: s �_ 1- Date: ] j (2

IAJ A'j2_6
E �R �e iefe�enced -
In general, these inspections included r+erifjbgthat (])the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWlv1P);
(2) the farm is complying with rapir menu of the State Rul es 13 NCAC 2H.0217, Some Sill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly tmder the direction of a
Certified Operator, (4) the regtured records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepages erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Paur t; therefore, these kerns must be implemented -
The maximum waste level in ]agoonslstarage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAVAP At a minimum,
maxtmtmi waste Ievel fttr waste for lagooaslstorage ponds must not ekce;d the level lliat provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour 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 er after) ofth date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Sod analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recaatrmended by the soil analysis.
tp The following records are required: ofPsite solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintamed by the facility, owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum ofthreeyeam
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land Iicatirm rates exceed the Plant
Available Nttrn_en TAhD rate for the receivine Em or result in runoff during anv eiven iication_
tp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated chaonel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable oudem.
cp it is MggEyg not aTniirm to keep crop yield k1banation far fitu re use to updateyow,, wastexnanagement
' r i'crir will IIead three of eld data l,Cfo�r Lan -be dated: � -' _
.. tµ.=:�� �'''� ''� '0""5'�'•: a'r'�z+:F
ice' •�_ .. x ":;i� _.' .i a�-F�f-. C ". r - _ ` ..a:.•a»LU.���_ax`''+.'.+•. -i�l"' ; '.a�r'"•
aryow .mfa�i ��y}v: ��,�,.,�,4?�''qY_..'� -• a-�;� i!:"•-�.s_�'�. L�_•��a-'3,?�'--yt -���, �.�'����_�- �•,�-x4�0 y:_�+ts�.�•`j:e�:�"a" L�.k 3:w._ r•�" ieYt.
-`1:
an�t1_.�• si.►{F-TbE�1-20-
.
_ a _ _ • i - '�, "'^P•� � -�a. .'.."4 ��,{ -r^�9rFa .ter. � •1'c'WVi�. Y-."Y'...
SS .� 'a`ry'�-.r-•�� r� "F ire .*a:." :r' �+s -x Y.�-." i �'�Y . - :�'-�...�`-�;��• o-. ,-,"..:t6=;:��.
'1 xx {"".'J rry"•�� i�s.�r..� r_Tvy �n'ir �� ,k:'� ati".�•.� a - i _..:.-Q � - a i'4` !�' i
SThatx3c you foe your ass�arIIce and operation duringthe inspedhsm: ,., you bave any ques[ions, please contact meat252-94C}
7 648I, exL 321 c r your T echmcal Specialist . -
Cc: eiNal O
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mal Washing[art, NC 27M 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Type of Visit k g Coirip�ance lrirspectiori :. O 0*atinn Re'viEw:::O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for plait ® Routine b Complant� Q Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification ❑ 4tber
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of-Ylcir 7 �2AQ2 Ttine: - 1D ZA a� Printed on: 7125=0I
25 24
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
© Permitted ® Certified [3 Condhionalh Certified [3 Registered Date I a9t Operated or Above Threshold: .. ___._...�...
Farm Name: .Eamdi -,_... County: a�ax __...._.___._ W. .•...
Owner Name: Sys Sanidm._ _-_ ww__. Phone No: 57-3-1 72 --- ....._.- w
Mailing Address: M Cnhhtown Rnad- Do=.NC.....-..._...... 28526 _.........
Facilit►' Contact: .» Title: ». ._ .____... .__._... _ Phone No: ...._....�. _ ..
Onsite Representative: Sfett* Santtdtts.-.._� _ . _ _ ....___ Integrator: Cargill.._ --
Certified Operator: Sttxt:- S&ltdel _ _ _._�» _._ .. Operator Certification Number: JIM.,,_,,,.................
Location of Farm:
Between Dover & Ft. Barn►►•eil on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275)
® Swine ❑ laouttry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 17 13 Longitude 77 • F 2.3 _1 12
..................... -: :Current.::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::Ues
Current:::::::: " ;';€:
....-..-...... ..............
Des' ...::::=:Current'::..
�..
_..--
:.:.. wore .:::::::::::: :: : :::C aci#�:: Po ulatrau::
;:::.o ::::::::::;
------------::----------
:: acri� o ulatuin::':';'. - ; ;::; :
...................
Ca adty-:;=Po uhFtion ::­:
-7-
❑ Wean to Feeder
--- 10 Later
F❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
1E3 Non -Layer
❑Non-Dain-
® Farrow to Wean
820
756
❑ Farrowto Feeder
❑ Other
'
❑ Farrow- to Finish
Total Design. try:
Ca P ac
820
❑ Giles
Total SSLW .
355,060
❑ Boars
''I�iunf6er.af:ons.'4 ❑ Subsurface D ra'uis Present Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Fuld Area
I;ago
;fix' r:
Ho lditt od1.Solii' ❑No Liquid Management SstmPn
Discharzes & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoa ❑ Spray Field ❑ Od=
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is obccm-ed, did it reach Water of the State? (1f yes. note DWQ) [] Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observ4 what is the estimated flow in eallntin?
d. Doe, discharge bypass a lagoon ,stem? (if ves, uotifv DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there eVidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ spill -way ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Stricture 3 Strncttuv 4 Structure ] Structure 6
Identifier: 1. _.. - _ 2.__ . _ -3.._. _ ____4 ..... ........ _................. _._.... ........-........------.
Frccboard (inches3. ._..._... Z�......._..... ._......-._.2R......-...... ..... .2SJ.....__—_ 2T................

