250049_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS,
INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS

0
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
25DD49
Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS250049
Denied Access
tnpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Craven Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
04/25/2017 Entry Time: 02730 prn
Exit Time: 4:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Faison Smith Farms, Inc. #2
Owner Email;
Owner;
Faison D Smith
Phone:
252-568-7450
Mailing Address:
524 Bill Sutton Rd
Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address:
425 Wiliam Pierce Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
Compliant
Not Compliant
Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35' 18' 59" Longitude:
77' 26 21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left
Question Areas:
Drschrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -site representative Genc Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith . Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: G4125117 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Calibration complete 6-24-16
Waste Analysis 3-13-17 1.7
11-21-1B 1.51
B-1-16 1.57
Soil Test due 2018
Crop yield complete
21)1.2" Rainfall recorded in Oct 2016 - lagoon level did not rise & hurricane Matthew hit. No way farm did not recieve rainfall from
hurricane. No irrigation provided in October during inspection; However, the farm found some irrigation records and rainfall and
sent them to me at a later date.
Sludge Survey 8-18-16 Thick-2.62'
LTZ-3.28'
Pump intake-3' } 43% Sludge Ratio
7}manage lagoons banks
page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/25/17 Inppection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896 0
— - — Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19.50 29.Oa
page: 3

C
Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date. 04/25/17 Inppection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Ye
H_ o Na ire
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
[]
Application Field
❑
'
Other
n
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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)
❑
❑
❑
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 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
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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)?
❑
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?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number:
250049
Inspection Date: 04/25/17 lnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Aknlication
rya Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn, wheat. Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Aftavista
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ 0 ❑
❑
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?
❑ M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
Ng lra N
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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: 5

Permit AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number:
250049
Inspection Date: D4/25/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na He
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
❑
■ ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
[]
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ M
❑
Other fssues
Yes
No Nm Me
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,
❑
❑ ❑
M
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-applicationy
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number.
250049 Facility Status:
Active permit: AWS250049
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Craven Region:
Washington
Late of Visit:
04/12/2016 Entry Time: 03:00 pm
Exit Time: 4:30 pm Incident #
Farm Flame:
Faison Smith Fames, Inc. #2
Owner Email:
Owner:
Faison D Smith
Phone:
252-568-7450
Mailing Address:
524 Bill Sutton Rd
Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address:
425 William Pierce Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brawn LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35' 18' 59" Longitude:
77' 25' 21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go
0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith
Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy
Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stiliey
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number. 250049
Inspection Date: 04112l16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Calibration due 2016
Waste Analysis 12-15-15 .98
8-26-15 1 Z2
5-1-15 1.97
Soil Test 4-14-15 wl highest lime .8 tons
21) Crop yield - need to put dates harvested
30]'Freeboard week of Feb 7th - 20" , Feb 14th 16" wl 1.4" rainfall on February 15th } No rainfall Feb 16. 17, 18, 19, and 20th.
Facility called in high freeboard of 16 inches on February 19, 2016,
*Ownerloperator sign IRR-2 forms
Sludge Survey 8-25-15 Thick-2.75'
LTZ-3.35'
Pump intake-3') 42% Sludge Ratio
page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/12/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19-50 25.00
page: 3

Permit: AWS25OD49 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: D4112/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na He
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
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 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
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures an -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
■ ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
T. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 He
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance aItem atives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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 n 1 D%/1 D 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: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number:
250049
Inspection Date: 04/12/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn, wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes N2 Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 0 ❑
[]
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, ptease 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: 5

Permit: AWS25OG49 Owner - FacilitY : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/12/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na N0
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
❑
❑ N
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
N❑
❑
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.
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 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
❑
■ ❑
❑
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

M
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
250049 Facility Status:
Active Permit; AWS250049
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Rate:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Craven Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0411612015 Entry Time: 03:00 pm
Exit Time: 4:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Faison Smith Farms, Inc. #2
Owner Emall:
Owner:
Faison D Smith
Phone:
252-568-7450
Mailing Address:
524 Bill Sutton Rd
Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address:
425 William Pierce Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35' 18' 59" Longitude:
77° 25' 21"
From Kinston take INC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s)
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey 7-28-14 Thick-2.59'
LTZ-3.51'
Pump intake-4,3') 40% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 6-6-14
Waste Analysis 1-13-15 1,66
9-23-14 1,06
6r12-14 2.06
Soil Test due 2015
Crop yield complete
Freeboard & Rainfall complete
'Nat much rainfall documented aver winter - need to track daily
'Need to mow vegetation in between Hog houses & lagoon
page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/16/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Currant promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 192fiA0
.5
page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/15/15 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?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? of yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State {gallons}?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
MCI
❑
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 He
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.eJ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
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 Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance ahernatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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 > 10%110 1bs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crap window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number:
250049
Inspection Date: G4116/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit.
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Ha Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crap 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 andlor land application site need improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
M ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
M ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 E]
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

` Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility -. Faison D Smith Facility Number:
250049
Inspection Date: 04116115 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. 1f 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?
❑
N ❑
❑
25. 1s the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ 0
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
1f 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 Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewh n s pe ct io n with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
250D49 Facility status:
Active Permit: AWS250049
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason For Visit:
Routine
County: Craven Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0611212014 Entry Time: 11:00 am
Exit Time: 12:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Faison Smith Farms, Inc, #2
Owner Email:
Owner.
Faison D Smith
Phone:
252-568-7450
Mailing Address:
524 Bill Sutton Rd
Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address:
425 William Pierce Rd
Dover NC 28526
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35' 16 59" Longitude:
77° 25- 21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go
0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat . Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy
On -site representative Geno Kennedy
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspectorts]:
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey due 2014
Calibration complete 6-6-14 w1340 GPM
Waste Analysis 3-10-14 1.86
12-11-13 2.36
8-21-13 1.14
4-30-13 1.89
Soil Test 10-8-12 } next one due 2D15
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
Crop yield complete
9)Clean-up cake like material at end of hog houses
'Need to utilize PAN and get lagoon level down
Phone
Phone
Phone
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number. 250049
Inspection Hate: 06/12/14 Inpsection Type: Complianoe Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4.896 4,QD0
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660.960
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 10/19M 19.5Q 19.00
page: 2

[ Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250D49
Inspection Date: 06/12/14 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?
❑
❑
❑
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)
❑
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)
1]
■ ❑
❑
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 No
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
❑M
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 pennit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks andlor 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 afternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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 manurelsIudge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

t Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility : Faison D Smith Facility Number:
Inspection bate: O6/12/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
250049
Routine
Waste Application
Qs
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Gordsboro
Soil Type 2
Altavista
Soil Type 3
Craven
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
M ❑
[]
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
[]
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

i Permit: AWS250049 Owner -Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 06/12/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
Ng Ha No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 'I" 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
❑
❑
❑
(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
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ M
❑
Other Issues
Yes
N� a�N�
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor 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?
❑
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 Pennit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250049 Facility Status: Active --, Permit: AWS250049 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qnmoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 09/19/2013 Entry Time: 01:30 PM Exit Time: 03:OQ pM Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms. Inc. #2 „- Owner Email:
Owner: Faison D Smith Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 524 Bill Sutton Rd - _- I
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd _,-- Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy--Urvwn LLC
Latitude: 35°18'59" Lon itude: ZZ'25'21"
Location of Farm: 9
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co, turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, $ Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey 8-21-13 Thick-2.55'
tTZ-3.55'
Pump intake-4.5} 39% Sludge Ratio
Calibration complete 12-20-12
Waste Analysis 8-21-13 1.14
4-30-13 1.89
1-17-13 1.63
Soil Test 10-8-12 wl highest lime 0 tons
Freeboard & Rainfalt complete & correspond w1 irrigation
Crop yield complete
-Soybeans short - poor stand
Page 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19,50 32.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason far 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? Cl ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) Cl ■ ❑ ❑
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./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property 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 altematives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
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: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison D Smith
Inspection Date: 09/19/2013 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 250049
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 10%11G 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
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type B
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type B
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
1E. 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 property 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: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 09/1912013 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?
Cl
124 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
01111
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?
❑
■ Cl ❑
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: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 09119/2013 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? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
/ 6kh Yoe LJ— UA AIC
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
M 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 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 Rev iewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
IN
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page 7

It
Division of Water Quality
• ❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250049 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250049 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08114/2012 Entry Time: 11:40 AM _ Exit Time: 12:40 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms. Inc. #2 Owner Email:
Owner: Faison Q amithPhone: 252-568-7450
Mailing Address: 524 Bill Sign RQ Albertson NC 285QE9420
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd , " - Dover NCi 28526
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: ; 5°18'59" Longitude. 77°25'21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor. & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith
Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy
Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 0811412012 Inspection Type: Comptianee Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey 8-10-11 Thick-2.69'
LTZ-3.41'
Pump intake-4.75' } 41 % Sludge Ratio
Calibration due 2012
Waste Analysis 6-6-12 2.27
2-6-12 2.1
10-10-11 1.19
Soil Test 12-7-11 wl highest lime .3 tons
Cu & Zn values Min range
11 j Outside crop window on corn on tract B 41.77 acres - irrigated 16.24 Ibs on 7-3-12
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
Crop yield complete
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Number: 25OG49
Inspection Rate: 08/1412012 Inspection Type: Compiiance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896 4,824
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon LAGOON 1 110/19/95
19.50 29.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250G49
Inspection pate: 08/1412012 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 levet into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
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: AW5250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Number. 250049
Inspection Date: 08/14/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
■
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
24. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 08/14/2012 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?
In
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
124 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 equlpment (NPDES only)?
Cl ❑
■ ❑
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: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection pate: 08/14/2012 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?
rug..._ �..........
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 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 probferns, over -application)
31. Do subsurface file 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 Re viewe r/I nspe cto r fa i I to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
13
11
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ Cl
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

N.
Division of Water quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number; 250049 Facility Status: Active Permit: P.WS2 49 ❑ denied Acoess
Inspection Type: ComplianW,In2peglion Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: County: Region: Washongtgn
Date of Visit: {i, 11�1 Entry Time: 21 .00 PM Exit Time: 01 �00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison . mi Farms. Inc. #2 _ Owner Email:
Owner: Faison D S= Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: 425 Wilfigm Pierce Rd Dover NC 28t�6
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Meshy -Br, wn L C _
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35`18'5,4' Longitude: 7 1"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary DIG(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 08/19/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey 9-28-10 Thick-2.3'
LTZ-3.8'
Pump intake-35) 35% Sludge Ratio
Calibration due 2012
Waste Analysis 6-13-11 1.7
2-17-11 1.5 )need new waste analysis
Soil Test 10-25-10 wl highest lime .6 tons
Cu & Zn values w/in range
Freeboard & Rainfall complete & correspond wl irrigation
'Need to get lagoon down by fall - can pump on soybeans tilt 9115
'Facility has new Center Pivot
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number. 250049
Inspection Date: 08119/2011 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 41896 3,531
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard observed Freeboard
lagoon -
LAGOON 1 10/19/95 1 1 19.50 26.00
Page: 3

Permit-. AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection date: 08/19/2011 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA HE
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 Storacie & Treatment
Yes
No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
It yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.l large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
S. 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 Ap lication
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)?
❑
■
❑ ❑
❑
■
❑ ❑
Yes
No
NA NE
❑
■
❑ ❑
❑
■
❑ ❑
13
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison ❑ Smith
Facility Number: 25OD49
Inspection pate: oa/19/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste AppLication
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Altavista
Soil Type 2
Arapahoe
Soil Type 3
Goldsboro
Soil Type 4
Craven
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ E ❑ ❑
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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
I& Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑ W Cl ❑
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? ❑
Pages 5

