310522_HISTORICAL_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

—PC--o ) 99 f#`, /,'— L /
Type of Visit: compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: alroutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
ysa
Date of Visit: j� 17 Arrival Time: g Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: T,V Owner Email:
Owner Name: yt a1 I tz" eI J_.�U2_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /x04 Vz— Title: r
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Phone:
Region: FIT-0
Integrator:
Certification Number: . 2 7 yDe"
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Qesign
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry C*apacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
La er Daia Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current D Cow
D , P.aultt, Ca aci P.o Non -Dairy
Layers Beef Stocker
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
1'urke s
Turke Poults
Other
Gilts
Boars
Other
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?
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)?
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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes allo
❑ Yes [E[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 3 1 jDate 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
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 139`
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes 2[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 0 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? 0 Yes ❑ 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 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
tZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
CQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Renuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
fo 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 El Checklists ❑ Design []Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. []Yes ® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [E 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 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: / - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
r 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ® No
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?
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 the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
O Yes
CENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
gL Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
© mov-) La oz s aja .tTc� 7'1cc Tr�x a 7 /A' c o1'] '/�
4-r
I � ,
77Pi?rJ _5 �- a -7� j't� v rr C� —`3 av )4
D u7 y. i rrJ� i7ll'2cJ 5 r p� CD cc� r1 _M '�O r_ D J-;?,y f'Z c, ti a.r /1 o.7
9,,, rn z�G + 1" i ' ��,a 0+�✓ /1 a, i?mGc> reJ 74 %`1> �r/ ' S
Fyr, /h 1/jT 3 T9
-I LI,-)
,ai'-LDy{t.� i �1"D l�lvw l`f1'rd� ! n (7Y �GrU�
►�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
e
Phone: W4 --303 Zj 1,5_1
Date: G —15-- —1--b / .7
21412015
Page 3 of 3

iype of visit: t, compnance inspection tv operation meview v structure r,vaivation ;.) I ecnnicai 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: G yyl� 7Pstif Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: �iQP/ /' / �C/[71�� Integrator: /l l�
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Region:t i
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish I ILayer I
Deslgn C*urrent
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, P,oultr, Ca acit P,o ,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
ILayers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dischar¢es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P'No ❑ NA [] NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: TT
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes dNo ❑ 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)
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 cZfNo
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes gNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - I 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 Callo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .2— r/
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 0�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E] 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 off 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 PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes QNo
❑ 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 Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes Er No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes .2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes J2 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?
❑ Yes ,lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [TNo ❑ 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 El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑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 I" Rainfall Inspections
ti
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o
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 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Z Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes O—No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [,]�o ❑ 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 j2No ❑ 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
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)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes JE^No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �'No ❑ NA [] NE
❑ Yes -d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Coinne'�nts'f(refer�to�gestionT#�ex'vlia'
n`an�y YE5 avers ando=any additionalrecammendations or any othercomments.;
.� r
Use drawmes of facility to bettin sf uations;(use,a'dditi_ona-I pa a !as necessary) :,.
ppkk
5ci c1-C'c--f_J
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
S CWQ- --9-0 �U
[a605yl
(-Gt_'3 cf-G p
Phone: �l� % W7323
Date:
21412015

Type of Visit: j2rCompliance Inspection n Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: OlZoutine O Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other Q Denied Access
If If
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County'. Region
Farm Name:y�y� �%�� i Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:ap
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:/"
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Wet Poultry
Layer
I INon-Layer
D.r. P■oultr,
Design
Capacity
Design
C•a �aci
Current
Pop.
Current
P,o
Cattle
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dai Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes F No [DNA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes CaNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes UNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _ T
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 [20�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes E]"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'EKO ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: 0(6
Waste Colection & Treatment
4. IS -storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ;:J-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes '�>o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): C2 =2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
_[2'No
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes,,FrNo
❑ 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 [�;J-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes j �jNo
❑ 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 frNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes J:J io
❑ 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 .❑i'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes . ;---I—No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
[] Yes ] ' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes �'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes [2-,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes 12'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 L�J'No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Wastc Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ,fNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 17rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,E"No
,3 -
2S. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ,fNo
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
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes E2-No
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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?] Yeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes j2 Ro ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes C2-14o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.'` G
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
T_
o 3 f i�iy
o-6 3
D-C Z _3
b • 7] Z
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
U•93 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ Yes [2-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone:
Date: 4�
2/4 014