Facility Number: 25�-24
Date of Inspection 7-2t10i
Priatc-d on: 7/25/2001
q.Vlia:l. w -..
5. Are there any immediate threats to tine bttegrAy of any of the sbactm observed? (iel trees, sevens erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc-)
6. Are there ahvctna+es on -site which are not properly addrMed andlor managed through a waste management or
closure plan? (if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an ❑ Yes ® No
hunwdiate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do amy of the structures need ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of The wasie management system other than waste structures require maintenanm/maprovement?
❑ Yes
2 No
9. Do any stactures lacj: adequate, ganged markers with required maximum and n mmium liquid level
elevation markings}?
[J Yes
19 No
Waste Application
10. Are there any bt$ers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Panding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue {Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
9 No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
i O No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑r No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes;
No
i & Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
jg 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?
(iel W1JP_ checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
[K No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation. freeboard, aa_Ste 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 activeh- certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22. Fail to notifi• regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
4 Yes
No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewI spection with on -sits representative?
❑ Yes
No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
21 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of Ake Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
No violations or de kiemm were noted dating this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
waste analysis 3-16-01, 13 1bsJ1000 gals. (recycle) , I.I IbsJ1000 gals. (irrigation)
�oii analysis 412001_ lime as reconmrended.
rogation records complete with a nitrogen balance.
'reeboard record sheet given to Mr. Sanders for recording levels.
Applied for General Permit.
Mow & shrub inside of dike walls to remove broadleaf weeds and woody shrubs to prevent shading & allow- a vegetative (grass) cover to
tav established-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerllnspector Signaturk-1 - QA&JU _ Date: `7 -?_is - Z_ce�1

05103101 Qmdnued,
Facility Number_ 25—U Date of bnspertion Printed on: 7f2512001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the stamp 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 neigbboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure. and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray, system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13 Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No

iType of Visit Q Compliance Inspection D Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
(late of Visit: 1113fl121H10 Time: 13:3t] Printed on: 121512000
25 24
Nat ❑ erational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .. ................
Farm Name: 1'ig.1'a.rWi$tr................... I .... .................................................... County: Cray.ca .............................................. WARD .......
OwnerName: 5.tgY.0........................................ suldca...................................................... Phone No: -X.7.2....................................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title: ........... •--•.... ............................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 4RR.+�lRbktQlXpl.k�R,1tc1.................... l �X:er..t�.0.............................. 2IJ52,6 .............
--- • -•.......................
Onsite Representative: 51cy.c.SAndcrs............................................................................. Integrator:
Certified Operator:ftyq............ ........................... Sa1tdc"............................................ Operator Certification Numher:17 .5.......
Location of Farm: _
Between Dover & Ft. Barnwell on Cobbtown Rd. (SR 1275) +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ' 1T 13 Longitude 77 • 23 12 u
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponutation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
820
817
❑ 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 DesignCapacity 820
Total SSLW 355,060
Number of Lagoons 4 [[-]Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System R,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®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: ................. ...1.....................•-..........2...................---....--•-3---....--•---..........---•----•4..---•----•---.....--•-----.................................... .........................
Freeboard (inches): 19 19 19 50
r inn
r_ .r .._i.... a__r.