Pennk: AVVS250049 owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 0811912011 Inspectl0n 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?
0
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?
❑ MOO
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NIP DES on)y)?
❑ ❑
■ ❑
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
Cl ■
❑ ❑
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: AWS250049 Owner • Facility: Faison ❑ Smith
Facility Number: 250049
Ins pectlon Date: 08/19/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
27. ❑id the facility fail to secure a phosphorous Ioss assessment {PLAT} certification?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Other Issues
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.
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 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 OAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 250049 Facility Status: Active Pemnit: AWS250949 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Coro lin ante Inspg ion _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 111L.1.81201 0 Entry Time:12:20 PM_ Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison m Owner Email:
Owner: Faison D Smith _ . _ Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 524 Bill Sutton Rd _. _.___ ffig5goa NC 285089420
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd __ _____ _ Dover NC 2§526
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant E Not Compliant Integrator: Murohy-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°18'59" Longitude: 77°25'21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents © Other issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 11118/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
CDC in records - Get copy of Permit
Waste Analysis 10-22-10 .91
7-6-10 1.0
3-5-10 2.1
Sludge Survey 9-28-10 Thick-2.30'
LTZ-3.80'
Pump intake-3.5' } 35% Sludge Ratio
Catibration complete 11-15-10 } less than 10% variance
Soil Test 10-25-10 with highest lime -6 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
'Application on wheat 9-17-10 thru 10-13-10 with approx 50lbs PAN applied to Wheat - Wheat planted 11-18-10 - field 34.28 acres
with 121 wheat PAN'
Freeboard and Rainfall complete and correspond with irrigation
Crop yield complete
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Inspection Date: 1111812010 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 250049
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
0 Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896 2,373
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Data Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19.50 30.00
Page: 3

ti
Permit: AWS250049 owner- Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 11118/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VA It: 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)
❑
01111
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0011
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.eJ 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 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

A
Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 11/18/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P2O5? ❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ■
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Com. Wheat. Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Cotton
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Craven
Soil Type 2 Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
1& 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 fait to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Y
Permit: AWS250049 owner • Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Number. 250049
Inspection Date: 11115/2010 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 a 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
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
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-complianoe of the Permit or CAWMP? 1101311
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 concem? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Inspection Date: 11/18/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional ❑WQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. ❑id Rev iewerl I n specto r fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 250049
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

l
0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250049 _ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250049 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven _ „ Region: inaton
Date of Visit: 09/17/2009 Entry Time: 12:30 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms. Inc. #2 Owner Email:
Owner: Faison D Smith Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 524 Bill Sutton Rd Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address: 425William Pierce Rd Qoyer NC28525
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant E Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown. LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 355"18'59" Longitude: 77°25'21" _
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith Operator Certification Number: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 09/17/2009 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Facility had discharge that originated at hog house #2. The flushline hack up and approximately 1000 gallons discharge from the hog
house to a drain tile and then to a drainage ditch. Traveled approx 1100 feet till it came to a stop in a low place in the ditch. Farm is in
procee of taking corrective actions to get wastewater hack into lagoon.
Waste analysis 7-20-09 2.4
4-15-09 2.3
12-3048 1.5
Sludge Survey 10-31-08 Thick-2.35'
LTZ-3.65'
Pump intake-5' ) sludge ratio 37%
Calibration 6-30-08 j next one due 2010
Soil test 1-29-09 with highest lime .4 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
Freeboard and Rainfall complete and correspond with irrigation
Update crop yield when cam is picked
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 25OD49
Inspection Date: 09/17/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896 6,200
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660.960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
ILagoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19.50 23.00
Page: 3

n
Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Data. 09117/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
01scharges & Stream Im acts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
■
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
■
Application Field
Q
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
Cl
❑
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
❑
■
❑
❑
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
❑
■
Cl
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
Cl
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■
❑
❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
0
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
Q
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
Q
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
Cl
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

0
Permit: AW5250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 09117/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 2 Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3 Cotton
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Arapahoe
Soil Type 4
Altavista
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facillty Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 09/17/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
Cl
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
Cl
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after n 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
21 If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
Cl
■
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
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: AM250049 Owner - Facility: Faison 0 Smith
Inspection date: 0911712009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other issues
31. did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss rev iewli n s pect ion with cn-site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number : 250049
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number-. 250049 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWS250049 ❑ Denied Aocess
Inspection Type: Cormgf jnce Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: RgOne County: Craven - Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 081251200E Entry Time+01:00 PM Exit Time:
Incident M
Farm Name: Fpj§gniSmith Farms Incowner Email:
Owner. Faison D Smith
Phone: 52,2-588-7450
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd Dover NC 285 6
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant integrator: Pro mi urn Sta nda r n 's
Location of Farm:
Latitude:35°18'59" Longitude:77"25'21"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Faison D Smith
Secondary OIC(sy:
Operator Certification Number: 18150
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy
Phone:
On -site representative Geno Kennedy
Phone:
Primary Inspector. Megan H Stilley
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
'No oopy of COC and Permit in records
Waste Analysis 6-1"8 2,7
2-26-08 2.3
Calibration 6-30-0a } next one due 2010
"Need to take 2008 soil samples
'Need to take 200B sludge survey
`No current waste analysis for August and September irrigation - going to send off waste analysis today
'Need to update freeboard records - rainfall and freeboard correspond with irrigation events.
'Email me stocking records
'Crop yields not updated since 2007 - corn and wheat 2008
'Manage weeds in spraytields
Page: 1

Permit: AWS250049 Owner. Facility: Faison O Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 09/25/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
❑ Swine -Feeder to FiniStl 4,896
Total Design Capacity: 4,B96
Total SSLW: 660,950
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19.50 33,00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
inspectlon Date: 09/25/2008 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?
❑ NOD
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
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures or}site that are not property 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 Applicatio
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?
❑ a ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below -
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground_
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page-. 3

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Inspection Date: 0912512008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number ; 250049
Reason for Visit: Rooline
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 10%110 Ibs.?
❑
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
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type b
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ 1 ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
18. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ E ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ i ❑ ❑
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?
❑ r ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250049 owner - Facility: Faison D Srnhh
Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Data: 09251200e 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 8 monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields? ■
Stocking? ❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)? ❑
22. Did the fad lity fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [1 ■ ❑ ❑
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? ❑ ■ 0 El
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively oertified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? 0 ❑ ■ ❑
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which Cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ 0 0
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?
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: 5

Permit: AWS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison ❑ Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: OW2512008 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes No NA NE
31, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ D ❑
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewTnspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ! ❑ ❑
Page: 6

® Division of Water Quality
F- Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency---------_----�
Facility Number : 250049 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS250049 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: CMvenRegion: Washington
Date of Visit: 0610112007 Entry Time:08:30 AM Exit Time:
Incident #,!:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms, Inc, #2 Owner Email:
Owner: 17aison D Smith
Phone: 252-F68-7450
Mailing Address: 2.1 Fill Sutton Rd Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address: •-25 lyiiiiam Pierce Rd Dover NC 28525
Facility Status: n Compliant n Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:35°18'597 — Longitude: 7725'20"
From Kinston tale NIC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges u 5:r:;a;r Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
g Records and Dr r,,!rients Other Issues
Certified Operator: F aison D Smizh Operator Certification Nurn'.)er: 18150
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Size Representative(s): Name Title Phone
2•: hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
On -size representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: E•.�egan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature. Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: A"VS250049 owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: CC10112007 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste Utilization Pltrn to he temporarily amended for corn, soybeans, summer annual, and wheat.
Farm; is going to rc-sprig Eermuda pasture in Spring 2008.
Mr. Faison Smith is -row 'he Operator in Charge; he has been re -certified.
Facility needs to upda'e Crop Yield for hay in 2006. Make sure to record weekly freeboard levels —only one reading was recorded in
April.
Waste Analysis 3 3-07 2.1
11-13-06
P-2-06 2_0
Soil 7es; 1-4-07 !` .]06 sample) 1.2T highest amount of lime applied
Cu & Zn values Zvi;! rn rannes
Cali ration perfcrtor 11-2-po
Sludge Survey 9-; -06 Thickness- 1 .92' LTZ-4.18'
Irrir.,- ion Records c:rrmple:e--no current waste sample for Jan 14 and 15 irrigations.
Fare: should rno,.r ;!• i� inside lagoon slopes for greater visibility.
Page: 2

Permit; .-",' JS250049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Number:25OD49
Inspection Date' G�;0112007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Opera=tions
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feed �:r to Finish 4,896 4,498
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard observed Freeboard
I
agoc i LAGOON 1 10/19/95 19.50 1 27.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS250049 owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 25OD49
Inspection Date: C610112007 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? ❑ ® 0 Q
Discharge originated at
Structure n
Application Field ❑
Other n
n❑
a. Was canveyar:1-1 ce man-made?13
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify ❑WQ) 0 13 ❑ ❑
c. Estimated vol-:ne reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharg:: bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
n
M
❑
❑
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
n
a
❑
❑
3_ %Vere there any r1dverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
1q
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yrt
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
ri
12
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any imrnediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.eJ large trees, severe
H
❑
❑
erosion, seepage. E.:c.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
r
"'
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the 51,ructures need maintenance or improvement?
n
a
❑
❑
$. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
i�,
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or,.-: �21: stacks)
9. Does any part cf the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
m
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Applicatiori
Yew
N-)
NA
NE
10 Are thr're aria rrqukired buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
i I
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evide:;c�3 cf incorrect application?
n
r-'
r]
❑
If yes, check the op;rropriale box belo:v-
Excessive Park: •J?
1--1
Hydraulic Overload?
n
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu. Zn, etc.)? n
Page: 4

Permit: AWS250049 owner- Facility: Faison D Smith
Inspection Date: 17610112007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Nimiber :
Reason tcr': _:*.:
250049
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN > 10%/10 Ilbs.?
n
Total P205?
171
Failure to incomorate ruanurelsludge into bare soil?
Outside of accE=•* .ible crop windov.'7
Evidence of ivina drift?
� I
Application outs id ; of application area?
r
Crop Type 1
Co.m, `Nheat, Soybeans
Crap Type 2
"irtnr
Annual
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
G.- -n
Soil Type 2
Gai�oro
Soil Type 3
F• r�isla
Soil Type 4
r nn
oe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14- Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
E. rot
❑
rl
Plan(CAWN.IP)?
15. Does the receiving crop andlor land application site need improvement?
7 in
11
El
16. Did the facility fail to secure andlor operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? i_
n
n
17. Does the facili':• lack adequate acreage for land application?
[
n
Q
1B. Is there a lack cf properly operating waste application equipment?
r G
n
n
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19, Did the facility .ail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
r ^`
f]
20. Does the fociIi'y fail l❑ have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
f �'
I° yes, check: •,he �;,-Propriate box below.
WUP?
r
Page: 5

Pern7it:." WS250D49 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Nurnb,,r
:
250049
Inspection Date: 06/01/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason ier Vi='°:
Routine
Retards and Documents
Yes
-
r
NA
NE
Checklists?
Design?
r
r4aps?
i-
Other?
r
21. Does record .'-:e.::ping need improvement?
n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Applicaticri7
�
120 Minute inspections?
�
V.'eather code?
r
Weekly Freeboarc'?
Transfers`'
r—
Rainfall?
I—
l ,spections after -- 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
r'
VJaste Analysis?
l` )nual soil analvsis?
Crop yields?
r
-
S Locking?
r-1
Annual Certification Form (UPDES only)?
I--
22. Did the facili'y L'Al to install and maintain a rain gauge?
i—
:m
D
El
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
[
S
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?
[l
❑
❑
26.'Did the facility ,3il to have an actively certified operator in charge?
F-
0
Cl
27. Did the facility °;ail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
r
a
❑
D
Other Issues
Yer
",
NA
NE
2& N,rere any ac':'.i,r)nal problerns noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
"~.
n
n
29. Did the facility t,:it to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
n
; _
❑
Q
mortality rates th :; exceed normal rates?
30, At the time nt it n inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■
ot:;:Iity represer'ta': e immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AINS250049 Owner- Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Nurrhrr : 25OG49
Inspection Dale: C6101I2007 Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Vi- t: Routine
Other Issues Yes •7 NA NE
31. Did the facility .1�iil to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? n vr� it
32. Did Reviewerli;•spector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? n _q 0
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