type of Visit: 0-Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: VRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: $- b-j �-Arrival Time: jQ; Ot1 Departure Time: 1 5 County: Region: t✓L
Farm Name:. LhMN /$t✓ Arm Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design C•uerent
Design
Current
111
Design Current
Swiue
Capacity PoP.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Fop.
C*attle
Capacity Fop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
fl
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
keys
©,the
key Poults
Other
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?
.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 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: $-
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 21 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes C2TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 3 t14+✓ 1D 11
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a a 3�1 _
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ;D 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 WNo ❑ 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 ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes —VAJ"'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 eNo [DNA ❑ 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 ONo ❑ 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
[ZrNo
❑ 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
0 Yes
[ZfNo
❑ NA
D NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
P�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E!� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ 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 ONO
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
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 �l O
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - rj a Date of Inspection:
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ZINO
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ErNo
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:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
ZyNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
4-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes �io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes VfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? [:]Yes ZNo ❑ NA [] NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes �f'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? [:]Yes F6'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).
0
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 7L4403 ��Gvr?j Phone: 2a-361-25h—
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AL
I Date: J_�-
Page 3 of 3 21412011

-� aCA13CA 500
PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number: 31-522
Facility Name: Tew
Certified Operator Name:
County: Duplin
Lynn Tew Operator Number:
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 Name/ID:
Spillway(Y or N):
Levei(inches):
Lagoon Lagoon 2.Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
#2 #3
N N
25 18
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
within 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. Volume 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 facilitys 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:
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.
Greer Moore for:
Lynn Tew Phone:
Facility Owner/Manager (print)
Lynn Tew Date:
Facility Owner/Manager (signature)
910-590-6599
7/4/2013

0
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): ILT #2
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr./24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) _
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design
25.0 inches
27.0 inches
2.0 inches
34890 ft2
43496 gallons
1801 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 3956i ft3
h. current herd # 1200 certified herd #1 2400
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 19781 ft'
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 I=
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I. current waste analysis dated 5/3/2013
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)
©ft3
35282 It'
68645 gallons
1.12 Ibs/1000 gal.
125.6 Ibs. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2121 /00

0
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): ILT #3
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr.124 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone)
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design
17.0 inches
19.61 inches
2.0 inches
40040 ft2
49917 gallons
180 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 39430 ft3
h. current herd #F-7-2-0-01 certified herd #1 2400
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
I. current waste analysis dated 1 5/3/2013
m. ((lines e + k)/1000) x line I =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Cluck on the next Structure tab shown below) .
J
PoA (30 Day) 2/21 /00
19715 ft'
©ft3
23357 ft3
53696 gallons
1.34 Ibs/1000 gal.
138.8 lbs. PAN

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: LT #2
line m =
125.6 lb PAN
2.
-Structure ID: LT #3
line m =
138.8 lb PAN
3.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
4.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
5.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
6.
Structure ID:
line m =
-lb PAN
n.lines I+2+3+4+5+6= 264.4lbPAN
III. 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
(lb/acre)
t. TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (lbs.)
column r x s
u. application window'
Pulls 1-2D
Soybeans
6.63
164.00
1087.3
April -Sept 15
Pulls 3-12
So beans
15.55
164.00
2550.2
April -Sept 16
'State current crop ending application date or next crop application beginning date for available
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 3637.5 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from section II) = 264.4 lb. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00

x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from section III) = 3637.5 lb. PAN
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) _ -3373 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.
NARRATIVE:
IAII pulls are currently under wheat and producer is still planning to plant soybeans at this time. DWO will be
notified when lagoons are back in compliance.
(Thank you!
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00

(Type of Visit: Q Co pliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
r ;� ,
Date of Visit: �T„=1 Arrival Time: D� Departure Time: County: ,)P(_XAJ Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name;
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: (3 M 06 t? G— Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Certification Number: -2_?4Q%
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Swine IIICapacity
WeanHtoFinEish
Design Current
Pop.
Design
Wet Poultry Capacity
Layer
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pap.
DairyCow
Wean
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder
Z D 0
Design
Dr l;oultr, Ca aci
Layers
Current
P.o
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Soars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
keys
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 Ezf blo ❑ 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
❑ No
`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes
[%
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

jFaciHty Number: jDate of Inspection: �.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage 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 ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LA ae4J j LA il,6-6 MZi LA Cj:s2 033
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 environmen
'tl threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes rNo ❑ 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 or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes Q
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes ERio
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[] Yes E2Koo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes Ld o3
[] NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
To
❑ 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
22. Did facility fail install Yes
❑ Sludge Survey
NA NE
the to and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
C]/
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[/]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciti Number: [Date of Ins ection:
f
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [:]Yes YNo
NA ❑ NE
25. is'the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes O/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ 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
EJ/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
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
No
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[]
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[] Yes
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 necessa, ).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: l9102 _ 3
Date: 3.4 3
21412011