5100 Continued on back
Facility Dumber: 25-24 Date of Inspection 11/30/2000 1 Printed on: 12/5/2000
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?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Fescue
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes []No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did 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?
l io �iolations:or deficiencies were;noted;duriing this v6it::Ydu will -receive no further : � :
rorres�nndence aboui this.visit...
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
. The first and second stage lagoons are full of sludge. Equipment is onsite to remove solids. A plan i
I place.
arm is not yet permitted. Plan is based on waste analysis.
IReviewer/Inspector Name Cart Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall I I

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number: 25-24 Date of Inspection 1113D12DDD Printed on: 12/5/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® 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 blades), 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
5/60

Division of. Water Quality
.. Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- Q
-. .. tither Agency
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection a Operation Review a Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 25 Date of Visit: Time: I 3 Printed on: 7/21/2000
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
It Permitted Wertified ❑ Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last. Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
y
P�'t'.!�.................................................................... County:...............r��C*..
Farm Name:--•----••..............�......... ....................................................
... ...
Owner Name:-•---•-•------....5` C-IC •• �r..4,JT 5
Facility Contact:..........................•-•---.............................................. Title:
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative:.......... .... ` '���'^
(! �'&S
...'............. .........................................................
Certified Operator: r��vo- S Jd
........................ ..........U'.......................................
Location'of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 4 64 Longitude E-�' «
__ _- - .Design Current
_ ... , Canarity Pann?"nn
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
r Boars
>:
. .............
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capadty Pcition
❑ Layer Ron -Dairy
airy
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW
Nt ber of I:agooW JE3 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lag•rm Area Spray Field Area
-� Ponds 1 Solid Traps:
No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & 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 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .............. I ...... .............. .............z........................... ?.. :.......... ..........................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 1 19 5-0
5I00
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes FWNo
❑ Yes y No
Structure G
Continued on back

Facility Number: 25 — 2 Date of .Inspection Printed on: 7/21 /2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes J ] 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 maintenancelimprovement? 19 Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ZNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum Iiquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes jo No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes 131 No
12. Crop type ^CeS C'e
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes MNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes C4 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes EgNo
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? -
❑ Yes
EgNo
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? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
EgNo
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
0 No
22. Fail to notify -regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes EA No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes EqNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes .KNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes 4!5,No
�'Vo �i�la inns:vr dt hc'jenei" wiv re it# t: dtrririg #his;visit: Yv�x will reeeiye ija ]Fui titer
Corrisp6Tideike. about, this Visit
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments:: �" . -` 1
....
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): _ -
JJ -T6e fj,t4 Otn� Vr., JL �A+'je.. 14y5 14Glee t+�� a X �'e
A t
Reviewer/Ins n f
:.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
p -Y.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r Date: �. 5100

Facility Number: 215— Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor 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 19 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 R!�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
5/00

+•f'.r /f-^ :.tlL .c.r...n">.....'r/'+..y �:,� ri • .,rC ^P'-..�iGti-iti�ni�}C �.���a . �.F�'�a..�Le.!S.w.r.rc,�Mnr�.-�d �►.rr+...��:a:-Yr..x,[ii•. �.c:r r:'�^7
M1'