It
Division of Water Quality
�j Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 250049 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA225449 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: QomDliance l soection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 0711112GQ6 Entry Time:12.30 PM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms. Inc. 42 Owner Email:
Owner: FaiEon D Smith
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 524 ENJ Sutton Rd Albertson NC_2Q5089420
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°18'59" Longitude: 77°25'20"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
© Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number:
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Geno Kennedy Phone:
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison ❑ Smith
Facility Number: 250049
Inspection date: 07111/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
W U P 8-30-05
COC and Permit 2007
Waste Analysis 5-10-06 17
2-21-06 1.6
Rainfall and freeboard recorded - make sure to initial by rain events greater than 1"
Sludge survey 11-27-05 Thick-1.3'
LTZ-5. V
PLAT complete 12-28-05 - No fields received high or very high
Calibrations complete 7-3-05
`Calibrations and sludge survey due September 2006
Crop yield 2006 - no previous years of crop records
Soil test 1-31-05 - Need to complete 2006 test
Soil test highest lime 2.4 tons - need to apply lime asap
Cu and Zn values within range
20) Need checklists in Notebook onsite
IRR- 1 and IRR-2 complete
"Bermuda has many weeds and in poor shape - suggest consulting an agronomist (Bob Edwards)"
Pag e: 2

Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Humber : 250049
Inspection Date: 07/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,896 4,000
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon LAGOON 1 22.80 32.00
Page: 3

Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 07/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream_Impa s 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) n ■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑
■
n
❑
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?
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./ 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: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 07/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 4
Corn (Grain)
Crap Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Craven
Soil Type 2
Goldsboro
Soil Type 3
Altavista
Soil Type 4
Arapahoe
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
0 ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
18. 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?
■ ❑ ❑ 0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison D 5mith
Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 07/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Dacuments
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
■
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■ n ❑ ❑
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?
❑
Crap yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPOES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
n
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
0
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
n
❑
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: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison D Smith Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 07/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? Q ■ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewtinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0 M 0 0
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 25QO49 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA225049 _ ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compfi nice Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/25/2006 Entry Time:01:00 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Faison Smith Farms. Inc. #2 Owner Email:
Owner: Faison D Smith Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 524 Bill Sutton Rd __ Albertson NC 285089420
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd Dover NC 28526 _
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:355"19'57" Longitude:77"25'24"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left
Question Areas:
JW Discharges & Stream Impacts W Waste Collection & Treatment © Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Geno Kennedy Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Need to manage weeds in spray field
rainfall records need to be initialized when rain events greater than 1"
address woody vegetation around lagoon
manage bare spots on lagoon - may want to add some topsoil
'Did not Took at records because Geno Kennedy not onsite. Will do another inspection and look at everything
Page: 1

Permit: NCA225049 owner - Facility: Faison D Smith
Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Data Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon LAGOON 1 22,80 29.50
Page: 2

LIN
Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Faison 0 Smith Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 04/25/2006 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure in
Application Field ❑
Other it
a. Was conveyance man-made? n ■ n n
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ D U
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? {if yes, notify DWQ}
f l
■
f l
I]
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
n
■
n
n
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
`l
01
discharge?
.......... Storage-- .._ .. ........_ ..__.
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
n
■
n
n
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
Cl
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
Q
MOD
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
0110
or closure plan?
?. 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,
DODD
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
n
improvement?
QtherissUes
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 andlor 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,
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
■
rl
❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0
■
f]
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
■
❑
❑
❑
Page: 3

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 250049 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA225049 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comi7llance_Inspectlon — Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Craven _ Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 98/31/2005 Entry Time: 08:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Danny Webb Farm Owner Emall:
Owner: fanny L Webb Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2317 Hwy 258 S Kinston NC 28504
Physical Address: 425 William Pierce Rd Dover NC 28526
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator: Murphy Family Farms
Latitude: 35'19'57" Longitude: 7Z°25'24"
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts ® Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Q Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title - Phone
24 hour contact name David Anderson Phone: [phone]
On -site representative David Anderson Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary tnspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary: /
427 PLAT was due Jan. 2005, however the previous owner did not address this issue,
Mr. Smith purchased this farm in late July 2005 and has been making improvements steadily. David Anderson has begun the PLAT
survey.
Waste analysis:
7-11-05 = 1.3
3-29-05 = 2.1
Soil sample Jan 2005
NOTE: need to cut the woody vegetation on the back side of the lagoon.
Page: 1

Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Danny L Webb
Facility Number: 250049
Inspection Date: 08/31/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
0 Swine -Feeder to Finish 4,896 4,800
Total Design Capacity: 4,896
Total SSLW: 660,960
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon LAGOON 1 22.80 24.00
Page: 2

of
Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Danny L Webb Facility Number: 250049
Inspection pate: 08/31/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges,& Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
XP5
OMOO
No NA
hLL
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)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d_ Does discharge bypass the waste management system? {if yes, notify DWQ}
❑
M ❑
0
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M 0
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
yes
M ❑
No NA
❑
NF
Waste Collection_ , torage & 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 (I-e.1 large trees, severe erosion,
❑
0 0
0
seepage, etc.)?
8. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
11
❑
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
❑
❑ 0
0
and/or wet stacks]
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
0
❑ 0
❑
improvement?
Yes
Uo NA
NE
Waste Anplication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
13
0 ❑
❑
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?
0
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
0
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Bermuda Grass (Hay,
Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
pats)
Crop Type 4
Page: 3

r
Permit: MCA225049 Owner - Facility: Danny L Webb
Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 08/31/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
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(GAWMP)? ❑
❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
0
❑
❑
16. bid the facility fail to secure andlor 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 ape rating waste application equipment?
0
Yp-s
❑
No NA
❑
NF
Records and Documenis_
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
0
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?
Cl
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
M 0
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
0
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
Transfers?
Rainfall?
Inspections after n 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
0
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
0
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
0
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
X ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ ❑
s
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
0110
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
m oo
Page: 4

r
Permit: NCA225049 Owner - Facility: Danny L Webb
Facility Number : 250049
Inspection Date: 08/31/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA HE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? 0 ❑ ❑ ❑
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or GAWMP? ❑ N 1111
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality © M ❑
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.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
32. Did Reviewerfinspector fail to discuss reviewhnspection with on -site representative?
0
M ❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
N ❑
❑
Page: 5

Type of Visit iI Co Review Inspection Q Operation Reiew Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit _�/Routine O Complaint o Foiiow up o Emergency Notification Q other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: r]-' . -[x( Time- 12
Facility Number �'
❑ Not O erational Q Below Threshold
,Permitted eTertified © Con`ditio�npally Certified D Registered Bate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ... _............
Farm Name: ... ..:!l�xe...._.W..�..7Cb------��................................ County:...�c-� ........_._ ... _....
Owner Name:........ b................................ Plhoon. a No:...
Mailing Address:�a _ .... .�.� .. �... ,...- !' ------ ...........
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator- ---.M.
Certified Operator: -..................... ..........•-•-----•----..............................__....... ........... Operator Certification Number: ........... -..............
... ..
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Morse Latitude �• �� ��� Longitude �• �� ���
r
Current - ; urtti - Design Crent
Swine ON
-
Po - `r' - ..
_.. �. try. ;= ci ~Pu elation C&..._- ]Po -#ion:..;
Wean to Feeder y ❑ Layer ❑Dairy
Rr Feeder to Finish �,^ ❑ Non -Layer r Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean..: ,.;.. �.:.�. _..__ :.. _.......: -
...
Farrow to Feeder ; ° _ - -- -
w.....w �. _ .....
Farrow to Finish _
Design :Cap •Totai� �acit
Gilts _- - r `3
Boars
-:Total; ssL W a
+Niiji2 of on sTx _
Discbarses & Stream Imvacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Er/Mo
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 2rNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes rNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity [freeboard plus storm storage] less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes o
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: Z j-- Date of Inspection --2,q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 54
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes &io
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) �
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes L'�
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance./improvement? El Yes [ Z
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes a o
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanoelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over a ication? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [ 'Yes El
❑ Excessive Ponding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type ; dIS
13. Do the receiving crops differ those designated in thC%rdfied Animal`01ste Manag-mint Plan 6Ajjpp ❑ 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? JYes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 10io
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 131No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes GrRo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ®No
Air Quality representative immediately.
�Commeats refer.to uest;an.� •°�1I~x lattx as YFS.aii�rers"aa�Ior� _ - -
�Llse drawtags �f'.fae�lriy-w betier.etcl►latn sttnattotts..(tts�.aaddi rtal pages`as ecessaiyj ;�� --
❑Field Copy ❑Final Notes � '
u7o�•�.� ah._o�►�p-i � - 5-- f � � a'� � 2 -s 1 bs
V 3_3_ay _ 2.3 I65.
11 -1$- G3 - 2 . I 165
r
��
� _ a -(-� ' • �^'� Jam^-' �`4
C� - r. Gov -0�-4Q 3A Ibs
I
rla",
CudS �b5u
r -
4-
.ALL. 4�,'
Reviewerfhispector Name s :.�u> _ � .�...k�.x •. ""i:�. -;.:.A:� _ 3: ...s�=}x': _':V s-`._ _ 'c-.:� r . r,t s:.� .._..z._
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 2
12/I2AR3 V - Continued

Facility Number: C — Date of Inspection
�#V
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �lo
❑ 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
�'"�
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Q No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
t
('el discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
El Yes
�,
L► KO
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
2<0
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
�zo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30, Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
ff es
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Q I To
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
B+To
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
M Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
63"Y"es
❑ No
35. Does record keepin for NPDES required forms need iimm rovement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes To
❑ Stocking Fo ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Ra?& au ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspectiod ❑ Annual Certification Fonwl_�'
Io No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ddittonal Comments andlor.Drawin ..
M
ai.s>....-.st.
r�`.►Q`�' " 1 l e��.V -� �'"� '� 3� j i�sT 0.4Ql:
—�-o _ 5T.- 5y1— 34 S Z.
�-� ;V-,,-
rz
12112103

{Facilillumber 25 - 49 Date: 312/04 Time: 1 1300 1 Time On Farm: 55 WARO
Farm Name Danny Webb Farm County Craven
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 900 Pink Hill Road Kinston INC 28504
Onsite
Representative Danny Webb Integrator ur h Brown
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection [pilot only]
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
4896
4896
D Routine
Q Response to DWQIDENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWC❑ referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current
Canarity Pnnnintinn
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ® yes ❑ no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6- Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 120
CROP TYPES lCoastal Bermuda -graze 15mall grain overseed om Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CrB GoA Ap AaA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
Facility Number 25 - 49 Date: 312104 I
PARAMETER
F1 8 Wasta tnill laavinn sits
m No assistance provided/requested
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ® yes ❑ no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6- Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 120
CROP TYPES lCoastal Bermuda -graze 15mall grain overseed om Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CrB GoA Ap AaA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
Facility Number 25 - 49 Date: 312104 I
PARAMETER
F1 8 Wasta tnill laavinn sits
m No assistance provided/requested

❑.,9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
® 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
❑ 19. Latelmissing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
® 21. Crop needs improvement
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient spraytield conditions
Regulatory Referrals
I Referred to ❑WQ Date: 3/2/2004
] Referred to NCDA Date:
] Other... Date:
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
MADE BY OPERATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
I hUHNIGAL A5515 I ANGh Neeaea
Proviaea
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
28. Forms Need (list In comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
®
❑
30.2M.0200 re -certification
❑
❑
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
®
❑
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
42. Irrigation Calibration
®
❑
43. Irrigation system designiinstallation
❑
❑
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
45. Operating Improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subso€ling, aeration, etc.
❑
❑
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
58. Cropfforage management education
❑
❑
69. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
Facility Number 25 - 49 Date: 312104
COMMENTS-
75 03/10/03

