310520_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

Type of Visit: ('Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: �ftoutine Complaint Follow-up Referral Emergency Other Denied Access
Date of Visit- Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name:/�/��� — Owner Email:
Owner Name: , Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title: Phone:
Latitude:
Integrator: k3A —3:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine C►apacity Pnp. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish Layer
Cattle
Dai Cow
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
]Non -Layer
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dr P.oultr, Ca aci P,o
Layers
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
III Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ZNo DNA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ' ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
0 Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
;'\No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Z o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

I It
Facilit Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment'
4. Is stodge capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ONE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
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 which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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 ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Ef No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes JZJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes C�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents Records _& Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2� No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 5� No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,j No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: 1-2
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
La Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
Yes
❑ No
0 NA ❑ NE
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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Q.,No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
;[ -No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document 0 Yes
12*o ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes
allo ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes
[ZNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
-E!rNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
;2'1Vo ❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #) Expylain )anylYtES{;answers;and/oi,�any additional'recommendgtions or,any�dt4lierggg`corir�ments., M_
- !- ? r ni ' x ,'Hai <..� t�. S tq� k5._,
Use drawings of facility; tol' a er ex lam situations (use"additional as necessary).'
,ages ;
,CJ01
3 3 I l G 4d � ,� 5-W 1949 C-r A6 /� 4� � � o. SfI
AJL s,,
�
d/vaAr
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Ws
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3 `.
Phone:
Date:
21412015

(Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: J26outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access II
Date of Visit: -t. L2L Arrival Time:F/77771 Departure Time: County:
Farm Name(//�/%�� Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
ILayer
Design
Capacity
I
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dirvyl RVul NERWOa
Layers
Design
acit
Current
P.o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
113cef
Boars
Pullets
Brood Cow
Other F�"ke
er
Turke s
Points
ther
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes
FrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes [T`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes �2�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? T
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: LV2z•
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [ 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �;Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes C2'—No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 4E"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes Lr&o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J:�FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE _
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EDI o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E�J­No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
allo
01
❑ NA'x-.[] NE
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Jallo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
D Yes
[ "No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
r3,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis D Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[—]Yes
[2-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
/ Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facilitv Number: 1 - 1717 .r) I Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[]Yes
P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the raciliiy out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
En"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
,❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
[] Yes
kffNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes-t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes -ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ YeseEj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes [E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comment's (irefer'to question #): lJzpl"airi7any YES answersand/iirany4additonal recommendations or�any other,comments` :gx` `'
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations(useladditivnal pages assnecessary,) ;
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:.
Page 3 of 3
1

Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: .routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: OC Title:
Onsite Representative: G�p{�j/� . ka2z,� f
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish
Current Design Current
Pap. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Design
Cattle Capacity
Dairy Cow
Current
Pop.
Wean to FeederFINon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
ffDesign Current
Dr, P■oultr, Ca aci P,o .
Layers
D Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
Pullets
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes./❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
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 the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ r Yes " ❑/No
❑ Yes O'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 2VIZ
Waste C911ection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure/1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: f
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No
, ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Vj No'
❑ NA
❑ NE
(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 ❑ Yes JZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PrNo
NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
y;] NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
.NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers [] Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [] No NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:101_,7_3110
24. Did the -facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permi ? ❑ Yes ❑ No - ...ZfNA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes [] No ZNA ❑ NE
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 phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
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 the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑'NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes P-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CaNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [7f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes J'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
,67a✓les 1'76-r1z?11-r_e61 -
/fix � lea
,9
as/�n8
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �k a p Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /V Date: /zr., 3 zz
Page 3 of 3 21412014

Type of Visit: Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: tt, Region: 7_?�
Farm Name: N1 OlL1l IM'a� 1*> Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: JA
Certification Number: G
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Design
C*apaclty
Current
Pap.
Design Current
W-1 1,ul1ry C►apacity Pnp.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
Dr, P,oultr. C•a aci P.o
La ers
Dry Cow
Non-Daity
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Other
OtherI
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Turke Poults
10ther
Discharges and Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes Wr No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the 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 the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes] No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is slY rage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes L2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I^
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed freeboard (in): C
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [;�fi10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) e
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes P'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [;TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) TT
9. Does any part of the waste.management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? j—
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ni No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12, Crop Type(s):
13, Soil Type(s):
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes P No [:]NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes Ea
llo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes 0 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspection
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permi . ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
w'
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ YesgZ ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? ❑ Yes ;'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes P'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately,
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[ j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1 Date: 1Af-L
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2011

aol 301 L-fib
PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number. 31-620 County. Duplin
Facility Name: Alvin C. Knowles
Certified Operator Name:
Mike Knowles
Operator Number:
AWA 18091
1. Current liquid level(s) in Inches as measured from the current liquid level in the lagoon to the
lowest point on the top of the dam for lagoons without spillways; and from the current liquid level
in the lagoon to the bottom of the spillway for lagoons with spillways.
Lagoon Name11D:
Spillway(Y or N):
Level(inches):
Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
Lag 1
N
14
2. Check all applicable items
Liquid level Is within the designed structural freeboard elevations of one or more structures.
Five and 30 day Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
withln acceptable ranges.
X Liquid level Is within the 25 year 24 hour storm elevations for one or more structures. A
30 day Plan of Action is attached. Agronomic balance is within acceptable range.
Waste is to be pumped and hauled to off site locations. Bolume and PAN content of waste
to be pumped and hauled is reflected in section III tables. Included within this plan Is a list
of the proposed sites with related facility numbers, number of acres and receiving crop
information. Contact and secure approval from the DWQ prior to transfer of waste to a site
not covered in the facility's CAWMP.
Operation will be partially or fully depopulated.
*Attach a complete schedule with corresponding animal units and dates fro depopulation
*if animals are to be moved to another permitted facility, provide facility number, lagoon
freeboard levels and herd population for the receiving facility
3. Earliest possible.date to begin land application of waste:
7/8/2013
I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information listed above and Included within the
attached Plan of Action, and to the best of my knowledge and ability, the information Is
accurate and correct.
Grace Knowles Phone:
Facility Owne anager (pre t)
Date:
2<1eiQ6_W_9 ease��
Facile Owner/Manager (signature)
910-271-0225
7/8/2013

. J �
II. TOTAL. POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 25 YRJ24
HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1. Structure ID: Lagoon 1
line m = 1310.7 lb PAN
2. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN -
3. Structure 1D:
une m =
lb PAN
4. Structure ID:
fine m =
lb PAN
5. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
6. Structure ID:
line In =
lb PAN
n.lineal +2+3+4+5+6= 1310.7lbPAN
111. TOTAL PAN BALANCE REMAINING FOR AVAILABLE CROPS DURING 30 DAY DRAW DOWN
PERIOD. DO NOT LIST FIELDS TO WHICH PAN CANNOT BE APPLIED DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD.
o. tract #
p. field #
q. crop
r. acres
s. remaining IRR
2 PAN balance
(Iblacre)
t TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (tbs.)
column r x s
u. application window'
Knowles
Zones 1-5
Bermuda
7.46
319.05
2380.1
March -Sept.
Aa_a_
V 1FVV VV,I�i, ,• V,vN V.IMI.Iy GrrIIVp MV,I Mp,V V• .IVIL VIVr pr�..„vpue.l, VV�I, II ,II,a Vu.V IV, g7pllp VlV
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 2380.1 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from 'section II) = 1310.7 lb. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2121 /00

x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from section Ili) = 2380.1 lb. PAN
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) = 8 lb. PAN
Line y must show as a deficit. If line y does not show as a deficit, list course of action here including pump and
haul, depopulation, herd reduction, etc. For pump & haul and herd reduction options, recalculate new PAN
based on new information. If new fields are to be included as an option for lowering lagoon level, add these
fields to the PAN balance table and recalculate the overall PAN balance. If animal waste is to be hauled to
another permitted facility, provide information regarding the herd population and lagoon freeboard levels at the
receiving facility.
Irrigation onto existing spray fields will continue as weather and field conditions permit. Additional land is
available for pumping if needed. Waste samples have been taken but are not available onllne at this time.
1 avaj r-�;.r• �l C- ro+n-� .� U..w•e� l s - rnc..�� c��-�
arqA--
PoA (30 Day) 2121100

PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
1. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE '
1. Structure Name/identifier (113): La con 1
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr./24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 14.0 inches .
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm 8 structural freeboard 19.0 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = 5.0 inches
d, top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) 435000 f?
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft' 1355750 gallons
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design 180 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 39430 ft3
h. current herd # ® certified herd # 119$
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g =
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design
J. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k. (lines h + i +j) x 7.48 x 30 days/line f=
4. Total PAN to be land'applied during draw down period
1. current waste analysis dated 1 12/12/2012
m. ((lines e + k)/1000) x line I =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00
fe
0 ft3
30975 ft3
386i6 gallons
0.94 Ibs/1000 gal.
1310.1 Ibs. PAN

Type of Visit VC, Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: eparture Time: County: Region:
&/
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = f Longitude: = ° 0 ' = "
Destgn Current Design' - .'Current x¢.,-$�' Desin, Current
Swine Capacity 51'opulattoii Wet Poultry Capacity Populatton .'.• Cottle+Ca sell h]Po$�ulation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
'. ❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars 3
:.Othere�;,
❑Other
7
Layer _ ❑ Dairy Cow
Non -Laver ' % ❑ Dairy Calf
,A `1 k'1 A El Daia Heifer
Y
Dry�PouIt'ry� ❑ Cow
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
—,.:.
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood
� Nu�mber�;'of:
,..a.:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
6No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ Yes
eLJ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
[]Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facili Number: 31 - Date of inspection: ZZ 16
Waste Collection & Treatment
4: Is stollage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ;ZNo
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes .ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ;Z No [] NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ;�FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �^No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) TT
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13, Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes E2rhTo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[]Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes C'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [,-2,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 0Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis oil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �TNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes PNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
[]NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

[Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?'es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
75'Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Pa No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P31No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
P�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
7rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
�' o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or,any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary);
a 14 cayspt e4e, Cat brG[)&nG 1 le S 6,
ReviewerlInspector Name:
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
AMA]

Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: OXoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: / l Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: . Region:
Farm Name: /? I'% �1.•! Owner Email:
Owner Name. -
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone:
Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: IM4 40 r- L�-r. —
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Wef Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Nesign C•urcent
Dr, P,oultr. aaci P,o
Layen
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
-11 Other
NJ Other
"Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes,,ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes /I__l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes o
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ NA
[] NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 5-Po jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
.,4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes d] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Struct}�re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: {/
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in).
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 which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes �NO
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ';J& ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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 ❑ Yes �,KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ]�'
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? T
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, et?)7
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes '0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ',E] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ,ETYes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis 125oil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: Z 4 //
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ONO
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check P'Yes jorNo
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:
25. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes f�?No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[a Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
[:]Yes
VrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑''No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
allo
[] NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any othercomments:.;
a
Use drawipgs of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
23/
2 3 L�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
�2�) 1"ey 1W eo 51AO(�
SMMeD, 'Meksl-/A,--,
aS q10 Di a /{lc)Ace_ ay""
Ise
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: / _
Page 3 of 3
Phone: dGCJ /�l� -7
Date: 12 l /
21412011

/Division of Water Quality
:Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit ompliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Time: Departure Time: County:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: %l s�f�/�-4�4 E
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator: zilli'42!5
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:<f -f
Latitude: 0 0 = 6 Longitude: = ° = i ❑ "
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ on -Layer
Dry Poultry
Non-L.
Pullets
Poults
Disebary-es & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifep
❑
PoLlLow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility.Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
.IwNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes O'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes/tfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(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
❑ Yes No
❑ NA [3NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes)2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes ;2 O El NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail, to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes ///o ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
'Commen..ts (refer to question`#): )E x'Olain'any YES answers and/6'r�any recnmmendattons or anygoth�er comments � s
'Use drawings of facility to. better explain situations. (use Add Mona l pages as neeessa¢y):
•
Reviewer/Inspector Name '_. , �� Phone:
f.;• s re;y
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: y
Page 2 of 3 1 12118104 / Continued

"Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
No
❑ NA
El NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
Z01yes
,❑,
❑ Yes �dNa
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box. WUP Checklists
ElEl❑ Design El ❑Other
///
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below,
❑ Yes io
El NA
[I NE
El Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [I Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis El Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes , No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
WYes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes )Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes / o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes No
[INA
❑ NE
30.
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: ; :., .,`,. }�%� ` ";- :"' ;,
1 12128104

Type of Visit 12rCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit _�Aoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name: _
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Arrival Time: -wit, Departure Time: County:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude: = c ❑ i ❑ « Longitude: 0 ° = I = "
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capeity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
El Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
JEJ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 7fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes_,(No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Yes �/J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Date of Inspection
Facility Number: —
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Struct re l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
f
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10%, or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
-
Comme ts.(refer to question;#)
Use drawings of facility to better
>
.. _ 14 \ .,t1 �•a_°�4 zl�' L'C': Yi5h4�-a6."t¢:�l*�-"x7r]Y� ,. _-
ExplAm'any YES'answcrs�andlo`r" any'recomme�ndat�ons mor any�other c` men ts.'
explain sifuahons., (ustladditiona) pages•as necessa�ry)py¢k . 'tµt ♦ay
•,..�i.1� �
Reviewer/Ins ector Name
p
``°��r�x` s
�,'� Phone:
:i
.�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
Z
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Re wired Records & Documents
19 Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check L ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑N� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
Yes
❑cc..,, No
El NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
edNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[I Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
P(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
T
3 I.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
12 No
❑ NA
❑ NE;
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Zj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
AltlitionalCo`mments and/or 1)ria �tngs:
3
� 1C'�eL�� 'Aly
y
ex 1�7ss16 �
a 1u0
1� U�
/, 7ie.
s� �S
�p
'd�1 R r�ae!_
I
�f Jrl ,
- /�ja GC G7�rt /r3
,rZ / ice! / U �
�' / ,
(/(%? �L✓4`[/' �
(i
la 7
12128104

.. o0roDivision of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Arrival Time: A // Departure Time: � County:
(2ivCGS' in Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: I Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: =
0
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Longitude: = ° =' =
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ aits
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer I El
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
El Beef Broad Cow
Dumber of Structures:
Discha[W & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the 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 adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[--]Yes [--]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

I
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
St ture 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed`? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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 ' ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 t . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l 0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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):
Reviewer/Inspector Name !j/t s,,f Phone: •—
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104" Continued

Facility Number: ` Date of Inspection
Re aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Sail Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
40 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
,Z Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, Freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
p? ��'� .tea S l� ��. ��v d� v`i' CQ71f Y'cz lv ►�. s', •
12128104

Type of Visit UCompliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other []Denied Access '
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: of�!0 Departure Time: County: < L � Reglon:----�.�F�
Farm Name: _/U�GI l7�hl�s /Y7 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: �f Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: %'��%%��.✓ C Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: latitude: = o = f = 5{ Longitude: = 0 0 , = "
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish 1/ Q
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ alts
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Fieid ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dai Cow
❑
Daia Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beel' Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the 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? (I f 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 the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
_2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2'1 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection &'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
[--]Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes El -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes J2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes .❑'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(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 ❑ Yes Q NO
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes J:-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) lZto
13. Soil type(s) '64
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes '- No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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):
J
7
ReviewerlInspector Name I �� / _ ---- Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: f e—'_ Date: G
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3 —s Date of Inspection
Reg4lred Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
❑ Yes -ENO ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
2'yes
❑ No
El NA
El NE
El Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ,mil Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking Ocrop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and l"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment`?
❑ Yes
U1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[2 NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑'NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑>E
Other Issues /
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[;I, Qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
� 5
-. 4-rck-13 C K- Crap y!e Ice a�o��c� ✓gat-fier,•,.ts
Coo-,Ig , J' ,..� 'fa,t Y\ J`" ���-� yr 1 ieuTs .
PC 1-, (7 0:7_� o r
12128104