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: / 5s Departure Time: County: L!N Region:
Farm Name: Ly/vN 1 (=-w rA(z (v-�. Owner Email: /�
�! - -- - - 914- 59o9--4S N
Owner Name: Lt�V/ti/ J . j w Phone: 910— 5gQ — 9 3 /0 (w�
Mailing Address:y I HOC=LeNDToL,.�,/V i[ 3 S t4L6m 43L2C NC 92395
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: (Q R eey' 1 "ma
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Design Current
C►attle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder'I
INon-Layer I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
dO
Design G•urrent
Dr, P,nultr. Ca acit Pao
Layers
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I
113eef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
]�
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
I XI No
T�
❑ NA
❑ 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 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate 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
T�
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: T EIC.iC RCA
aC}D
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
n
Observed Freeboard (in): pi 1 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
TT��
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 DWQ
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? P] 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 It No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 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): e.v}4eA l S1& co(La(opycVAC�
13. Soil Type(s): _Cacs_QSG +fin /y(3 --Cy_e
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 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
Required 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.
OWUP ❑Checklists [3 Design 0 Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
O Waste Application [D Weekly Freeboard ['] Waste Analysis Q Soil Analysis Q Waste Transfers Q Weather Code
[] Rainfall [:]Stocking Q Crop Yield [] 120 Minute Inspections O 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 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: --j j - S Date of Inspection: -'�,/7 /
I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25, Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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?
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 the 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
1Qj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
12�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
[] NA
❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes J4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes N1No ❑ 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).
CT/O/Y A
Sc�tx;C�,0 11�1 6AGI� l./�C:ooN ► s % QorA OgT�� �CnrE �1�
S i TES AQ 1 i ATIO14 70 A61 7-47-6- SDK Td GF-C )ME c�.tPG�AN i
F 6t,o►� r A R- 3� Nw� > �Q`s o F i � 1 C c�a V-�
R• w�D 6!As �C)1C ACT/
�a�-oS
U ."PS 1.3
S
GqCC
n j b��
��� J4 �r"f'�-S 7 G��� 3 r
Qa4N$ �C- �- %>� P P ��yv T�ICTc f� CQl�tC� C2A F•r t"31
N w lnAi�IceR , L W1u kAO-� Fa�6�1
To C CT ►a (4� at C 4 t L LA (t r= i O)vG T/ �� �` o � nA�s w�c ri t` 3)1y %!a
Fb(� 141CN14 f-�C �
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412011

0%%,jCo srg,.r
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
YZ
REGION 4
ATLANTA FEDERAL CENTER
61 FORSYTH STREET
r'< naosti°
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303.8960
NOV 2 9 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL 70101060000217045844
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED �.
Mr. Lynn Tew
PO Box 796
Salemburg, North Carolina 28385
Re: Letter of Concern
Lynn Tew Farms
Animal Waste State Permit No. AWS310522
Dear Mr. Tew:
On October 4, 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 4 and the North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources performed a Compliance Evaluation Inspection
(CEI) on the Lynn Tew Farms (Facility). The results of the EPA's CEI are summarized in the enclosed
report. The EPA's participation in this inspection was to evaluate the Facility's compliance with the
requirements of Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1342, the regulations promulgated
thereunder at 40 Code of Federal'Regulations Part 122.23.
During the CEI, several operation and maintenance issues were noted and are described more
thoroughly in the enclosed report. To summarize, the banks of the lagoons at the Facility were not well -
maintained as there was overgrowth of large weeds and Lagoon l was above the minimum freeboard.
Additionally, the land application fields were overgrown and were overtaken by grasses other than
Bermuda hay which is out of compliance with the Facility's waste utilization plan. Furthermore, the
mortality rendering boxes on site were cracked and missing lids.
Within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter, please address the concerns listed above and enclosed in
the CEI. Specifically, please provide photographs of the maintained lagoons, a photograph of the
operational rendering boxes, and a written plan which includes crops to be planted, planting dates, and
waste application rates for each field. Information may be sent by mail to the address listed in the
letterhead above and addressed to Ms. Becky Fauver, or by email to [e-mail].
Enclosed are two(2) documents, the U.S. EPA Small Business Resources -Information Sheet and the
Clean East Management Plans, to assist you in understanding the compliance assistance resources and
tools available to you.
Internet Addrass (YRL) • http://www.spa.gov
Recycled/Recyclable . Printed with Vegetable 00 Based Inks on RecyGed Paper (Mlnimurn 30 % Poslconsumer)