"prodlr.:er requested copy of sludge survey. Information to be mailed on 314/04.
New waste analysis taken on 2115/04 waiting results.
"Waste analysis dated 11/18/03 nitrogen is 2.1 Ibs11000 gallons
"COC dated April 9, 2003 and on site. At time of oper. review, producer had not mailed rain stop event form to Raleigh.
34. Need to secure sludge survey by April 24, 2004.
2. Need to calibrate irrigation system by April 24, 2004.
'Soil test dated 1218103 Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
17. Failure to record weather codes on IRR1.
9. Failure to record crop yields.
"Stocking records were available for review. (Company stocking records)
. Producer stated that on 311104 he destroyed wheat crop (poor stant) by cutting into ground tract 13 field 7 hydrants 4-9.
Animal waste was applied to these pulls. Hydrants 4 and 5 received 33.85 lbs of nitrogen per acre, Waste was applied to
hydrants 6-9 however, producer waiting for waste analysis to be received for these events. NOR to DWD no receiving crop.
Crop has to be harvested.
1. Hydrants 10 and 11 inspection of spray field (wheat crop), there was not an adequate receiving crop for waste to be
applied on.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Martin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 319104 Entered By: Martin McLawhorn
76 03/10/03

............. ....
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason far Visit p Routine ❑ Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: 1:11 pm
p of operational p BelowThreshold
Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
. ii
Farm Name: Danny Webb Farm County: Craveja............................................... WkRO.......
Owner Name: Danny Webb Phone No: 919-523-5227
Mailing Address: 900.Piutk1li11..111mid.................................. ......... ....... I.......................... Ki nsto AC............................................................ 2850.4 ..............
FacilityContact' .. .... .......Title:--••........................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative: Chuck.Riggs............................................................................... Integrator: Murphy -Fa mUy.Far3ats...............----...................
Certified Operator: Damny..L................................ W.Ab ............................................. ... Operator Certification Number:2,09118.......-----.---.
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NU 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance onleft.
n �
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude « Longitude . 4 «
DesignCnrrent .: ;: -DeA n Current.
esign_ :a.' : u rren w -, z . g - g
Swine = ` Capacity `Population P ltq�; _: Capacity Population Cattle rc:.:. Capaci#y.:- Population
13 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
13 Farrow to Wean
E3 Farrow to Fee er
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
0 Boars
13
ayer
p
Non -Layer
m. .
Number. ofLagoons - 13Subsurface rams Presentp Lagoon red 13 pray Fie red
Holding iPonds:ISolid Traps E3 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? _.i ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discnarge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? q
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? Ll Yes ® No
:i
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other ihan from a discharge? 0 Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storn: storage) less than a.:tequate? p Spillway p Yes ®No
Structure I Stricture 2 Stn.eture 3 Structure 4 ?� Structure 5 Structure 6
t3 airy
17 Non -Dairy
p
Othert-
Total Desig€,Itapacity-"
4,896
'TotaUSSLW
660,960
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ....... ....... 29..

aci iy Number: 2s_4g Date of Inspection
5
,r
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, Severe erosion,
0 Yes
p No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an -
p Yes
p No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? '
p Yes
® No
s
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
p Yes
M No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes
p No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda Small Grain Overseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
p No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
p No
�w
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? °.j
p Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
p No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management flan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
® Yes
p No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
p No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No "
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ ofemergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
p No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
M N❑
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ; '
p Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP"
p Yes
p No
In No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Comat%erits: refer tii" uestion ##}:;=Eli lain nm=YE$ answers and/or an areiiaiiiiiiendgtivns vr:an` ether commeints === ="
- � .-r --F .ax T:-s... �.� '_ �� �W.-....... _ .....__...... �"�"�.?:=..-.-.:M�'....:;.w;'".c"..
U§idrawings a eceSS
etterWexplains�tuat�ons: (use's ditiona :pageS;n ary
_ac__rty.to Field Ca nal -
i r PY F� Notes --
C7
* Irrigating at time of inspection. Front Coastal Bermuda field.
7. Vegetation well established on dike walls with few bare areas.
15. Coastal Bermuda needs to be cut and baled; approximately 4-5 ft in height with a lot of weeds which indicates
eceiving crop is not being properly managed. Soybeans also contained a lot of weed growth.
17 & 18. CAWMP records not available for review.
1 1, 13, 19, 22, 25. Unable to complete until CAWMP records are reviewed.
5. Please be advised that the. G1C or backup GIC is responsible for inspecting....' (SEE PAGE 3)
Reviewerlins ector Name
Da hne.B. Cullom...: u,. ........' :.. entered'h Aieir:T ndal!
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
O

05103101 ',
Continued
Facility Number: 25_49 Date of Inspection ® •-
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
13 Yes
p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
p Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoo,V,,
p Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan Belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) $�
p Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
p Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes
p No
iIU U L LI V Ina 'k-V 1111111N11W a 1191 V 1." 14 W 111 g,'; .- ^"- .. - _. - _ � ..... ........ : 1
.... land application sites within,24'hours after land application has occurred. This facility does not have an OIC
backup designated and Mr. R- is indicated Mr. Webb was out of town and wouldn't return for approximately 2.
weeks. A a
In addition, irrigating on Coastal'Bermuda that is 4-5 ft in height is not acceptableas good management for an
�,�, _•
SIC. •�
lease submit the CAWMR records -along with your current waste utilization plan -to the DWQ-WARO:�e
�a14-Ll��� ftCa��S I�GI�'- 11 �tS'2.6�Z .�jEVi G��d1 i �?o�•,zaC.3 ��ov-�
-� �
7 JoZ- 7-. z lbsqIas o� l.l0 3b5.�ioc�a s . �ja,� a sps
s [ z74a z ��� '' 'n t` -C ��-� •4-r /ate .
,y +F
G - �Qe ct'v.SZ zZO 'Za•" q z
{ G 7 t.� r GO irS Go Y , n:,y y.3 r`�d2 0 rb �� !'>►�
301
it � �r � �� �� - �,y _ _ � . �• ' � '., �� ��� ��' �,s'r ! r ' •"t_ S,
� j¢ ;p+11 t `' ;- oJ1Z :ber. Coac.
i { 1 �y� � ���'1}1,�' 1 I�a1 .y'. , p 1 �, - �. a +,�. + ���v ; /+- 1 '� 1 •S � �� _ 'nf Q
['%.CJ •r 4.RJ� �'4 - • S ��"'tY �{ "`^'��^^C 4�LY ry V t �"y [ '� Ith
po
.�r `�y r VV s�? � • lor►_AM:G.
-49
�I � Nulea a. ILL
fly' _ L F. ir��'t"� n �,i •��t ��jr

i�istaa aF�w _
'�� -._ � Yam. - •-:.....,p..w .......'� .. w. �.�. � A: •:: •• .....-,. .,.... .._ ri - - � � ':
t
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Ql�outine Q Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
I'acilit►' Number Hate of Visit: L_L 'ime.
/ Not Operational Below Threshold
{y�� Permitted M"Cer tified Q Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
^� , I 1 rI— �i �G--C3
Farm Name: r 1 1CL�vl�L�_a OA6 �C•r�L Count.•• l _r"' t __ „ Wd_
Owner Name: Phone No: 2 SZ4-
Mailing Address: t 11 C_ 2 a 4-In�
Facilit►° Contact:
Onsite Representative: C_ 3
Certified Operator: i
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: ty1.C-
Operator Certification Number: _. �9 0A
E.sfi"Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' D u Longitude 0 �»
Curivot "" : ' D Sign Current - ign _ -Des* nrrtat =
Swine Ca atitV' P'illation . ' Poultn- Ca acity ' : Population _- Cattle Cal acity ... Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer -= Dairy
eeder to Finish 1!ABqL 4­
OCid ❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy,
-
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ er Farrow to Feeder ❑ Dth_
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capad '
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
F ,Tnt$i SSLW=:
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area ❑ 5 ran Field Area
-Holding Ponds 1: Solid s r _ Trap � ._ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management 5vstem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b- If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Stare? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gat/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any par[ 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
Identifier:
Frccboard (inches): - S 4
05IV3101
Structure 5
❑ Yes 93'Ko
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
ONO
❑ Yes
�10
El Yes
,M_!,
i�v No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection - 5 �O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Del trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
b. 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/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 maintenancelimprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type �] k Q,,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re wired 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?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review•iinspection 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 ANN vIP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes L N.
ElYes Uv No
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes G3'�-o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑Y ❑No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes G is
uYes ElNo
O/Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes l�;vo
❑ Yes El-<
❑ Yes ,❑��No
❑ Yes �'+IoNO
❑ Yes Lld"No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about thisvisit.
Comments. (refeir,to question ff)-' Explib an-y-YES answers kiilu �'"y..reeommeadations or anyA er.comvtenis.0
M
Use drawings of falaiv to better explain situations._ {nse itddtdortal..Pa:ges as necessary):: : [J pield Ganv [] Final Notes, _
OvL(S � 4 t��
�-{'1'�� � �►►��M�
CA
k--JL[�--�
Ice- k�'C`.
0.r- �' ►-t� j �y� �O-�Q C4-'-Q C
r
&AAA,.,.)cta- Nis --6 6c- co4- bj_� row- 4-5
Vj L i +� Qd-L C v ►
-CL
o� &
Name ,nL a
REewerlInspector
ewerllnspector Signature: [ Date:
05103101 Continued
4�

Facilit►- Number: S — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there am• dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
79- Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
M NVere 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 permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes i�Ko
❑ Yes �O
❑ Yes Q^'N—o
❑ Yes Lr Joo
El Yes � .
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Dr2'Wings:
17 i 18 . C>(-M_ P r —e> tech nab" I_Va.i 1&L(k_ rem 1 e_LAAJ ,
Covet. f G-. v+11k.� 0-�e el d S 41A�
<<`C .t`
P rvk" ur2 Occ*&ak S t i t hoes
la' j �p it �� PL . . !� n �p� n
l � S + r�
I
tom- �y� �� 5t Low[f r�
45 w V\- a f r0x..
+� F
V
C'UeVZM:;L —1-a 4-e� :3 ram—L*�-
05103101

of Visit Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up D Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilitv Number 25 49 Date of Visit: Time:
Not Operational Q Below Threshold
®Permitted S Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered pate Laxt Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: DA1Rilx.i? ebb.Fam ......................................................... .... Count►': itlY.tAl................ ....... ....................... W.►�RA.......
Owner Name: DAnn .................................... 1Y!ribb..-------......................._...-- ....................... Phone No: 9.19.-M:5222.-- ....... _... ..........................................
Mailing Address: N}PjtjkHU JwW.............................
. ............................................... KinstmNC-.... ................................... ................... T.BfL[l:l.............
FariIlt%• Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative. Uaau]uY Wxbb.......................... . Integrator: Mtltlrhy.FttmjJy..,F&r na.............-....
Certified Operator: suulu�. T�..� . ...............W..Cbh............. -........... _................ _ Operator CertWication Number:2ft"B ............................
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn lets on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left. A�
_ I
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude o' �° �µ Longitude 0
---Design Current.
-
Design Current
Design-- Current
Swine. Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacitv Population Cattle'
Capacity Population
❑ wean to Feeder
10 Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feedcr to Finish
4896
420(1
❑Non -Laver
-
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ ether
El Farrow to Finish
.......
---- -- ...
Total .Dmigtt .Capacity- -
4,896
❑ Crilts
Total SSLW
66099G0
❑ soars
---- .
N�imber vf.I�agouna 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area Spray Field Area
Holding.Nndsf.Solid Traps [] No Liquid Waste Management System......
DischaMe5 I Stream Impacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge origiva.ted at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsen4 was the corive ance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If ve.s. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, ►►hat is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d_ Does discharge bypass a lagoon systerrr? (If yes, notify UWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impact--, or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Tixatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Stiucnire l Structure 2 Stnu:ture 3 Stnrc:ture 4 Structure S
Identifier:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ® No
[]'Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure G
Freeboard (inches) : ............... 29...............