Type of Visit �fCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification p Other ❑Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: A • Time.
0 Not(Operational O Below Threshold
0 Permitted ©,Ce ed © Conditionally Certified © R ' tered Date -Last Opera r Above,,Threshold; ». »._......
Farm Name: ........�il......_.�-r {I.IG.�I,.S ». »_/w/Z!� County: .. �...»................_ .._ _ ...... ...
Owner Name: »» W _w_ .._..._.... _......
Mailing Address:.._.
Facility Contact: . ......»..»»._...... ...... ..._._...... Title:..__....__._.__
Onsite Representative: »� _� .__._..._._._........
CertifiedOperator: .............. . .... . . . .. . . ...... .
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No: _. �.»... ____....._. _...
Integrator:
Operator Certification Nil m r:....... .......... _...... .... _.._....
qrI
,S`wine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ horse Latitude " Longitude 4 Oct
Swine Ca�citv�Po"tralation. �iv!PoW �:Ca`Poi►ulation;:, 'Caule,� ;Gap` ty�Popelation
u Wean to feeder
:. LJ Layer I ' 3au
U 1y
❑ Non -Layer Non-D
seder to Finish
Farrow to WeanNT
$: p
tt Other
_! , TO DeSlgnjCapSG y 'i w
i T©tal'SS Lw
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars}
Namber ofIsi�gains i �fi
11r7
r. i
Discharges $ Stream Lnoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Suruct e l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): _
12112103
❑ Yes
P'No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No _
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes XNo
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number:Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures o served? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes /No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ yes WNo
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? es eNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes &No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes )TNo
elevation markings?
Waste Anulication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ;2'_T0
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Sa W`"'
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Rxea' �6 d�'C�/'Gao.�
�_� ; _ sun .
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWN T).) ❑ 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 E!rNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes �No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Ao
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes .OlNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes �Ko
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 4 ""
Air Quality representative immediately.
Field Coon ❑ Final Notes
else- A/e_ca'(f0hA1
Reviewer ecto! Name �k �1. : ', by ',. c_n !H, .aj q 91 � 1 r J sl ntii a It 7j� a ?'gt 'r
ReviewerAkspector Signature: Date: �

Facility Number:..&KJ Date of Inspection
Reguired:Records_ & Docurnents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
FfYes ❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
,TNo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes &o
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ;"No
27_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes QJ No
`P
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes/No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

1Jti A
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
O�OF
9QG
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
y
r
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
--�
:�.__ --- -----
--- - --M -- ----- - - - --Alan W: Klimek, P:E Director
Division of Water Quality
August 7, 2003
Alvin Knowles
116 West Clement Street
Wallace, NC 28466
Subject: Rescission of Notice of Violation /
Issuance of Notice of Deficiency
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
Facility # 31-520
Duplin County
Dear Alvin Knowles:
Thank you for your recent submittal of the information requested in our letter dated April 15,
2003. We greatly appreciate the effort that you made in compiling this information and sending
it to our Wilmington Regional Office by the date required. We also appreciate the fact that you
reported the problem with high freeboard to our staff as required by your permit and worked with
our staff to manage the problem once it occurred.
Upon review and consideration of the information submitted, the Wilmington Regional Office has
determined that no further compliance/enforcement actions will be taken by the Division for
these high freeboards,
Also, based on your actions to properly operate your facility, the Division of Water Quality
hereby rescinds the Notice of Violation that was issued to you on April 15, 2003 and replaces it
with this Notice of Deficiency.
In the future, please continue to evaluate ways to maintain freeboard levels in the required range.
These methods include, but are not limited to, water conservation practices, adding additional
application sites, updating your cropping systems, adding additional and/or more flexible
application equipment, and maintaining the lagoon levels at the lowest allowable and appropriate
levels throughout the year. Our staff looks forward to continuing to work with you and your
Technical Specialist to evaluate and implement any needed changes to your system.
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
1 800 623-7748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax: [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01-01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled 1 10% post -consumer paper
http:11h2o.enr.state.nc.us

Inadequate Freeboard
Alvin Knowles
August 7, 2003
Page 2
Thank you again for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact the staff of Wilmington Regional Office at 910-395-3900.
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
CC: Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy -Brown, LLC
Billy Houston, Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Patrick Fussell, DSWC
Wilmington Files 31-520
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Central Files

April 16, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Alvin Knowles
116 West Clement Street
Wallace NC 28466
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Request for Information
.Inadequate Freeboard
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
#31-520
Duplin County
Dear Sir or Madam:
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
On March 23, 2003, a representative of your animal operation informed the Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) that there was inadequate freeboard in the lagoon(s) serving this facility.
This lack of adequate freeboard is in non-compliance with the Certificate of Coverage
issued to this facility on July 19, 2000. In addition to this Notice of Violation (NOV), this non-
compliance is subject to an appropriate enforcement action by DWQ. This action can consist of
one or more of the following: a civil or criminal enforcement action; an injunction; and/or a
requirement to apply for coverage under an individual permit. The action chosen will be based
on complete evaluation of all factors that resulted in the inadequate freeboard; the actions taken
to restore the needed freeboard; and the actions being proposed to prevent the problem from
reoccurring.
To assist us in our review, please provide the Wilmington Regional Office with an
evaluation of the reasons for the freeboard violation(s) and a strategy to prevent future freeboard
violation(s). This evaluation and strategy must include but is not limited to the following:
Current Freeboard level(s)
Freeboard level records in the lagoon(s) for the past 12 months up to the date of submittal
Spraying records for the past 12 months up to the date of submittal
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone [phone] Location:
1-877-623-6748 1617 Mail Service Center . Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Slate Courier #52-01-01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper
http✓/h2o. enr state.nc.us

Inadequate Freeboard
Page 2
Rainfall records for the past 12 months for this site up to the date of submittal (if
available)
Cropping system and PAN specified in the CAWMP. If the cropping system was not in
compliance with the facility's CAWMP, provide details of the cropping system in place
for the past 12 months.
A summary of actions taken to restore the needed freeboard in the lagoon(s) including but
not limited to removal of animals from the site, delay of restocking of animals, pumping
and hauling waste to another site (specify site), securing additional irrigation equipment,
and securing additional spray sites.
A description of water conservation measures in use at the facility and the date(s)
installed.
If the lagoon level(s) are still in violation of the facility's CAWMP and Permit, provide
an updated Plan of Action as to how the facility will return to compliance.
Provide a detailed description of the actions taken or proposed to be taken to insure that
there are no further freeboard violations at this facility.
This information must be received by the Wilmington Regional Office at the following
address no later than 10 days following receipt of this letter.
Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-2845
Once this information is received and evaluated by the DWQ staff, a determination will
be made as to the appropriate compliance/enforcement actions to be taken. Each case will be
evaluated on its own merit. The efforts by the owner/producer to notify DWQ of the problem,
efforts made to resolve the problem once identified, and efforts proposed to prevent future
problems will be positive factors in this determination.
Nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you either the responsibility or
liability for this non-compliance or future cases of non-compliance. If you have any questions
regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our Wilmington Regional Office Staff at
[phone].
Sincerely,
j {
11 Klimek, P.AlanW.
irector
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Central Files

Facility Number Date of Visit: % Time: i3D
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
E3Permitted 13Certified O Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated orAboveThreshold:
Farm Name: e2A ,C.t 0&Al S County: 44'1 / 1
Owner Name: Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Z Wi Eye
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: G
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 6 Longitude 4 4
Design Current
swine Uspacity Fo ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
IL I Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current Design Current
1'oultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca acl . ty Population'
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dai
❑ Non -Layer I I ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Desigin Capacity
Nombc.r of Lagoons -
Holding fonds'l,Sohd,.Traps
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?
Total. SSLW
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection && Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes
( No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
O No
❑ Yes
a No
Structure 6
Continued