W0-Rn
State of North Carolina
Department. of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
August 4, 1999
Mr. Steve A. Sanders
Pig Paradise
400 Cobbtown Road
Dover, North Carolina 28526
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Pig Paradise
Facility No. # 25-24
Craven County
Dear Mr. Sanders:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (as it is
viewed in D WQ 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 211.0217, 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.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 2 52/946-648 1, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist,
Sincerely,
Lyn B- Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: LBH files
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Facility Number 25 24 Dateoflnspeotion 4-8-99
Time of Inspection 1Q3Q 24 hn(hh:mm)
El Permitted H Certified ❑Conditionally Certified [ Registered 0 Nol O erationxl Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: f.'.iC.Earadise........ .... _................ _... _............ _.._......................................... County: Cosen_............................ _......... ..... WAHO._....
On net Name:Stextt.................................... Salldols....................... ...... _... _..... _............ Phone No: 252-52&1Z22............... _........................
...._.........
FacilityContact: ...................... ..... .... ._.......... _..__............. _........ Title: .................... ....... ..................................... Phone No:........................_.........................
Mailing Address: 4.QQ..Ca6619xnJbAd._................................................ _..... _....... _..... D.oxxr...!!lC............ _........................... ...................... 28526 .............
Onsite Representative: Sku.&.Isahellc.Sandell_......... _... _.... .._........................... .Integrator: CmrgM...................... .... _.........................................
.
Certified Operator: Sterr.9. ..... SA,dets_.......................................... Operator Certification Number: ]ZQ45...._...........__........
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 7 13 Longitude 77 • 23 —12 «
Swine _ Capacity Population Pouhry Capacity Po ulaton Cattle
Ca ac' Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Laver ❑Dairy•
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non -Davy
® Farrow to Were 820 760
❑ Farrow to Feeder IEI Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity 820
❑ Gilts
❑ soars Total SSLW 355,060
_- Numberoflagoons _ - ® ❑ Subsurface Draios Present ❑ Lagoan Ares ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponde f Said Traps ` ILI No Liquid Waste Management System
6ischaraes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Di,elom ee ongwaled at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spiny Field ❑ Other
a. If discharee is obsen'ed, scat the cnm'ecanceman-made?
b_ If discharge is obscn-ed did it reach Atater of the State? (ltvea notifc DW Q)
c. If discharge is obscxr-�d rchat is the e,timalsd Dow in ¢al/min'.'
d. Does discharge bypass a la_nnon s�slem? (If, c,. nolif, DW Q)
2. Is there esidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there anv adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (frceboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
a/a
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
Structure 6
ldeutifier........................ _._........ ............. _... _....... _.._.......
Frecbom'd (inebes):.......... _.24C............ .............24L'..._.........._....._....29."..._........_... _......... 1r.:...........
................_....._................_._..._.....................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe emsiou,0 yes N No
seepage, etc.)
itJi/Uq Continued nn flack

Facility Number. 25-24 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a Haste 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 maintenancerimprovement?
& Does any pail 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?
Wxtitc &En? �
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
4-5-99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ®No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fait 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 re►riewrtnspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0. a 'N6' V'ioltivn.s: (WdeGciendes- were: doted:during this Visit:: Yflti wi11: r&eiVe 'na further :
,correspondence about this visit
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
urds available for review. All components present.
1 set system installed by Crocket : 88 nozzles, 60' spacing. Map available but the FSA map is not clear. Suggest to get a must
er map if possible. The full circle wets 0.15 ac/nozzle and partial circle wets 0.07 ac/nozzle.
;abet acre determination is not necessary.
to plan is based on waste analysis of 0.86 Ibs of Nitrogen.
tinue to manage the sprayfield to keep the vegetation growing and utilizing the applied nitrogen. Plan to out fescue in late April or
of May.
hue collecting waste samples within 60 days of application and annual soil samples.
ReviewerMspectorName Lj413:=H'aH66_n
Reviewerlinsvector Sienature: 9
Date: -f- cf_ g
r

3/23/99
Facility Number. 25-24 Date of Inspection 4-5-99
Odlar 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? ❑ 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
3 1. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? [:]Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks Iack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary coved ❑ Yes []No
F
n receiving the general permit you will be required to record weekly freeboard levels.
tinue to manage the vegetation on teh dfle wall and monitorthe recycle line for leaks, break or any malfunctiou.
u have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-6481, ext. 318.

r "® A J i •sion of Soil and Water Conservation ❑Other Agencyr. H, �_
:-= "R ®Division of Water Quality
�. :{=
0 Routine ❑ Conr hint ❑ Follow-up of DWQ ims [motion ❑ Follow-up of ❑SWC review ❑ Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 'Z5
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered ® Certified ® Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not O eratiunal hate Last Operated:
FarmName: Pi.1). n se ............................ .... County:........................ ........ I ................ ............. .......................
Owner Name: $ cwc '�,A �3I. . Phone No:.... ............................
Facility Contact:
Mailing Address:
Title:
Onsitc Representative---------------5we_ S'_��
............----............................................... ......................
Certified Operator. .................... S q"e Sa..s
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number;
Latitude ' C 4 C° Longitude • 04 6'
Swine "'"
design. Current:
Capacity Populatioa
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
0 Farrow to Wean
I ID
7
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Nuatlzer nf:I.agtiiWns I:Hoidiug'Pflds.: ❑ S agoo spray F
o,
.u.
❑ 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: ❑ 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?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes CW No
❑ Yes )IgNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes hK No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes $M No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes 15 No