05103101 Continued
Facility plumber: 25-49 Date of Inspection 4l26/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ tives, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ONO
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
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
11. 1s there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop typc Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain averseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Ccrlitied 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 pendcd 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
Reauirtied'Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (id irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes N No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes N No
23. Did Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up -6sit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You wail receive no Further correspondence about this visfL.
Gamments referta. itest3ion j:; iarn'an YES-ansrPerttand/orany:rccommendatlons;or-anv.ather.comments:, R '' ..
Ilse. drawings of facrly�tobctter caplain;stustlt►n:naie sdditioaal pagesasx necessary)::; IX
�Field Copy O
Final Notes _
_-- _..... �..... .......... ............._...... .. .... .----.... _.., ..
*Soil test dated 4/12/01 approx. 1800 lbs lime was applied per acre. Suggest keeping time receipts. Cu and Zu within guidelines.
Remember to take soil test for 2002 and follow lime requirements.
*Waste analysis dated 2/5/02 nitrogen is 2.8 lbs/1000 gallons
11/20/01 nitrogen is 1.5 lbs/1000 gallons
*New waste analysis taken 4/24/02 no results.
*Lagoon level is recorded weekly as required by permit.
*Lagoon level recorded on 9/28/01 at 39", on 10/26/01 lagoon recorded at 49". There were not irrigation events to correspond to change in
lagoon level. Farm manager stated he was reading marker incorrectly. lie sum to record all irrigation events.
ReviewerIlns Martin Mc]La��harn ector Name —
,.
77n��iawn.lr..rn.+r•�nr Cinr�nf...w• ny♦n•

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 25-49 Date of Inspection 4126120t12
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads., building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface: of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
*Records are complete and balanced.
*General permit on site.
*According to Mr. Webb, field # 10 was planted in soybeans with no irrigation events in 2001. Crop for 2002 will be soybeans.
*Coastal burmuda to be sprayed for weds.
*Continue to establish veg. on dike walls.
*Facility has made improvements since last inspection.

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation i
Reason far Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O ather ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 25 y Date of Visit: -zit 'r1mv: t2:IX1 pm Printed on: 722001
- ••�0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified (] Conditionally Certified E3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: J?n[tTMAkt.km. County: ���ten.. ... W.t�.Q_......
....----••----•• ... .................... ......
Owner Name: DAM ..................................... Rchb.................................................. . .... Phone No: 9.12-523-57.22......................
Mailing Address: 2Q0.bnk.1=JR oaid ................................................... ........ WMatanNC...... ...................................................... 28Sti.4_.-.......
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
nsiteRepresentative- Rawy.Webh .............................................. - ......... ..-...-......... Integrator: MurVhy..F :.k.axtins..---................................
Certified Operator: DaW ..................................... 1.Ckb.......................................----•-... Operator Certification Number:2Q9Q.8 .............................
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Cra,%en Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ horse Latitude Longitude • �' K
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®No
Discharge oizginated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance nian-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b- If discharge is obscn ed, slid it reach Water of the Staic" (If }•e - uotih• DWQ) ❑ yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is obsenFed, what is the estimated floe' in gallmiu?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, uotil'y- DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YLs N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Stricture 3 Sinicture 4 Structure 5 Slnicture 6
Ideaitifier... ....---••--•----••............................•--....._.
Freeboaid (inches):---............3a...................... -... . ...... I...........

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 25-49 Date of lnipection 6-8-2001 Printed on: 7212001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observe? (iel trees, severe erosion, [] Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which arc not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes N 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 maintenancelituprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelintprovement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any strictures lack adequate, gauged [Harker% with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding N PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
® Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pendcd for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Re uired Records & D( uinents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage ,& General Permit or other Permit readily available?
N Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components ofthe Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
N Yes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in chargc7
❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency- situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Did Reviewcrllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspcction with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Docs facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
® Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question !#}: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
❑ � w ��
Field Copy ❑ Final Note-
s .
7. Continue efforts to remove vegetation from inside dilce wall.
15. Brush pile removed from field #10; planning to plant millet, *Note (WUP should be amended to rcflsx( this receiving crop). No
=civng crop at time of inspection in field # 10.
17. CAWMP needs a copy of the Certificate of Coverage & General Permit.
18 & 19. Waste analysis 6-5-01, 2.3 lbs.11000 gals.; Soil analysis 4-12-01, lime as recommended, need to obtain copy of 1999 soil analysis
for CAWMP records. Need copy of the most current Waste Utilization Plan in the CAWMP: last WUP on site is from 1998 with Feld 10 -
Coastal Bermuda. fields 2 & 7 as CIW/SB, however the irrigation design shows fields 10 & 2 as CB and field 7 as C/WISB. Update current
WUP to address crop for field #10. lrrigation records comvleted by nulls for each field. If the WUP has 50
Rev iewerllnspectvr Name Daphne:B. Culbiii:-.. ' _. _ _ _ T '- �:
__
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. 6 . C"_U4 N,_ Date: —7 — Z. —Q 1

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 25-49 isle of ix�spertivn 6�-2001
printed on: 702001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atfor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt.
roads.. building structure, andlor public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan bladc(s). inoperable shutters, etc.)
_i 1. Do the animals fled storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Cl Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
AdditionaMomments andlor Drawings:
lbs. for small grain overseed then overapplication has ocurred in field 42 or if 100 lbs. is the PAN rate then land application should not i
have occurred in January 2001 on small grain.
acility will receive a Notice of Violation for noted violation above. A site visit will be conducted again to follow-up this inspection.
01. 4:00 pm - Mr. Webb contacted the WaRO to notify me that he had located his current WUP and it indicated that he has a Pan
of 50 lbs. for the small grain overseed which means that overapplication occurred on this receiving crop.

of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
LL .. .. . ... ....... I -- I
Facili#► Number
Date of vi-dt: 2l19/2001 Time. 1U:15 Printed ow 616l2001
25 49
a Not Operational Q Below Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified ©Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: DAPirw..W.fe h.Fam...................................... County: Cxavxix............................................ . WARQ..... ---
OwnerName: Da]u w..................................... Wchb................ ---....... .. .............. ................. Phone No: 919r521-5227 ..........................................................
Mailing; Address: 9.Q0 FJnkHillRaad..............----••......----••----••....................................... Ki1antan.ICJ.0........ .................. ...... ..... ....................... 285.0k............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Vanny.Webb .............................................................................. Integrator: MLrphy,.Fa,U 1y..F B......................................
Certified Operator: D.awy.................................... Webb ................................................ Operator Certification Number:2090.8 .............................
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left.
IT,
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude bk
Design Current
Swine Canacily Paaolation
❑ Wean to Feeder
N Feeder to Finish
4896
4896
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'Design Current . •• Desi u Current
Poultry Ca a . - Po ulatiuri Cattle' Capachy Population .
[] Laver ❑ llain
❑ Non -Layer I I JEI Nan-Dain
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 4,896
Total SSLW 660,960
..........
Nuidilier of. Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ©Spray Field Area
No Li uid Waste Mana ement S]stern
Holding Pvnrla:l SoliWl Traps = q g
Discharzes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®Nn
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsen ed, was the conveyauce man-inade? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of th-; State'? (if yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is obsen'cd, ,,vhat is the eslitnated dove• in gaUtniu?
d. Does, discharge bypass a lagoon sysitem? (If yes, uotify 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 N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus sionn storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spill -way ❑ Yes ® No
Stiucture 1 Structure 2 Sinicture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:................................... .................................... .................................... •----•----••----••--....... ........
Freeboard(inehes):...... ......... 2,7............... ................I.................4 .....

05103101
Facility Number: 25-49
Date of Inspection 1 2/19/2001 1 Printed on: 6/6/2001
Continued
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity- of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion..
seepage, etc.)
6. Are therestructures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste managcment system other than waste structures require maintenance/impro►=entent?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there anv butlers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is then: evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed Corn., Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N 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 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?
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?
(ic/ WLJP. checklis(s, design, maps, etc.)
I9. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
M 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlmspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were anv additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
—113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit-
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
* Soil test dated 7/19/00, Little applied at recommended rates. Suggest keeping lime receipts.
21. No soil test for 1999.
* Soil test taken 2/15/01. No results received.
* Discussed IRR2/waste sampling schedule.
* Waste analysis dated 10/19/00. Nitrogen was 1.7 lbs/1000 gallons. On 5/17/00 nitrogen was 2.4 lbs/1000 gallons.
* Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by Permit.
* Need to correct IRR2 using wheat as smallgrain overseed with PAN rate of 96 lbs/acre. No overapplication.
* Need to sevarate smallgrain cover crop from coastal Wrmuda on IRR2. r
n.,. _.. - m.......,.,...... -......_..........__.............,. -
Reytewerllnspector Name Martin IcLawhorn. ;. -_- erttet�ed.by: i)efta Robbme=_ - _
Re►-iewerlinspector Signature: Date:

` Soil test dated 7119100. Lime applied at recommended rates. Suggest keeping lime
receipts.
21.. No soil test for 1999.
Soil test taken 2115: 0 1. No results received.
* Discussed IRR2/waste sampling schedule.
* Waste analysis dated 10119/00. Nitrogen was L7 lbs11000 gallons. On 5/17100
nitrogen was 2.4 lbsl1000 gallons.
* Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by Permit-
* Need to correct IRR2 rising wheat as small rain overseed with PAN rate of 96 lbslacre.
No overapplication.
* deed to separate small grain cover crap fro in coastal berntuda on I KRI".
21, There is not a current waste analysis for irri€�ation events on wheat in January 2001.
Need to take new waste analvsis and rebalance PAN for wheat.
* deed to correct PAN for wheat to 96 lbslacre for 21001 crov.
7. Need to shape eroding around east side of lagoon. Need to repair stormwater catch
basin between lagoon and buildings,
15, Back coastal bertnuda field needs improvement. Need to remove brush pile and
resprig with Bermuda.

Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection a Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Q Fallow up p Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Bate of Visit: 121i121i0Q Time: 11:QQ Printed on: 12/5/2000
25 49
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................... -
Farm Name: vaw.M..0b.farm............................................ .. County: CrAyxix .............................................. WARO.......
OwnerName: JDantly.......................................12Y.gbh...........................................-----.......-- Phone No: 9.1.9:52 -52V..........................................................
Facility Contact:..............................................................................Title:.................................................... ... Phone No:
............................................................
Mailing Address: 9RQ..P.1A1k.H41I.H9ad ..............................
Onsite Representative: D.a7nfttx..1?!.&b............................................................................... Integrator: lYluxPhly.kalttAly..kaf1]tlli...............
Certified Operator:Dainay.................................... W.Clab ..................................... .......... Operator Certification Number:2,99.9$...... .......................
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • Longitude �• �� 0"
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4896
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current.
Poultry Catyacitv Po uiation Cattle Ca aci " Po -ulatia6-4
❑ Layer ❑ ©airy
❑ Non -Layer I I I0 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 4,896
Total SSLW 660,960'
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds/ Solid. Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharzes & 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 each 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. 1s there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .................. ...... .............................................. .......
Freeboard (inches): 26

5/00 Continued on hack
Facility Number: 25— 99 Date of Inspection 121112000 Printed on: 12/5/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes IN No
12. Crop type Soybeans Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 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? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss 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?
tliv Yiolatioas;or'deficiencies•were "noted :during. this Visit: ; Y uti will receive no further
carres�o idence about this.visit.:: ::::::::: ::: ::::: ...... .
to pump waste as weather and soil conditions permit.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
El Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall

Reviewer/tnspector Signature: _ Date: ,/pp 1
Facility Number: 2-1,-49 Datc ref Inspection 121112UOU 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 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
s/00

Type of Visit ❑ Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review a Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit @) Routine n Complaint d Follow up a Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date (if Visit: 7-12-2U[Itf Time. 13Q5
L�L�Facilityver
Q Not D erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
FarmName: Aanny..W..6h.Fatm.................................................................................... County: lCray.en....... ................ ---.................... W.-"0.......
OwnerName: Ihm................................. ......1'Ygjab.........................................---•..---......... Phone No: ..........................----.......................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title -
Phone No:
Mailing Address: q,Ql.P.inkB111 0Ad........................... .... Kiastoa.KC............................................................ M5.0.4 .............
On%it.e Rep resentati►e: Ranxt :W.ebb............................................................................... integrator: Marph}.F.amily:.k:maw........... ............. .............
.
Certified Operator:,Qan y.J................................. Webb................................................. Operator Certification Number:20908.............................
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 1475 go 0.5 mile to farm entrance on left
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • Longitude Is • �»
:.: Design Current ' ::: iaesig>x Current = : - = Design. Current
Swine CSpacitV Population. Poultry..- Capacity Population—:. Cattle Ca�acity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4896
4896
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
---
❑ Layer ❑ I3airy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Nan -Davy
E I
❑ Other -
Total Design Capacity 4,$96
Total SSI;vV 660,96�
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Prrsent ❑ Lagmm Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding PvndaV:Sol1d:Traps; ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System -
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoou ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. «ac the conveyance maFt-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If tischarge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If }-es, uotiN DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is obsesn•ed. -what is the estunated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoou systent? (ifyes. noti& DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pail of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (frccboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Stiucnire I Structure 2 Structure a Structure 4 Structure 5 StlUctum fi
Ideutifier: ..........prinaag ................................................................................................... ......................................................................................
FrLeboard(incites): .2$................................................... ................................... .................................... ....................... ............. ....................................