.-I
Facility Number: ZI —,3W Date of Inspection 2 Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ekj 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 Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes � No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes C.No
12. Crop type !��/,rru�"� 6WO , -54i4l1l_rr-,0v Okr —S&ed , LV4 A,,/Oew
I3. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes JKNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
V,No
Required
Records_&_Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
V9 No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
NINo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
JKYes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
P9 No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
K No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
rv,' No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
O No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
URNo
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Coimments`(refer to question #): Explain any:vYES answers and/or airy recommendiitions°or anyAother�cq"tmments r « '
Use ❑ ❑ Final Notes
^a`
r#tg � �lpOh !R%t.4/' lrlifl� he�l� IoLOLr%k j
��
`-' O16C/ IT�� ItC��6 70� dog ktli iq .44&'P�e2 f4 Go',eL�t �..�G,16�71' Ile, ,
A,J inaA yleGld -or 16. Z*e we/e Ar
rr/� o S r zG0 �, t riir vd k s
Reviewer/]nspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101
A
Continued

-' Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Z Z
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ZNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes I[No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes CRNo
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 2KNo
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 CffNo
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes KNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes CffNo
bOgs
IiA111C�'1 � illl or raWlri :P-
.,
ne zG?� 2 sii �,,o/ram .
4r 4U , �a/C W CO' It 10 j/,E11 4"V Ae �,1
f
4W )C�d VI-,-- lee" '001rl-'51 /-"I;v /z� 413�1
J
5/00

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretar3
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
June 4, 2001
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Alvin Knowles
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
116 West Clement Street
Wallace NC 28466
V k 1 •W'A
IV•
GVEI� K
!TM CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
NMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Notification for Wettable Acre Determination
Animal Waste Management System
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
Facility Number 31-520
Duplin County
Dear Alvin Knowles:
A letter dated January 15, 1999 was sent to advise you about concerns associated with Certified Animal
Waste Management Plans and the method by which the irrigated acres within the plans were calculated. Only
the acres that are wetted can be credited in the waste management plan as receiving waste application. Any
acreage within the plan that can not be reached by waste application equipment can not be used as part of your
plan.
An evaluation by Dean Hunkele on 8/10/99 was made to review the actual number of acres at your
facility that receive animal waste during land application. The evaluation of your facility has yielded one of
the following two results as indicated by the box marked with an "X".
Cate ory 1:
3 The evaluation of your facility could not be completed due to a lack of information. Please
contact your Technical Specialist to assist in providing Dean Hunkele the necessary
information to potentially exempt your facility from undergoing a complete wettable acre
determination. Please submit this information to Dean Hunkele, at 127 Cardinal Drive
Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405-3845, within in 90 days of the receipt of this letter. If you
have any questions please contact Dean Hunkele at [phone]. If within 90 days you
are unable to provide Dean Hunkele with the information you are automatically
required to complete a Wettable Acre Determination as described by Category 2
below, within 180 days of receipt of this letter.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled110% post -consumer paper

Notification for Wettable Acre Determination
Animal Waste Management System
Page 2
Category 2:
❑ Your facility has been identified by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources
as a facility that may have overestimated the number of acres actually receiving animal
waste. Therefore, some or all of your fields may be exceeding the allowable loading rates
set in your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to resolve this issue, please contact a designated Technical Specialist to have him
or her conduct a Wettable Acre Determination for your facility. The Technical Specialist must
be one that has been approved by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission to conduct
Wettable Acre Determinations. Many Technical Specialist with the N.C. Cooperative Extension
Service, the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, and the Division of Soil and Water Conservation have received this special
designation. You may also contact a private Technical Specialist who has received this
designation, or a Professional Engineer.
All needed modifications to your Animal Waste Management System must be made and
the Wettable Acres Determination Certification must be returned to DWQ within the next
180 days. If the needed modifications are not made and if the form is not returned within the
required time, DWQ will be forced to take appropriate enforcement actions to bring this facility
into compliance. These actions may include civil penalty assessments, permit revocation,
and/or injunctive relief.
Once a Wettable Acre Determination has been completed, a copy of the attached Wettable
Acre Determination Certification must be submitted to the address listed on the form. Please
note that both the owner and the Technical Specialist must sign the certification. A copy of all
the Wettable Acre Determination documentation that applies to your Waste Utilization Plan
must be kept at your facility. DWQ and the Division of Soil & Water Conservation Staff will
review all documentation during their annual visit of your facility. An additional copy must by
kept on file at the local Soil & Water Conservation District Office. Please note that if you install
or modify your irrigation system, a designated Irrigation Specialist or a Professional Engineer
must also sign the Wettable Acre Determination Certification.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Sonya Avant of our
Central Office staff at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc'. Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
Murphy Family Farms

tAsaoi<i"of Water Qualrty
1
d
F
Q Din426n of Soil and Water Conservation i
,
O Other Agency
9 �
Type of Visit G<ompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 1p"Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: l 'I 1TM: � �� Printed on: 7/21/2000
.3 I $Z �
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ❑ Certified [3 Conditionally ]C'eertified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............
Farm Name' ..�! rti ]L+^oW �e S r' Gt r r+1 County: .ti�l .....+'1..............................................I.............
... ................I.. ............................................................................
OwnerName: tl..�•V .v1 �nDt,J��S Phone No:............................................................. ............ ............................................................................................ ..........................
FacilityContact: ..•ritle:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: !�.... l.G'.".. n:OW iGs Integrator: 1�..... ��'�...................................................
.... .... V I+
Certified Operator: ................................................... .......................................... .... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
FIN
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• ��
Design Curreiiit
''Capacity PODnIation
Wean to Feeder
' Feeder to Finish
l Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
=-s Boars
Design Current
Poultry Ca aci Population Cattle
❑ Layer I I 1 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I I ❑ Non -Dail
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
a 'Cerrrent
ity..' Pouitilatio
u�Nei}mberot I:agoons 3i ❑ Subsurface Drains Present El Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Ares
�ySiFs� tss,� I &t�}1i
�Holhlfng Ponds/ Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
a. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ...............I.................... ............ ........................ ................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): T i
5100
❑ YeSXNo
[]Yes gNo
❑ Yes XNo
'r(q
❑ Yes �^o
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes J711No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 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 VNo
(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 J21No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 151N0
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 ,0No
11. Is there evidence of over application`r?rr ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes L20%
12. Crap type em et wy C o�r1 �2�7, may beak
���•�d�f
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes _ErNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
.Yes [:]No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes ,EJINo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ZN0
Required Records & Documents
17. Pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
/Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
ZYes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ERINo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes J21No
22. Pail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes eNo
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes PrNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 12'No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes,,E'No
* •yi0lati0ns'o. i:igfciencies *00hoteo• 0(wing this'vasjt; • YOO will-..t&....K....0..6...f.u..tt..h..oe..-..,-
correspondence. abb6f this AsiK. • . • . ` . -
141, 7_4e •
Wod
r?eeGtS �tx,� �2 gees d ��r''I;�IJo� w�-�aPlay aA keer;nq 4e, ota4(,L, .
I ?.. Need you te 4f GovereLcle AvId 6nefaj Feee1i, f Avcul-late
IS. Mce4; 6tve IIn9pen oC"esfoJn ,J-jr'orenA4iorl aW.KilaLle.
1 Q . 3e S rar"e� 4 o -�-a k,e was4e �s,,,.jv la 5 n ►'► (4)r� _ �t d vse 4ko,w.
✓)e GD /`G+t S� � ' l'! , n d liQ y x 01 a-) j% 1 IyC ej+I D% evee S r
Reviewer/Inspector Name p
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date: ill% 0 5/00