Facility Number: 25 — Z�
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
J9 No
Structures (LagoonsMolding Fond5, Flush Pits, etc.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E[No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: P.° I- = .sue
..........
Freeboard(ft):.............•�•---............ ............2................... . 5 -...........................................................
....... ................. ................................... .
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
KNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
W No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? '
❑ Yes
No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
19 No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
G`z..:.
15.
Crop type �eG'5 ....................... .......................................... _................ ....... ........... .................................... .......................................
...........
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
Ed No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
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
i$ No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
IF Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
-or
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
QNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
UNO. O1kionio' r dericiencies:werenotedduring this:visIC- You:w'it1 i-ec6�e Ro ftirttiei-
• . • eyrrespdtidettee abvu� this: visit:- .. ......... . . . . . • . • - - ; - . - .. • .. . . . .....:.:...:.:. .
�►mtnertts;; refe..r. an: c; : Tatn:: YFxS:arssindloiriuias'ori a�thr:.it&':n
.. ...:.:...... ..... ... :...... a^^�.. ....; . �, :d333.• . J.s "3e:Fx"'� G` '�...... .: ie
...............:... ��
PH
:use $mot of Iti l retxex a ipt:sttut�oia..use;addrti
.....r��......-r.„S,�.F..�,..>£�Y^„t:»e......x....... "Dc ..,: ....,ee....., -3`E,R ..... ,.. -
a
1 W �S Q1L+R-1•�py_- L'ifi�.l W�f.'f�G ci/`n 1•RYS Cin� 1U� �M �� V.
7/25/97
Naive:
Reviewer/Inspectorr--::
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: - Date:

_ DSVWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review -:
❑ P=
P .y
a
r-
tionDVAnimal FeedlotOperation Site Ins ee
Y
;w
0 Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DW&I inspection Q Follow-ue of DSWC: review Q Other
Date of Inspection
Facili�,Num�her=��
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time fin fraction of lours
Farm Status: []Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex.1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
Certified ❑ Permitted or inspection (includes travel and processing)
113 Not O erationa! Date LastOperated: ................... ............... ........................ . ...................................... ............................
Farm Name: ���... P�� � '.s ................... County: ........ clllle �..........-..........................................
Owner Name :.......... srke-..........S:`."..^..JJ5........................ ................. ........................... Phone No--�2-7-.-..� Lt G......--...
Facility Contact: .... .......�".`. ....... -.... Title: ................................................................ Phone No: ...... -........ .....
.... # A yy......... ... ...............
Mailing Address: 2.s-— .......................
Onsite Representative: ...---'�........ SRC �erS........................................ Integrator: .........0..[.l........................................... ... .............
Certified Operator:.- .................... rr•............................................ Operator Certification Number:.-.......................................
J u� 7" r
............................
Location of Farm:
.................................. ..... ........ ........................--............................ - ........... ................... -.-...-.................. -........ .............. ....--....... --.....
�
Latitude 0 4 O:c Longitude • c :c
Type of Operation
SWMe
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
1 ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
700
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW -
Nurither of Lagoortil'Holding Ponds 1E1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 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?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Surface Water' (If- ycs, notify DWQ)
c. lfdischar�-lle 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 ]agoonslholding ponds) require
413 a197 maintenance/improvement ?
❑ Yes Nf No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 5�No
❑ Yes XNe
❑ Yes No
Continued on back

Facility Number: !X5 — 2+t
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
V No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
bjNo
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
WNo
Structures ( Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ONO
Freeboard (ft): Structure l Structure 2 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure G
2• 7 rt �S7tructure
ir� ".4'�_ 2 5�-
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
XNo
IL Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
IgNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......�r_'A-
lb. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
t4No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
PrNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
ONO
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
W No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
XNo
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
�No
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
XNo
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
VNo
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
VNo
tr�mm�ts:. re%r.t6 . uestitxn #. '.E .. ". laih'2', -YES i ers:andlni'; air :'r cairiirieuil ti hiiis tir as ''ather'ra» itts :=`"` `- ° "ate -r
T ....., .� ..... .". .. ... .. , ... .:., H "
+uyy++
drawin f;[aciiit ;io tter � Iam'srtttatians: u addttional . • "`� "�'° `°�`�` M�` z.
n -ss.'4-c s�wcl�2 .
D2s%�A CarAeJSLIP o- .14 Wf SATMp�
p.,l4.i {. n..r- y.n,� �n 7��.. .c-� "�'� � �,�^^ +`S �n�`L �.Y.� r•� �M �. sp .yr
'F.
r
..........
Reviewer/Inspector Name s�►i '�cr.,� �":_;,;:' ,,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -77
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30197