S/00
Facility Number. 25-49 Date of Inspection 7-1Z-2000
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 ou-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvem=0
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any s iwtures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenaneelimpmvement?
11- is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Conti► med on back
❑Yes NNo
❑ Yes N No
NYes El No
El Yes NNo
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Oversecd Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
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?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination."
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss 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?
0 Nn violations 6r deFciencies '&e,noted:during this visit.. You will,recei a nb further:
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
* lagoon level records complete. Mr. Webb said he called in high levels to DWQ in February (1-28 to 2-4 up to 16 inches) AL
7. Planning to shape eroding area on east wall and will seed with Fescue this fall - also will repair drop pipelcatch basin to carry surface
water away from lagoon and buildings
15. Coastal Bermuda was resprigged this spring and sprayed for weeds about two weeks ago. Will respray and bush hog within next two
weeks. Fields were reseeded in 1997 & 1998. Planning to ditch perimeter on back field and clean out existing ditches within next 30 days
o improve drainage. Coastal Bermuda is nonexistent in back field.
19. No soils report available for 1999. Took samples last week and i5 waiting for results. Did apply lime in August 1999.
* Last waste analvsis dated 5-17-00 at 2.4 lbs/1000 gal. Previous reports dated 2-3-00 at 1.3 and i 1-18-99 at 1.4 lbs11000 gal.
- - - -- __.- - _- .- .. -
Reviewer/Inspector Name

IReviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number. Date. of Inspection 7-12-2Ultt}
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the c:oafmcment 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(&), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or. -Drawings - -
f
* Waste plan dated 6-9-98 with an overall PAN deficit of 195 lbs. Mr. Webb has 39.6 acres under irrigation but has aluminum pipe an
an reach all fields. 1RR2 pulls are all set up on 4.4 acres. i1i122 are complete and balanced with no over application. Irrigation design
n site.

= .-• D Division of Soil and
.W.ater_.Conseryatio_n - Uperation-Re►iew
0 Division -of Soil ad Water Conseryation -Complianinspection-
Divisionce
_
of Water Quality - Compuance•Inspec ion
© -
• - - Other Agency- Operation Rey�ew - - - e
. T
14) Routine Q Complaint a Follow -tip of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facil€ty Number �rj Oate or Inspection
Time or Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
SPermitted 9 Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: etnn }lip r .. County:....--.. �ap-0
!...............6......,....-..a... �r................................................. .fir.. h.....-.- .....
Owner Name: h 4f................... �iVt. :b b ..... ............ ..... .... Phone No• ' �� �S�Z
sx .....r �.. .............................................7..................... •.......
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative
: .... ,rykdC ....Lk .....1`.F�a-n .. ...... ............... Integrator:..W+:4Y...�.. .... .`.Ay .... ram.....
l.... i.A.1.
Certified Operator-_.. h (......i�.:................Y" .b Operator Certification Number: ... ,1.—p,9ae.................
.
Location of Farm:
Latitude a 4 :Z Longitude • 69
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
c A
gq
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
.. ...... _...........
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 7 1 ID Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischames & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is ohscrved. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑Waters of the Slate
e. If dischar �,e i% observed. what is the estimated (low in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l Structure 2
Identifier:
Frechcfard (inches): .......... -76
11
..,
116199
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
L J
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes ® No
ti.le,
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
E4 No
❑ Yes
allo
❑ Yes
A No
Structure 6
Continued on
back

Facility Number: f- - Date or Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Applicatit�n
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes 0 No
E j.Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 54 No
❑ Yes SNo
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ONo
12. Crop type 4' D- `7 +fin �C� ...............±.....,...............��x........(4............................................ ��c.�,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certit�-iedd An}mal Nyl stg Management Plan (CAWMP)? Yes ❑ No
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land ;ipplicationl (footprint) � � �►-, ��g• cat-. ❑ Yes O�No
1S. Does the receiving crop need improvenrcnt?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Required Records & I)ocutnents
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, freeboar , 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 certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ 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?
0. No.violations or deficiencies .were rioted during.tiiis;visit:. You v'A'11.retreive nd further .:.:.
correspofideikc abbot: this Visit.: • : • : ;
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 2 No
❑ Yes &f No
❑ Yes fgNo
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 4M No
❑ Yes allo
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any. recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):.;.
1-i tad -U l Q - hkz i, . -4-n Gue_4 4v re_5Pr.*rs _ Aut-. -', jr)-Ay - hf g y eAv. M i 1 r.�
P,td&v -lea- a u 4J� L1,e Ii&.,l 4-o c l ek c A..L�, ? 12
Nt k 4o ;pi&
.c l�-�l r r Cerra-eQ l T aiiii- L ayL"4v 9,eL � _OdaS
kzrl
e1Z
h, irk.{ sou 4- t- c V`°5-4- Pla, 40 ► it O'` (- 41�,X_
bi�.
Reviewer/Inspector Name L yr, g, W�1~r�is
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 11/6/99

Facility Number:,::?-5 — q-q Date of Inspection S uT 99
.... .
Additional Continents and/or Drawings:: ,
AsA-P
J/-'� 4"-t�
7/25/97

f
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr. Danny Webb
Danny Webb Farm
900 Pink Hill Rd.
Kinston, NC 28504
i 0TZ!1W,j
ENR
NCD
EfJYIRQNmewr AND N.aruFtAL. Fii<SQIiRCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
October 9, 1998
SUBJECT; Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Danny Webb Farm
Fac. No. 2549
Craven County
Dear Mr. Webb:
On September 30, 1998, I conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the
referenced facility. Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A
copy of the inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the
State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Sill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator, (4) the required records are being
kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the
comment section of the attached inspection form. It is very important as the owner and
Operator in Charge that you address any noted concerns, as soon as possible. For
assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil & Water
Conservation District Office.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

3
Page 2
Danny Webb Farm
October 9, 1998
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have
further questions or comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at
[phone], ext, 321.
Sincerely,
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Craven County SWCD Office
Dr,Zarth Boyd, Murphy Family Farms
aRO

r-
Facility Number hate of Inspection 9-30-98
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified 10 Applied for Permit ■ Permitted C] Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm name: Danny ..Wlchb.Farm.... •.............................................. ............••----•---•----....... County: Craven WARO
Owner Name: Duny....-----.......................... W.tbh.......................................................... Phone No: 252:523.-SZ2:7...----.................... •----•..... .•......
Facility Contact: ... .................. .......................... .....Title: . Phone No
Mailing Address: 911i1.PinkHdl.13.d...................................................... -----..................... Ki, lau.NC....---...--•-••-----•.........................-•---......... 28504.---------....
Onsite Representative: Danj*,..RYxhb,.Mikr_Ham........ -............................................ Integrator- Murptty-Family.E.arms---............... ................. _
Certified Operator:Danny..L................................'kVpbbb.......---•..--------............................ Operator Certification Number:2090 .... -.......... ......... ...
Location of Farm:
A.
Latitude =• 4 �i Longitude �■ ��"
r .- ... -
• � ��
-
est Fw
;
nrrenKxo- ign ..nrren
- 7 � :�;-:: tgn urren
,,.. -
rSwme,..._a
,-�
°x
opulatinn �, ry...:Capacity PapuIat�on 'Cattiesm Capacity Population ;
•
ti can to ceder
.Caparaty_
er Dairy
p
'
e er to tsNon-Layer
a
Non-Dairy
�
tocanz arrow
¢aK--�:- - . -•• v�x+c M�� ,r wad. __
.-
13 er'q; 'CGS— = 3y
p arrow to Feeder
P:
p Farrow to rots
-:�-' `_ `: To#al Desi Ca act ,
=s
Gilts
Gil
mofai 660,960
jj s� ...:
i _
Boars
w
N m}iei~ of Tgoyis IrT3olding Ponds pSubsurface rains resent p goon Area p pray ie rea_
;.:::Y.�. �-.:M::.� _.: •---T..µ fin:..:_
x.r_.'�z- +s x^.-.g �:= �a "`rwxs. "fir''SiL _ -
� eo Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galimin?
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?
S. 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 N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes 17 No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
[3 Yes ® No

Facifity Number: 25_49 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes N No
Structures a oons Holdin Ponds Flush Pits. etc
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure b
Identifier: -..... -.... ....-- .... _ .................. -..... ---........ ........ ..... ........ ......... .....................
Freeboard (ft): 3.4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
. (If any of questions 9-I2 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?
p Yes
ig No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
a No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type --.. COM.rr..flage.& Graina.--•--.......C.oastal_Hernnxda.Grass...... ............................................... ............ ..................
...................
...........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
© Yes
® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
13 Yes
® No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
® No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
N No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
®No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
®No
.. D ula tions.
: Ca espas�$Aoegr bouemt neiise►s':iwSier' note uringrs visit. .on will-rer-erve n.v further . :
:•...:: -
::::
.. ...
Reviewer/Inspector Name ap ne= om
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _F_1 (� , M. ,1 Date: q -kn ��

4
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered m Certified p Applied for Permit 0 Permitted in Not Opera Bona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Dann.W..etdkFarjA.................... .....-..........-----.................... County: Craven WARD
OwnerName: Danny .................................... W.Chh .......................................................... Phone No: 919-_523-522:I.................... ........ ............. .........
Facility Contact: Danny.!'xbb................... ....... ....................... Title: owaer............. ..................................... Phone No: 2521121-.=7 .......................
Address: 911Q.Pionk.Hi11..11d............................................................................. Kinston..NC............................................................ 28504......---.--..
Onsite Representative: I)aw..-W.abb, mike.Hain,.T.O mmle.SLanings............. 1 ntegrator: Murphy..Farm y.F,arin&................... ..................
Certified Operator:DaujLy..L............................... Webb ................................................. Operator Certification N u m ber: 200 ............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude "
=-:::..,. _.... mow.:.:....... — - ....:.:.:.:....:
_...... .
y-Population = Paultry� = Capse
p oLiquid Managementys em _
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes N No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes N No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

acr r um er: 5_49 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
a No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
® Yes
p No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:•..............#:1-.-............
Freeboard (ft): 1.5
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
N No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
N Yes
p No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
p Yes
N No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...... Caastal.Be:muda.(hayj............. 1�54ybeansDNeat...... .......... -.........................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
® Yes
p No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®N❑
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
® Yes
p No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
®No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
®No
R . o -violations. or tciencses'were-noted during this visit.,. na vrt .rer-eive nu u er .
•.•:Lei'[es�posde�eieab�ut�x�iswis;�;.....::::...•.•.• -' ::•:•:.'.•.•.•.•.• -'�' ' ::::. .
Reviewer/Inspector Name ..:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

w... ...........
j.:
- _-- DSW.0 Anlmal`P.rativ ;Feedlot O 'en;'Reylew
Vr
❑ _
�. w.a.
...::... -.
Anl K
$e
DW mat Feedlot Q eratio`n° Sife Ins ed on
m
_ P. P -
10 Routine Q Complaint a Follow-u of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other"
Date of Inspection —IY-9
Facility Number S
Time of Inspection �24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)} Spent on Review
Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:....__ •• .. __.... _......... ......... ._........ ..._.._
Farm 1►lame:......... P d�. . .......... County: ��Sr �' � _....__...._..... .......... ��'!+ `..............
Land Owner Name........o.. Phone 2.%.._...._..- _...._------_.
Facility Conctact: ...... ..... _........... -._..... ....._....._ .._.. -... _... Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address '1bD Pk-b 0,11 K do g�t7
❑nsite Representative:..... .. Na V... ......... ... _. Integrator: L"2t'.�k
_..... .... �... _._............... _....... -
Certified Operator• "�`i. r �" �"��' Operator Certification. Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude � �� �" Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
». Desi
..�Wtne..,..,
..Curre..
P
aCaaci o ul: r;o' za:uK:'-..;�»�'Cattle;�::a rra,
Pllationa acPo ulaa 1`-.
m.
Wean to Feeder M ❑ ❑ D
❑ Feeder to Finish tf 7l& ElNon-Layer Non -Dairy
171 Farrow to Wean
.F
s—
.. <
» Farrow to Feeder r: - 'a- -:Total, Design: Ca acttY- .
fin+
..1171 Farrow to Finis
.ry
_.�.-
Y
Numer of is aons:f -HoIdia Ponds;:<=F' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present w
a
,,� »:�.., `:s .�..:�: �%:gin«:Poi:, ❑ La von Area . ��� ❑ Spray Field Area
neral
I . Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes VNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ye ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes P(No
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
Co►rtinued an back

Facility Number: —)5--- 4q
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or 1-1old ing Pond
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
....................................................................... ..................................... .... ....... I—.................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes ] dNo
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes KNo
Structure 7 Structure 6
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify ❑WO)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid'level markers?
NVaste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP. or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. P type 6-a.+S -�'
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for [and application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Onl
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes )No
❑ Yes 'V(No
XYes ❑ No
❑ Yes 1?fNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes V(No
❑ Yes X No
XYes ❑ No
❑ Yes V�No
❑ Yes b(No
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes bfNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes 19No
-- ---------------------
-CiAniii nis-0efer_to 46e U011.#):; Explain any YES"answers an&or any recommendati6nri or auy otI e>' caipaiiirienfs::'
se.drarvin s f factl�t :to hatter a 1ain.Situations.- use a es as.necessa
U p y xR g3);
f p
(�r Y'u►+t �.wt•� S s a� tr.Eif �� t p^� �� �1a�[5�, �ae `gyp 1 e. AE
Qc6- &- A Por "4J 1�/ 1154.
Reviewer/Inspector Name M
r �R
/jA
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Clint
Date:

.ti
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr,, Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Danny Webb
�EHNFi
Division of Soil & Water. Conservation
1
va
RECEIVED
April 24, 1997 WASHINGTON OFFICE
APR 2 8 ,1997
900 Pink Hill Road IQ 1& IL
Kinston, NC 28501 y'
SUBJECT: Operation Review Summary & Corrective Action Recommendation for
Danny Webb Farm
Facility No.25-49
Craven County
Dear Mr. Webb,
On April 14, an Operation Review was conducted of the Danny Webb Farm, facility no.
25-49. This Review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10D, is one of two
visits scheduled for all registered livestock operations during the 1997 calendar year.
The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, It was determined that waste was not being discharged to the
waters of the State, and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal
systems were maintained and operated under the responsible charge of a certified
operator. A copy of the completed review form is enclosed for your information. The
following observances, questions, and management deficiencies were discovered and
noted for corrective action or response:
• As soon conditions permit, fields 2 and 10 need to be planted in Coastal
Bermuda for compliance with the Waste Utilization Plan.
• Re-establish vegetation on bare spots of lagoon walls as needed.
• Stabilize and vegetate graded areas near buildings; repair eroded areas as
needed.
• Revise the Waste Utilization Plan to include the additional acreage from the
land application field near the farm entrance once the site is established.
• Secure the following documents and have readily available on -site: Site
Evaluation (NRCS NC-CPA-17); Hazard Classification; site schematic; design
survey materials which were prepared prior to construction and include locations
of property fines, perennial streams, wetland areas and other borders affecting
943 Washington Square Mail, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

J! . r ram.
Mr. Dann yy Webb
April24, 1997
Page 2
design, topography, soil borings in relation to lagoon siting; and an Operation
and Maintenance Plan for the waste management system.
• Ensure the acreage documented on the land application field maps and the
Waste Utilization Plan is for wettable or usable acres as opposed to total acres.
• This was not required at the time of the review but in preparation for the
upcoming general permit, you will need to secure and maintain the following
records on your farm: annual soil sampling records; odor, insect and mortality
checklists. You should be able to secure the last three items from either your
technical specialist, the local Soil and Water Conservation District, or the
Cooperative Extension Service..
The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this
Operation Review. Please do not hesitate to call Scott Jones or me at 919/946-6481 if
you have any questions, concerns or need additional information.
Sincerely,
?0--f- CN�
1
Pat Hooper
Environmental Engineer I
cc: Craven Soil and Water Conservation District
Carroll Pierce, ❑SWC Technical Services Chief
Division of Water Quality- WaRO
DSWC WaRO Files

IS Routine p Complaint p Follow-up ol DWQ inspection p Follow-up of review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ®24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: Certified
a CU E- R Sn
Farm Name: Illanny.WehLEaxm................•-•................................._..... County: Craven WARD
OwnerName: Damny................ ......................W..ebh•••••••••••••••....•••............................. ........ Phone No: 219-S23-522T...........................................................
Mailing Address: gIIQ.Pink.Hill.Rd................................................................................. Kinitao.Ac ............................................................ MAI..............
Onsite Representative: Aa.nny..W.cbh.&.Tummy..Hajow tnn.................................. Integrator: Mnrrp1ty.Ea.ably..Faxaas...... ................... -...........
Certified Operator: Dwen.P_................................ She}taxd........ .......... ........ ................. Operator Certification Number: l..728ft.............................
Location of Farm:
qr
Latitude ©0 ®� ©u Longitude ©• & ®u
p Not Operational Date Last Operated: ................... ... .......................................................
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
a. I£ discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ®No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ®No
maintenance/improvement?

e
'%.M
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
p Yes
® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 111197)?
p Yes
®No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
® No
Structures_ La oons andlor H !n ding,Ponds
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
p Yes
® No
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon I Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
Lagoon 4
...-----3.2Jnches.f.---.....-'-'...........................'---................ I ......... ............. ........................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
N No
I I . Is erosion, or any other threats to the -integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
N No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
p Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over'application?
p Yes
® No
(I£ in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... I ...... C.0=al..8ermuda G=s.....•---......5xn ll.Grazn.(Wh=t..Baxley,„Milo...
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
p Yes
® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
® No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
® Yes
p No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
p Yes
®No
Fur Crtifd O_iFacily
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
M No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
® Yes
p No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
®No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
p Yes
®No
tin tc a t #t. ..t.... .. .. .riiit4y: .... aFtBlvt st}+ ist� aiiarixgr:aiiy t#s>?:eattit�adr+i s : := � ; :� =
l lac: ca u g i fact i :talk t r:e piata:sr(ris'4fi 1 A4 ft, Ks s doftss�})
am ti a on site according to3Mr �We :ttt a ration 8 mon _ d E. '_ v �- +s_ ;` i No dr
.y �-" �;' -'•+' ' -�.7 -.f:' G y'.�--3t.� t:._. ,►ia':a'�;'-`_'..--'�.:.:..43 v ,,.s: ..'- •'..�''�.:v'..r�`�:..Q_ ��
18" ields 2& 10'56ed to be planted t iib Coastal Bermuda'accord_ing to WUP.:conditions have been too wet and aperatton has not
�.q-T-..����"l.+ Wit... aY.l�' ?Jx �1.Y`��-c •'�• '- _ iR1-'}'tY:l— y"�F'7i.^'r�5':�-s:. +-..
gad a need to pump bec�suse"of .age..certification conditional Iand application records not a�ailable ;k -- . �-:
'fir-C•;,,,. '.e:'C.sf" -lci.. .a..r"":,isi:w.�'.it..:te'. •-�:y. .=7�'?a. a_ _ �_ r.
? 1: ,See t 8 ��.:.:� ... ems: ..., ~�` a.
Need to"stabilize and vegetate graded areas near buildings and bare spots on lagoon walls - r-''" •' -
�� � :� k � • �_ '�E�:: � :fix a:`. � � : �....��•�'-,-itr_ _.,.:, �'` ems:- ;N; r,
L%1r. Web la plans to have WUP:revised to includee fieldhear farm for entrance additional acreage.
_ '+:+.;-^-rk�' i,J"i e' . -.. - - ...... -- v� ...... - '•.�t aa'i:'.' : s'dr. a '.e•" r ::r 'y"S"•'.. j''`Y%T"��"���'
'.'J ' t'. -. . s' �''�?.`;t.''s�Y.n�w��,`.+n+i.'.�.'.��'.`�i .;�y'k=�C';.�?.tiC[i � 7i*�',�.i1�e�i'!-'-�i .. xy��{ rv�"y." s w►.r,:a�� ,.�'` +�:x;`i : • H.,.; iee.�
i..Fr.
-
4896 Feeder -Finish; steady.state.li�e ►�+t 60,960 ltis _ - •� ;x � M ,r�; i, ' " ��' s - r '?
- '.i .. �' �S"4h '�.. - �' �..i.{.::- 'q�LL.i•a e_ x�r ;'fin. y�-':::� 2'r"`T�.y' :.�'j. �• '°S3
_ `i. rs.9:.'� ,: •.C�'f :� •k: �.-".+r .• • �.:v.m :S;=-:6:..a5 �-r;; • • .+�„,„ *i4...='.::, .`F i�1 �. .-,y�.�"' .+.+. +.:s..,. "�`�.' "`:'
-:!..YG�=� ram:'1! •4 Y `'..�' r...�-,-�"'� 'x a-y. F.'iC T''"' • s `y�.�..r. " "L: ..�' 4'..iVin $, r� [,ii�'rx�. �..f Y, )���{e� � •'+�
i.�.- �-r+..:�4Nor-}.+�iys.J�� -Jam._.. y-.�'-�•�• !iM-a �.i..i� J J.A•[����.J�rL ri.�"`•1�w nY..:..
---------------
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:�yr ��o������ Date: 1