Facility Number: 31 Date rat' Iuspection iV71011
'()dnr ensues
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 4iTNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes eNo
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 ZNo
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 eNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes VNO
32. Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
..Additional_
ommentszn or'., rawrngs::-
Ti

y i I n [ E � ,. 4w I r --�. - < <{ a t�¢Ff •�:+ v 'xs;C,rn �'. �� �,-I�
tns�on of So and Water COn5erVatlOn dp
S t[f Quali
I
Ai9�Ot,/er'..Ageney ir�l (I. .�.:�. %.;!iil; + � '��q, SMI ti
.., , f ; �U'. r �
��..-.. .xR,,.Lr.,;'•1�.i ;u, .'a .z. .,".. -i.-, �.:.ri .v.!;.,: ,,r _! 'i{e,,�lfl l..i„ n,rRn '[...
i
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason.for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ANot
ine: � Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number L
erational Q Below Threshold
© Permitted ❑ Cert' fed Q Condi ' nallyyCetired C3 Registered Date Last Operate Above 'Threshold:Farm Name: %`U.� s...�.fl./'fk� County:........ .� ................. ..
......!..1//..............................
OwnerName: ....................................... ........................ Phone No:.......................................................................................
/, .
Facility Contact: .... k. !.k.........:...........�'a! � .... Title:..:.` ' 1..................................... Whone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ....................]../.f..........................................................,..................../I.......... ............................. %]�
Onsite Representative:./.'Cl..' `....L.. 14.11. ..........��lL7�(!l.�5. Integrator:........../,/ r(!�.+V�..............................................
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location 'of Farm:
t
wine U vourtry LJ s;ame L i rlorse W.... ... tI t i _.,..W.,.,._ I , t_ t t ,
Design Current. Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑_Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish JE3 Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag -on Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Iml2actr.
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Disc•harme originated at: [-]Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a.• If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (Ir yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharoc is observed. what is the estitnalUd AOW in gathnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (Freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
StrnctnrC I Structurc 2 SlrllCttlrc 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
1,1
Identifier: .......... 2j1.4...................................................................... ............................
Freeboard (inches):
S/OD
❑ Yes �'�VO
El Yes ❑N`o'
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 1*;)
❑ Yes Uio
❑ Yes �Io
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: — () Date of inspection / o Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes KNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes 4 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 I(No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes T
0
Waste application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes j0o
11. Is there evidence of over application?
�❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes INo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Perrnit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes JN
o
El Yeso
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes 91No
❑ Yes No .
❑ Yes No
0 Rio YiQlations or ileiencie5 rrt a noted dtar'ir;w. eeeive Rio, #'urthgr; ;
6 rtS oridentce: abbot. 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):
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
[]Yes . P� No
❑ Yes ..®\'�i
\ o
❑ Yes ,NNo
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes f �No
El Yes \ No
qVP
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer inspector Signature, Date: "O 5100

I Facility Number: — d/ Date of inspection pd Printed on: 7/21/2000
66r Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor hplow 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
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes IuErNo
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 IE1110
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 /ONO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes P1116
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pei-manent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes �o
Additiona]:Comments�andtor.: ravings:
i" " Al-e�
CIO
J

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Alvin Knowles
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
116 West Clement Street
Wallace NC 28466
Farm Number: 31 - 520
Dear Alvin Knowles:
MAR 1 7 2000
MIM
March 15, 2000
1 � •
2
CDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
You are hereby notified that Alvin C. Knowles Farm, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sixty, (60) days to submit the.
attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular
Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subject your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call J R Joshi at [phone] extension 363 or Dean
Hunkele with the Wilmington Regional Office at [phone].
Sin ly,
ell
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Wilmington Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Alvin Knowles
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
116 West Clement Street
Wallace NC 28466
Dear Alvin Knowles:
kvW,A
1 •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 31-520
Duplin County
This letter is being sent` to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers.
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRR1, IRR2, DRY1, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR1, SLUR2,
SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext, 571.
;2Sinc
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

P,4' �,-, -= 3
Revised April 20, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Numb3 - 5�-6 Operation is flagged for a wettable
Farm Name: 4�- w acre determination due to failure of
On -Site Representative: Part 11 eligibility item(s) F1 F2 F3 F4
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: Lti�-�k�� Operation not required to secure WA
( f determination at this time based on
Date of site visit: <3 exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP:
Annual farm PAN deficit: pounds
Operation pended for wet a le acre
determination based on P1 P2 P3
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: 1. hard -hose traveler; 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system w/permanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wlportable pipe;
stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part II, overrides Part 1 exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D�D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exe*ion as verified in Part Ill. (NOTE:75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part II. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part II - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part Ill).
PART H. 75% Rule .Eligibility Checklist and .Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination .required .because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
_F1 Lack ofacreage-which tesultedin:overzapplicationMf WaStewater_(PAN) on-7spray.
field(s) accord ing -to farm'slast two -years nf:in iga#ionzecords.7
F2 Unclear, -illegible, -or lack ofinformation/map.
F3 Obvious -field -limitations -(nu merousAitches,failure:-to:deductTequired:....
bufferlsetback-acreage;-or25%':oftotai_acreageddentifiedin-CAWMR.:inbiudes
small;-irregulady-shaped.fields - fields:less-than-5acresfortravelers-or. less than
2 acres for -stationary spdnHers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage -in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part III.

Revised April 20, 1999
Facility Number -
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT FIELD TYPE OF TOTAL CAWMP FIELD COMMENTS'
NUMBER NUMBER1,2 IRRIGATION LACRESI ACRES
SYSTEM
I
1 I I I I
f
I I I I !
I
l
n LIIM ►III►ICI-nt L...J-.,_4 1 L.6 .......4:_ ..1___-tl._IJ-j�-- --
`la_iv IIVlnW_IX - llruIQ,IL* f+un,Lullc, %it HVI"L "6,IilVGI.z Illay uc u-gcu [ItNlaL,a Vl I I C u Ilwllucla �J=�J= lLI"U Ull %'mvvlvlr
and type of irrigation system. - If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for -exemption; -otherwise operation will be subject to WA determination.
FIELD NUMBER2 -must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS'- back-up fields with CAWMP acreage-exceeding75% of its totai.acres and having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's.Previoustwo years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records,- cannot serve -as -the
sole basis -for requiring a WA Determination._Back-upfiieldsTnust-be-noted in the -comment 'secbonand must be accessible
by irrigation system.
Part IV. Pending WA Determinations
P1 Plan -Jacks -following -information:
P2 Plan -revision may:satisfy'75% rule based on adequate overall PAN deficit -and by
adjusting all field. -acreage -to below 75% use rate ,
P3 Other (ie/in process of installing new irrigation system):

it
Division of Soil 'and Wiate`r Conseiwahoi4 �OperateorAevrerv', " � ° ' �" "" •" i,' , c, ;''+ .
.' ,,D1Vi8iOn- Q sbifugd pV ter3'i.`OIIS 1'V8t10n� 118nCe �,�i
i Division of Water Quality tom Rance lns erctlOil
,!& EI
E
,: 1? P 1
}
;Other A enC d taOn 1tevleW-�,If.,t°,J..=:!2}i7� €3 d,i.F•;:E.I �fE y �'� y�, E tkh r,
x g ✓ I► era„Vp.IT,
Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow -tip of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection a
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted 9certified © Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Not O erational Dat je Last Operated:
Farm Name: M��.�x .. U: County:........... II�'1.......................................................
OwnerName: . ................................................... ....................................................................... Phone No: ......................................................... ..............................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title: ..... Phone No::...........I...........
........................................................... ...........................
MailingAddress: ...................�.......................................................................................... ............................. .......,..................
Onsite Representative:... .��.�.. lr�l r..................................................... Integrator:...............,........................................
..............�,(
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:........ .....
Location of Farm:
........................................................................................................................................................................................ I ...........................................................114
Latitude • ° �•' Longitude • 6 66
1;:Design Current ; ",Design..'Design Current
CsrneEPoint attle
.. Ca acit Po ulation r] Caacit. Pooulation
Capacity Population `
„.
E
f"
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Q
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts E
❑ Boars
+` E❑ Layer airy
`' ❑ Non -Layer ;' ❑ Non -Dairy
77
❑ Other I
t� 3 E 3'„',' �l 40bL ; s' '° T&A tDesigh; Capacity
ii'. ' T&ASSLW'_'
Nuiiiber of Lagoons } ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area [I Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
�. '
•
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes j No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water cif the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c, if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/ruin'?
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 Z No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes YNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway 0�Yes J'Nol
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ....... �................................................... .................................... ........ I .......................... ..... I............................. ...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 0 No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on buck

10
•- Facility Number: Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? XYes ❑ 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
D'No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ku No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
%No
12. Crop type S C �WI
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
[yNo
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 cropmeed improvement?
❑ Yes
�(No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo
Required Records & Documents
17, Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
5 '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.)
XYes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
aYes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
�TNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[XNo
22, Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
allo
23. Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
1�]'No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
kNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
[ No
U: 10 yiolatigris:or defcie>t?Icies were Wotan cl><W g •tbis:visit' :Y:o4 iviil feeeiye OO futtht
corres' oricieirce: aN ' f this vesi
,Comments 7 refer to uestxon4x Ex' lain ari YES:answers and/or an recommendations or an other'comments = i'
Llse�drawing of facility to better�explain situations'. (useaddit<onahpagesas necessary.)':` �E �� r..� Ett �r , :,Es„� _�'_�, f '„33
1
t s4t�� rer� 1i t�� RCS xkss c�QrcS
050 �_ -+c;N ff 4",
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
3/23I99

Facility Number: -- . a!7 late 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 �1'es ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? ✓N
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 Q<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 [XNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 4No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? P�Ycs ❑ No
1
'Additional ornrn nts 'andlor ra*il*gS.nr
A.
3)Vc9clo'-, rz� V:Pv�
Y �
r
7
OQ?-V lzl::;A
J
3/23/99

FAMILY FARMS
August 4, 1998
N.C. Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
127 North Cardinal Drive
Wilmington, NC 28405
Subject: Lagoon Closure Form
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
Facility No.: 31-520
Duplin County
RECEIVED
AUG 0 6 1998
BY:
Please find enclosed a copy of the Animal Waste Storage Pond and Lagoon Closure
Report Form, along with the Lagoon Closure Plan for the above referenced farm.
If you have any questions, please contact me at [phone] ext. 4562.
Sincerely,
M. Kevin Weston
Technical Specialist
cc: File
Post Office Box 759, Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458, [phone], FAX [phone]

.-
Animal Waste Storage Pond and Lagoon Closure Report Form
I Phase «pe or print all information tat 1t cloea trot require a �i,_rta[ur_1
Gener-al TnForniation: r
`lame oL- Farm: ALVIN �. ICr�6wr.Ef �"Baca-- Fac:ilitc• No:
Owne:�s) �+ame: AwInr C. KNCWLLS
vlaiiin_ Address:___ /IL _ W &irmeMr sreeet Phone N 019�o}zYr- G/eryG
WAcc.IC.f NC ZIfV&& Count':: D"Pa,N
Operation Description (remaining animals onl%•):
0 Plea4 check this box if there will be no animals on this earn after lagoon closure. It there will still a e animals on the site
after lagoon closure. please provide the following information on the aninzais :hat wiill remain.
eration Descrintion:
Type of Szvire No. of.Anintals
_i /Wean to Feeder
i/Fccdcr to Finish
Z F=.=w to Wean
Z,' Fcx-, o tv-'o Fender
Z F_rro%v to Finish
T}•pe Of Potclrr: NO. OfAlliMalS Tvpe ojCarde No. -of Ariunais
J Laver :) Dairy
.s Pui[ets Z Beef
Qr,rer Ttpe of L:: esror:� :\•iurtt)er ot.�nimcrls:
Will the r_r.n maintain a number of animals greater than the ?H .0217 chreshoid? Yes k, No =I
Will ocher lagoons be in oceration at this farm after this one closes? Yes' No G
How : %." nv lagoons are left in use on this farm?:
(Nar = : - or the Cv ace: Quality Section's staff in the Division
of Wa:e: Qttalitv's Regional Once (see map on back)
was cc::cac:ed on ldate) for notification or the pending closure of this pond or lagoon.
This nctincacion was at lease ?= hours prior to the start of closure which began on� (dare).
I :hat the above information is correct and ccmoiece. I have followed a closure plan which meets
ail v-RCS specifications and crice:ia. I realize that I will be subject to enforcement action per Article 21
or the North Carolina General Statutes if I fail to properly close out the lagoon.
v arne of Land Owner (Please Print):
Signature: SaL 196t.4 \
Date:
The rac iicy has followed a closure plan which metes all requirements set forh in tide.NRCS Technical
Guide Standard 998. The following- items were completed by the owner and venfled by me: all waste
liquids and sludges have been removed and land applied at agronorruc rate. all input pioes have been
removed. all slopes have been stabilized as nectssarr, and vezetation established on all. disturbed areas.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): 44,�.•� WEsrn.�
Aft -illation:
Address (Ag-ency): /a. 6o,. )rl c eryr P _Phone :vo.:(*'?'/u)=Ar4-G yfPk rf;frz
Sianat,.:re: U _ Date:, J�V_9r _
turn within Iz days tollo%vinf, completion of aninial .vucer storage pona Ur lagoon closure to:
N. C. Division Of Water Quality- Water Quality Section
Compliance Group
P.O. Box 29-3_
Raleigh. SIC 2 7 6`_6-0 35
PLC - i N-Ia% 3. 1996

Name of Farm: _ ,Q��,,, C. KNci k.81' AAP- — Facility No. l - f za
O-,vner(s) Name: C, Kure,., Es _
Mailing Address/Location: 1/& W. Z,-,rmxYr frRear Phone No.:[9ia} zYt- yrye.
County: 1iwr�4.r.
This plan describes the closing pocedures for the above referenced farm. The following
closure procedures will be followed in accordance with the current MRCS standards.
1. All existing pipes that were used to discharge waste from the buildings to the
lagoon shall be capped or removed to eliminate fresh water entry from the buildings.
2. All effluent and sludge shall be pumped from the lagoon and shall be land applied
to crops at agronomic rates based on realistic yield expectations for nitrogen. The effluent
an(fsludge shall be analyzed for nitrogen content prior to application. During the removal
process, all sludge remaining on the side slopes shall be washed down and agitated in
with the bottom sludge and land applied. There shall be one foot or Iess of sludge
remaining in the lagoon upon completion. Satisfactory removal of the sludge shall be
determined by visual inspection.
3. Any foreign material other than waste found in the lagoon shall be properly
disposed of in a permitted landfill facility. Such material cannot be buried on the farm as
this practice constitutes the operation of an unpermitted landfill.
4. Any electrical services or devices such as recycle pumps, etc. around the lagoon
which will no longer be needed shall be disconnected at the power source and removed.
5. Upon completion of the removal procedures outlined above, the lagoon may be
a) filled in with soil
b) left intact and allowed to fill with fresh water for use as a fresh water pond
c) breached so that it will no longer impound liquid
If left for use as a pond, the requirements of Conservation Practice Standard 378 (Ponds)
shall be met.If the lagoon embankment is breached, the slopes and bottom of the breach
shall be stable for the soil material involved, but the side slopes shall be no greater than
3:1.
6. All disturbed areas shall be fertilized, seeded and mulched before the lagoon
closure can be certified.
Estimated amount of effluent/sludge: J'f 3aco jJ Effluent/sludge analysis:
Total amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN):
The following acreage may be used for land application based on the crop to be grown:
Tract/FieId #
Crop
lbs. N/ac.
Acres
lbs. N utilized
T 7 Z$ 3 2
.6'1044. 1
as
/ 9
dC
T 7 St :` ib
elf
106
Zz
tzao
T ZZ
foArs
b
oaa

The following acreage may be used for Iand application based on the crop to be grown:
Tract/F'ieId # I Cron I lbs. N/ac. I Acres I K. N utilized
Name of Owner:
POOR,....��
Name of Technical specialist:_ 24, ele" i fi esr"j
Affiliation: - /r'l14"Wt F10n/4Y
Address (Agency):_Po. 5.,- 70
dry f � Zryr.? - -- -
Signature: 4

TRW
Ali-

1 ~�'�i�• , r'�
`� 11.�f'lr5s�r1i.
:f,� q�:r ,',I
� ��j ry1 �;Y
,y , V .