SWC A imat Fee' Eoi~ _ e a io �iev�i'
K D n p r n R e ems. n�
,
.-y�: �. - ._ ..x.. +r�:.:.r ":air_ i....�tw;;-. .:'fa.:: •._:.�e '. Y _--„Yf• -
_-
�.-:� ijV1l �:Arimai`=�"-i=e�e�d�o'�� �� er����a�ri:� ie'�l..,-5.�, ec#i b h
.?'a: ,:7r+:=r�=::�^»�'.:a.' :.-.,rc. �.:_.�^t.? A: �-„ ;;;�w. ^�.,�„�-w. sx.:�'e_� .;.—+�.,-.:•��?:: �� ..5t��'"-.. .arv'a�v,r-xr.-�'.s�ir�.:
p
.:::sue -�-, •' .- "-- ... ..
- Via:. - e ,V:
maCJ Ll .:Number S at inspection: Tirrte af`-fnspectioRY - w;--
=;hr:.F=time
Farm Status: ""' e� —_-- - ❑ fioutine ElComplaint ❑ Faffa:•r-up
Farm Name: �Ariny_. County:
Phone No: ❑ w n or Name: ���..;��� .�..._..•,.._.�
Mailing Address:
inl r� ra3
Onsite representative, Q>P"Z � i.ILI�I�?ur tLY-F 1�lilntegrator: �� }���__
Certified Operator Name:
Location of Farris: N0 iTwm sf~-;� - -
14]
lo-S
Latitude C�'�°[�•• Longitude
❑ Not Operatiana! pate Lkst Operated: _....�,.
Type of'Operation and Design Capacity
�kTne . b P.orrftry �'f� �Catile:'' H-�A[ _.- ...
�_ $-. Nuns er �:.••:,:;• urnoAr�• umtie°`=��
z.z aver i Dairy `..
Non -Laver
„ fN
rl R.--°.:F^ �;-g,,. M '.-...3;.-;;'�-'::,r . a.-�":.�.- • ram:"`•:
%, ❑ Type of pLivestock
=''= Mra
Wean to Feeder
© Feeder #a Finish
r T Wa=n f
S ac r
arrow
NUrnber�of�ql�agoons'I"rHaldirto:Pvs:icis'- 1 _ �--d� ❑ Subsurface EJr8ir7s Fre52nt '`'•`•'
s.�. ��-�- : ems...,. •_N .s;,,.,.;� _...:, � m- '�'-``:��y-� ;;�;sK �:�,� =�
....�- ' =ate -��. �•�F,.� '- �,,,�_=--�;..� :��.� _ l.agOan Area Spray Reid A
General ,
1. Are there any buffers that need mainteriancalrrprovemeni? ❑Yes VNo
2, is any discharge observed from any part cf the c'p.ra#tan? � [� Yes :i>U'�:
a. 'It discharge. is observed, was Lh2 ecnvayanca mar -mac-? ❑Yes O F1a
b. I; discharge is ccs=rued, did it reach 5l:rcC? L'Jater?•{!f yes, nctity G'+J4J ❑Yes Drb
c, If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flo:v in oalJmin? .�
d. Gces discharc= bypass a iacaen systCm? (If yes, rctify u�'IC) [i Yes [Yf t't

fi_ Is facility not in compliance Leith any applicable setback criteria?
❑ Yes
21'io
7. id the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1111a7j?
g�ti
[y� Yes
❑ P7o
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑Yes
Structures (Lacco-s andJor 1-Ioldina Fonds)
9. is structural freeboard less than adequate?
❑ Yes
2110
Freaboard (ft): Lag qn 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
14. Is seepeas obs_r:et from any of the structures?
❑Yes
Mb
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any. of the structures observed?
0-Yes
PU
lk 12 Da any of the structures need maintenance!improvement?
F Yes
❑ lb_l
(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-struc:ures lack adguate markers to identify start -and stop pumping levels?
El Yes
2Kb
Waste Aooiication ,-
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
ur�o
(If in excess WMP, or runoff entering watars of the State, notify DWQ)
;jof
+"lA Ater I
15. Crop type 1t� _.� 1_7' _
18- Do the active crops differ witn tycse designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
❑ Yes
ONb
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
R�o
Does the cover craqneed improvement?
fEs
❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipnenf?
❑ Yes
_
"vlVo
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes
Vr\b
22. Does record keeping need improvement? 5W ircr�, � lS 5 u r??t t ap To
❑ Yes
[�1z
�.7�r"i ►3 t3Y �ai�a rr[. ! f�1Zt�i�TID�►] i`c� t ! Lea FbZm.,,.
•
,--/
=3. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
R �
24. Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
2�16
�" 2S
.. a- . Y. .:._.. - ,. �� :ors•:
a rV
v :s
Y. ." ...
51
.... ' _- Q _ ."" .. .- ::c.'"�-' ;Poi'''= •;ti.•:_:; 3:*�. vn"
.. " . _ � •- GPI+ "'�'t
LA
_-
_^
t-� rr: °' o� :-.� c:, S'� z v::�. � F• -" Imo,~�SkO) N t.Aa
­­.- - "! ­ w - :­•+'r`ir.N`h'A�.��?"`.�e 7spectoyr....!-
Reviewerllar,:y Name- ��. ;�__-y r ?:r,: s•x- ~
.:... jam"•
r?
Fie t p erlfns actor ""' --'Si ure: _-�-,�;:, []ate:
. g. nat- -
cc: Division of Water Duality, Water Duality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr.. Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Danny Webb
Danny Webb Farm
900 Pink Hill Rd
Kinston NC 28501
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Danny Webb Farm
Facility ID#: 25-49
Craven County
Dear Mr. Webb:
RECEN®
WAS14INGTON OFFICE
NOV 1 9 1996
0.EP
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 919/733-0026.
Sincerely
� d
A. Preston Howard, Jr_, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Washington Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687. �yiC
FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 2761 1-7687 An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Empbyer
Voice 919-7 i 5-4100 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

- ^�- =--V'=-' --.e-:i,: __.-.rL�- c.'•�.-.-;ice^�r-`-'`.'`�
- - '� `•.:?�:.='�;�:�:�=� --,. h call �iraaer :., ; <.i `• �:� �;;=�:::..�.>. ,.�_,:.:.::. � .:,:
w� iic.C'k:_::•'rw�=�}�$� �ar;acr,,�•:N'7*��c�.:..�°':.•-4:.'T�sx,.s,�,}-.:h:.�.ers=•:r�:r„-�%`m;:sn;`�k'u:��__��RY'�...�:'^:'�^s:;., e^s�.�
Type of Visit ® Gompbanoe Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for emit D Routine 0 Compliant ❑ FolEow up ❑ Emergency NotiftCafion ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
- - Date of Vikic Z2001 Time.-] i:00 pm Printed on: aM 3f2001
i Fatcilih- Number
,_..-- -- 0 Not D erational Q Below Threshold
Pcrinitted ® Certirped 13 Conditionalh- Cerii kit © Registered Date Laxt Operated or Abo�•e Threshold: w
Farm Name: Count-:
Dw ner Name: Aebh Phone No: 919-52 :;5=2 _
Mailing Address: W 5nt i t d K,hotst�txt C ._ __._-.-._-.• 75�4
Faality Contacts --Title- _. _ .._. «.... Phone No:... _ .... .. .
Onsite Representative: 1) Wehb _ - __ Integrator-
Certified
Operator. Dnux -- �4'cbh __ Operator Certification Number: 709fi.8--_----__--
Location of Farm:
From Kinston take NC 55 into Craven Co. turn left on SR 147; go 0S mile to farm entrance on kit •.
i
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Lititudc � I` L�l- ; �� Longitude. � �• ����
Design:;" -.:Current;"' -:--[- Curren#:.::.:
l --'Swine.-. C aeitF Po Etiitdion'- Ca iacii_` ;Popuiiation Cattle =: Capacity .Papidation' ;
❑ Wean to Feeder
I® Feeder to Finish
J❑ Farrow- to Wean
4896 4800
{ t
J❑ Farrow- to Feeder
I I
❑ Farrow- to Finish
JD GilLs
❑ Boars
'--dumber-uf Lagoons �:. - . -- 1❑ Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area I[] Spray Field
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps No Liquid Waste Management System
Dkzhames & Sire -am impacts
I . Is my dischffi^Qe ohsm ed from aw part of the operation?
Discharge orimumed at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsenvd, was the couvm once main -made?
b_ If discharge ik observed, did it reach Vvater of the State? (If yes_ notify DWQ)
c. If dis_-harne is obcen^r,-d_ what is the estimaled flow in ealhniiP
d. Dcr-- diccim-e bypass a lagoon qys-tenV (if ycs, uotifi- DWQ)
2. Is there m idence of past discharge from any pan of the operation?
3. Were there am adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection S Tma meat
4. Is storage capacity (board plus slams storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I S ructint ? Stnirttitr ; Stnucnn-e 4 Structure 5
Identifiler: .
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes !J No
'j Yes lg No
Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
Stntcture G

Ford Number: _'► R'
s—a� Date a;111�1,ectir,n r,•-�zoai pRn,�:a �,�,: s�� �rzoo�
5. Are there am munCdiXe threats to the idsty of any of the strncUres obsc�? (=I trees, severe erosion,
scqpage, etc-)
6. Are there slznc ov-sle which are not properly addmSS*d and/or managed thrungh a waste management or
closure plan?,
(If any of questions 46 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
huntedia,te public health or aaviranmental threat, noOTY DWQ)
7. Do any of the struttares mcod ?
S. Does am part of the waste maaagcim=t system other than Waste structures require maintenanceirmprovement?
9. Do any stucturm lwl: adequer, g wgcd markers with required mwiiinmn and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Anptication .
10. Are there any buffers that need -
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ® PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crap type Coasud Baturmda (Hay) Small Grain Uverseed _ Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® Noy
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes X. No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops d$er with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility Incl< adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [E No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? 1'] Yes 0 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. 1s there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuimd Record,. & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to hay=e all components of the Certified Animal Vdastc Management Plan readih- available?
(ie/ WUP. checklists_ desim maps. etc.)
19. Does record seeping n=d improvement? (ie/ irrigatim fi=bowd, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. 1s facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facilii�• fail to hate a activeh certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DR'Q of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems_ over application)
21 Did Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss teviewtmspeition with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
CKk' Yes r No
[]'Yes JR. No
® Yes ❑ No
R Yes Cf No
F,- Yes ❑ No
Yes E No
0 Yes Q No
Yes [K.- No
J Yes Z No
® Yes 0 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no fQrther correspondence about this visit.
0 Field Copy 0 Final Notes FQR_�-
,
7.
Continue efforts to remove vegetation front inside diL-e w all.
15. Brush pile removed from field -10-. planning to plant millet, *Note (WUP should be amended to reflect this receh mg cmp). No
rcoeivng crop at time of inspo--tion in field 4 10.
17. CAWMP needs a copy of the Certificate of Coverage & General Permit_
18 & 19. Waste analysis 6-5-01- 2a 1bs-11000 gals.; Soil analysis 4-12-01. lime as recommended; need to obtain copy of 1999 soil anah sis
ca CAWMP records. Need com- of the most current Waste Utilization Plan m the CAWMP: last WUP on site i_t from 1998 with field 10 - !
Coastal Bermuda, fields 2 & 7 as C1WtSB_ however the irrigation design shows fields 10 & 2 as CB and field 7 as C/W/SB. Update current
VVUP to address crop for field T 10. Irrigation rewords completed by pulls for each fie]d. If the WUP has 50 w!
Reviewerfluspector Name
Rei-iewer/inspector
Date-- G - g - d

I Co>r�nacd
Number. 25 Bate of inspection 6-8-20[f 1 Printed on: 8/13200/
dor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe fivm the comment building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge aver below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond aiih no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animilis not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes % No
28. Is there any evidence of wind dr¢t during land application? (�e. residue on nei-ghboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building shvcture, and/or public piopesty)
29. Is the land application sprat, system intake not located near the liquid surface of the iagoou? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventt7atian fan(s) noted? (ix- 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 pips or a permanenthemporary cm er? ❑ Yes ❑ No
_�- ..._.::-_-- -----...._...._.__.�-_.. �....�...... ..._........:_tea for aull grain overseed then overapplication ha,; ocu:red in field #2 or if 100 lbs. is the PAN rate then land application should not
have occurred in January 2001 on small grain-
acilM, will receive a Notice of Violation for noted -6olation above. A site visit will be conducted again to follow-up this insl=ction.
6-8-01, 4:00 pm - Mr. Webb contacted The WaRO to notifi, me that he had located his current VIUP and it indicated that he has a Pan
to of 50 Ibs. for the small gain overseed_ which means that cawapplication occurred on this receiving crop.
T