s r ' [3Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality .E
;,
r
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up'ofD1VQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection b
Facility Number 3 I
Time of Inspection t)© 24 hr. (hh:mm)
10 Registered t% Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted
JUNot O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: r
...... ��.)%Ih...... �`.._�o���.......4.'mirk ...............................
'
.. County:...4tA..........................
Owner Name: 1
.......N.\ 1+�..........C....................1.` ".0 k............................................ Phone No:..��t� .. ' �%!err+.............................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title: ................................................................
Phone No:............................. .....................
MailingAddress: .... ...i.1e..........�.�14.......•�:.;........•......................................
......�'1�3 ............................................ 4C............
Onsite Representative:.....p1`Y�.........KYAW1�...................................................
Integrator:........ �j........... ................... ..............• ........
Certified Operator;
Operator 1`.v,...,...,
............:.....
., Certification Number;,.,,,,,.,
Location of Farm:
:........aeSA:&AtAwlt:....Sl .4....af...... X... ......
..5R..U;�........................................................................:....
Latitude Longitude
v R %Design - Current _ ;' Design Current Design ' Current'
ivvme Capacetty ,Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity, Poptilatiot
❑ Wean to Feeder
ig Feeder to Finish
Ma
❑ Farrow to Wean
0 Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number, of Lagoons I Holding Ponds � ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
t
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System s
�" n
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
c. If discharge is observed, what'is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
jj No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M 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
U Yes
❑ No.
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
MNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
7125/97 Continued on back

Facilit?Number: 3—ar
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'? ElYes W No
Structures (Lagoons,Iloldine fonds, Flush fits, etc )
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes C9 No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 S Lru citjre 5 Structure 6
Idcnti ficr:
Freeboard(ft):.......,...1.:J..................................................... I., ......... I .....
....
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures? 0 Yes [V No
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of' the structures observed'?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an imrnediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
i
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ............ h4xvgut}.4rr......................... kcvil�................ ...........:.5.! i..).....Q.troth..................... .................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment'?
20. Does facility require aTollow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
r
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available:'
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'?
❑ Yes
T No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Yes
(P.No
N. Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
0 No.vioNtions or deficiencies.were noted during this:visit. Nou.will receive no further
correspondence AhoW this .visiC-: '
4 Yes {X No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes qQ No
❑ Yes [A No
Comments',(t•e er`to question#:): Explain_ any YES answers and/or any recorritnendations or anyother connnents.
Use draw ngs'of facility to better'explain situations. (rise additional pa' cs as itc^ccstiary) y
„ -
1vv: - L tA- Q; s��� b� corms-cd. •
IZ have oor a �Y.a Sw)j 6.
sh��lc} #--1
-16013
u. �Jo��k �- �� i 5a.m.�l�.s sl,,�t� b� ��nlakJz s ,rceo,� �. s��(� � � ��� mY lr�aer t�v►n��'
� � t.1t1 ,n+%rtib.�,r• z sl�tv�c� lei t�tJa�tcl. e.v ���a�itan. �o►-�•- 5ha�lt) be av� Si�•c,
4r a 5 9�'i�►�C b,
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Narne
iA`.
Reviewer/inspector Signature: /n - - ---- Date:

E�,I DSWC Animal Feedlot Operat><on Review
n�
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operatl<onx Site Inspection ` >;
-#. a x.' �d9 l� t a"�6aF� ^.:4 S4 '� A._ ji EARVI k. lN.
III -Routine O Com taint O Foliow-up of DWQ inspection
0 Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number i
Time of Inspection (3d. = 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status, R Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:I,25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review 0
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted
or Inspection includes travel and processinM
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated : ..............
....... ........... ....... ....... ........ ................................... ....... ........ ................ ................
FarmName:...... .. s.......GAc&............................................... County:...... in................................................._............
AA....C......1(-ww
Land Owner Name: ... 1ly.in...... La .... ... �aJllal.6................................................ Phone No:..lL.IL[!? .YS-�... ! a.........................................
Facility Conctact:... Alan .....Y1aWI4........L............................ Title: ...... QPAP............................. Phone No: . .................
Mailing Address: .......11.0..... LU..,......�.�`I�Yk1As.11.....S.... ....................................................a!!�1. II&C3r.,..t...WS......................................, .���t'a�(a......
OnsiteRepresentative: ........1�k10i�l.S.............. ........................................... Integrator:........U..f.011........................q......„.............................
/......C�7V.\,
Certified Operator: .....1 .!. � ........0..:............. K�1.(}.wles ...... ........................
Operator Certification Number: j..h,. j..0.....I.........
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•®r" Longitude • ®• ©C4
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4130/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
P No
❑ Yes
R' No
❑ Yes
IjU No
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ Yes
09 No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
(i No
Continued on back

Facil4ity Number: ....11',...... ....
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Q9 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ERNo
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structurgs (Laggens andlor Holdiag Ands)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
a............... .......... _............. ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste AUDlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... b.OWT+:WAL............................................................................. 31+ic&ns...... ............................... I..............
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does 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
No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
IX Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
RL No
❑ Yes
K No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
%No
❑ Yes
M No
;f Yes
❑ No
Coninients,(re fer to questton #) Explain ariy YES answers`'an dlor any recommendations,orany,other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain.situations:' (use additional pages as necessary) =` A' ' �k
I2.. Cuh an. Pi�,� ;ng 1l+A.�-t��� sheul� he— PILO uhd mi-eeJeJ, Allaur — 4fnavlj be pMiSLW 4
b spat 001, II
11�• 1� ere�� �V be- )1` W ' y- �agit CAW Ca�' 56.0 ( e' JcSiIXAW lo, 4.u. WQSit
vk-417-0.61i, � (G^ O Dt,5 WV,_ 4Correc� ac rtale- T
2_4.5�rol rtcaras '4VU13 b� V�k by f%Ser-rrV1, o,;Jtn,� 4^ Odd -mu"*% Wvs4-t &vJ Svi(
4csi- 5600 b e -,tC.,+.r..
Reviewer/Inspector Name"
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: IA
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Alvin Knowles
Alvin C. Knowles Farm
110 W Clement St
Wallace NC 28466
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Alvin C. Knowles Farm
Facility ID#: 31-520
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Knowles:
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 91gn33-0026.
Sincerel ,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, 1K 14
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 �C An Equal Opportunity/Afflrmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 9T% recycled/10°,6 post -consumer paper

no
DIVISION OF E0 ~'•=`iAT ',L� tir.GE'v `•• f
'P'NTMAL FEEDLOT OPE - = � J: "S S i l V-ISI I a TION R.ECOR D,
DATE _9c5
F= Name/Owner: �� 11/i U • I� N
Mailina A
County:
Inte�*ator:
tlnLt
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
a
Pho _e•
)16
P If 6
1' dot.. 10
559 113 -3 Iry Ve. �r 1>e-
Type of Operation: Swine Pocl-; Ca e
Desimn Caracirv: on Sire:
DEM Certi,-�cation Number: ACE DENT Ce_�= caror_ Number: AC�.�. W
Latitude: L " Elet aaor: Fe e
Ci cle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon hav�e�s,:ci_ n:=eboa-;l of I Foot - 25 ye` 2^—, hour storm evert
(a uroximarely I Foot - 7 inches)L% r No Ac.:Ial Freeboaz-z-f_j_Ft. '2_ Inches
Was any seepage observed from the l�agoon::s;? Y:s ti iv as a:�y e,cs cr observe ? Ye or No
Is adequate land available for sprav? Yes o'_' INo Is "e cover crou adecua:e? Yes or No
Crop(s) being un uzed: � fy +C,
Does the faciiity meet SCS minimum se:bacti c=:e:ia? 200 Fee: corn D�'ellinas? 'e : No
100 Feet from Weds? e r No
Is the animai waste stockpiled within 100 F_e, of LiSGS Blue Line S e=rn? Yes G(D
Is animal waste land applied or spray ir::ga__ within 25 Feet of aUSGS NLn Blue Lire? Yes or No
Is animal waste dlscha Lied Into waters of ti-c sta:e by r-nan-made ditch, ushing system. or other
similar man-made devices? Yes r No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the faciiin, maintain adequate waste manaaemen: records (volumes of manure, lard applied,
spray irigared on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
Additional Comments:
61a) '890Ptk10_ A-6905s �rkt4zof_ MUX'
rife,- Ir�SPec�'tl — .41)?9, -6)2
1f 1
IGLr
Insuecror Name Si
Facility AssL:ssment Unit L se .Acr c, imefn,s it Needed,

alt�1Go
yy _ F_No R
DIVISIO OF
A'N-MAL FYFDL0T OPEN-.ice:��' S SITE VIS:i A x1ON P1C0P-D
DATE.
Farm Name; Owner _H1,
.Mailin4 Address:
County:
Intezrator.��
On Site Reoresentadve:
Phvsical AddresslLocatiom .
Phone:
Phore: d'd,%
l n l , *PPIZox .' / A'41.
Type of Ope.adon: Swine ,V PoS__= i Ca e
Design Capacity: Lin�K W_a_ Site:
DEM Ce.=Hcadon Number: ACE DE1�I Ce `cation \�: cer. ACNE
Latitude: Lor_::de E:_ adon: Fept
C—ir,.:e Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lazoon have suL:c:e : =__board of 1 Foot - 25 vea- 24 hour s:o:Li event
(araroxiinately I Foot 7 inches or. No Actual FrLeboard:' Ft. Inches r
Was anv seepage observed from the lag-,ci :s.? Yes o>� Was a':V erosion o.b e4? e r No
is adequate land available f_or)s_orav? Yes c_ No Is the cove: crop adec��a_e? Yes o. No
Crop(s) being u:ihzed: �f AJO W1A1r&Je— 96W
_-Of
Does the facility meet SCS minimum se:bac°� cn ='a? 200 Foe: �:orn Dw'e:J"las? �es r No
100 Feet from V e?ls? es r No
is the animal waEze stockpiled within 100 Fee: ofliSGS Blue Line Sire..r:? Yes 00
Is animal waste land applied or sprav irgn_ted within 25 Fee: of a USGS N:ao Blue Lire? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waie:s of t':' st_:e by titan -made ditch, fl'us"in g system. or other
similar man-made devices? Yes r N If Yes, Please ExPIL--r.
Does the faciiin, maintain adequate waste =.nagement records (volumes of manure, land applied,
suraV irrigated on specific acre agre .xi En cove: crop)? Yes or No
Additional Commgents: �/11�11,� �i� - �� 1C%fY , / 44V
g«-�i _fL S66,I) AND � SILL - MM-U-
Facility Unit "se raft i�rim::,tti if Ne; dt!d.

CONSULTING
CHEMISTS
NCDEHNR-DEM
Environmental Chemists, Inc.
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
SHIPPING ADDRESS:
P.O. Box 1037
[phone] (Office)
6602 Windmill Way
Wrightsville Beach,
[phone] (Lab)
Wilmington,
North Carolina 28480
[phone] (Fax)
North Carolina 28405
REF(7RT OF ANAL Y.S..Z-5
2/21/96 2/29/96
Date Sampled: Date of Report:
127 Cardinal Dr. Ext. Client —
Sampled By: P. 0.1:
Wilmington, NC 28405 Rick Shiver 2305
Report To: Report#�
Fecal Coliform by SM9222D. 18 edition (Membrane Filter)
SALE ID LAB I Fecai_Colonies/100ml
UT to Doctor's Creek
@ Hwy 41 0906 >2210
UT to Doctor's Creek
@ Pond Spillway 0907 2

Environmental Chemists, Inc.
;,WUNG ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE:
SHIPPING ADDRESS-,
P.O. Box 1037
[phone] (06cc)
6602 Windmill Way
CONSULTING
CHEMISTS Wrightsvillc.teach,
[phone] (Lab)
Wilmington,
North Carolit:28480
[phone] (Fax)
North Carolina 28405
CHAIN OF CUSTODY FOR SAMPLE COLLECTION
x
Client: D.E.H.N.R. Report #:
Collected By (signature & p-rint): DAVID HULSINGER
Sample Type: Influent, Effluent, Well, ream Soil, Other
Collection: For composite Indicate Date Time for Start & Finish
Location &
Identification
Sample
Type
Collection
Date Time
Bottle
ID
Lab
ID
Analysis
Requested
0 IIv" I
y
f�(.
/• l ��'
O�
I
�/
t�� �� c
�a�5 I��w
6
Quo
Fe� o
Transfez
Relinquished By
Date/Time
Received By
Date/Time
2
:.'.
Proper. Preservative Used: Acid _ Base Other
Received On Ice or Chilled to 4°C- Yes No
Accepted . I/�- " Re j_ected
..: comments,:,."
µ Delivered
' Received By
b Time:'--`—'12
...- ,z •;;,��t :,. � •:} s - , i •� y�:�

! Site Requires Immediate Attention: Y
Facility No. -z 1 — S 0
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address:
County: —
Integrator:
DATE: t/ 15 1995
Time: r
— rL- o'y-` ­0 r
Phone�-E)91z
On Site Representative: ' Phone:
Physical Address/Location: _AC �=Jf - ' ` �� �� �� Cr,..
w/ y f
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: j I �-i U Number of Animals on Site: 11G
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 34 ° Lt`(_' 4Yq" Longitude:7'6 " C)1- ' 11, a�5 Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches Ye ' or No Actual Freeboard: ��Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o N� Was any erosion observed? 3Yeor No
Is adequate land available for spray?LYos or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized: C o a
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 eet from Dwellings?6 or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes o o If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific, acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
Additional Comments: ",3_� 4vo
1� ♦ r JL r F Ci(_�l 7 " ?
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Nal�q�
REGISTRATIONFORM FOR ANIMAL_FEEDLOT OPERA9kONS:. `
Department of Environment, Health and Natural esources
Division of Environmental Management,-'>>,,�7
Water Quality Section �;':•.
If the animal waste management system for your feedlot �•'ROn�
is designed to serve more than or equal to 100 head of cat -lb, 75
horses, 250 swine, 1,000 sheep, or 30,000 birds that are served
by a liquid waste system, then this form must be filled out and
mailed by December 31, 1993 pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0217 (c) in
order to be deemed permitted by DEM. Please print clearly.
Farm Name: Alvin C. Knowles
110 W Clement St.
Wallace, NC 28466
Duplin County
n _ i
Owner(s) Name:
Managers) Name:
Lessee Name:
919-285-4846
Latitude/Longitude if known: QBSP # 23-047-03-09
Design capacity of animal waste n ge men system fNumbe and
type of confined animal (s) :-r�.+
Average animal populatio on the
animal(s) raised): b
,(N fiber aftd type of
Year Production Began: ASCS Tract No.:"!
Type of Waste Manageme ystem Used:
-A
Acres Available for Land Application f Waste: Z
M q
Owner(s) Signature(s): Date: Z�l.2
31- 5ao
Date:
(Bob Bilbrey, Serviceman)

r
State,'of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •To
Division of Environmental Management
-
James S. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary 1H F1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 9, 1993
Alvin Knowles
110 W. Clement St.
Wallace NC 28466
Dear Mr. Knowles:
This is to inform you that your completed registration form required by the recently
modified nondischarge rule has been received by the Division of Environmental Management
(DEM), Water Quality Section.
On December 10, 1992 the Environmental Management Commission adopted a water
quality rule which governs animal waste management systems. The goal of the rule is for
animal operations to be managed such that animal waste is not discharged to surface waters
of the state. The rule allows animal waste systems to be "deemed permitted" if certain
minimum criteria are met (15A NCAC 2H'.0217). By submitting this registration you have
met one of the criteria for being deemed permitted. .
We would like to remind you that existing feedlots which meet the sue thresholds
listed in the rule, and any new or expanded feedlots constructed between February 1, 1993
and December 31, 1993 must submit a signed certification form to DEM by December 31,
1997. New or expanded feedlots constructed after December 31, 1993 must obtain signed
certification before animals are stocked on the farm. Certification of an approved animal
waste management plan can be obtained after the Soil and Water Conservation Commission
adopts rules later this year.
We appreciate you providing us with this information. if you have any question about
the new nondischarge rule, please contact David Harding at [phone].
Sincerely,
//,Steve Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
P.O. Box 29535, Rdelgh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/ 10% past -consumer paper