If you have specific questions or need additional information, please contact Ms. Fauver of my staff at
[phone] or by email [e-mail].
epa.l ov.
Sincerely,
Daniel O'Lone, Acting Chief
Stormwater and Residuals Enforcement Section
Clean Water Enforcement Branch
Enclosures:
cc: Ms. Amanda Gaines
Wilmington Office
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Mr. Keith Larick
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources

United States Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
Water Compliance Inspection report
Section A: National Data System Coding i.e. PCS
Transaction Code NPDES yr/moiday Inspection Type Inspector Fac Type
N 2011110/4 = J 3
Remarks
Inspection Work Days Facility Self -Monitoring Evaluation Rating Bl CA - --------------------------- Reserved ----- -•--------------- ----
Section B: Facility Data
Name and Location of Facility Inspected
Entry Time/Date
Permit Effective Date
Lynn Tew Farms
Road
1225 FusHill, N
Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458
10/04/2011 2:00 em
October 1 2009
Exit Time/Date
Permit Expiration Date
p
10/04/2011 3:30 prn
September 30, 2014
Name(s) of On -Site Representative(s)ITitle(s)IPhone and Fax Number(s)
Other Facility Data (e.g., SIC NAICS, and other
descriptive information)
none
NC DNER Representative:
Amanda Gaines
Name, Address of Responsible Official/Title/Phone and Fax Number
Lyynn Tew
103 Lake Drive
Clinton„ North Carolina 28328
Ph. 910-590-9312
Section C: Areas Evaluated During Inspection fChack only those areas evaluated
X
Permit
Self -Monitoring Program
Pretreatment MS4
X
Records/Reports
Compliance Schedules
Pollution Prevention
X
Facility Site Review
Laboratory
Storm Water
X
Effluent/Receiving Waters
Operations & Maintenance
Combined Sewer Overflow
Flow Measurement
Sludge Handling/Disposal
Sanitary Sewer Overflow
Section D: Summary of Findings/Comments
Attach additional sheets of narrative and checklists, including Single Event Violation codes, as necessatyj
SEV Codes SEV Description
99999
99999
99999.
99999
Name(s) and Signature(s) of Inspectar(s)
Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Date
Rebecca Fauver
U.S. EPA Rcgion 4
Clean Water Enforcement Branch
[phone]Ofliec
[phone] Fax
Z
i ,
Signature of Managemenr 0 A Reviewer
Agency/Office/Phone and Fax Numbers
Date
Daniel O'Lone, Acting Chief
f
U.S. EPA Region 4
Clean Water Enl'oreement Branch
Storm Water and Residuals Section'
[phone] Office
[phone] Fax
/
EPA Form 3560-3 (Rev 1.06) Previous editions are obsolete.

NPDES CAF4 Water Compliance Inspection Report
Date: 10/04/2011 Entry Time: 2:00 pm
Weather Conditions: Clear
State Inspector: Amanda Gaines
1. FACILITY
Facility Name Lynn Tew Farms
Latitude/Longitude N 34.97829 W 77.78020
Type of Operation Feeder to Finish Swine
Number of Animals 1,200
Number of Animals in Confinement 1,200 0 45 days or more
Animals have direct contact with Waters 0 no ❑ yes, explain
Nearest Waters ❑ 303(d) listed
Unnamed Tributary to Rockfish Creek
25-year, 24 hour rainfall amount for this location
7.5 Inches, according to nutrient management plan
Description of Facility
On the south side of the street, there are two houses that are torn down and will be renovated.
There is an operating lagoon (lagoon 3) located near the inoperable houses but it is not receiving
waste presently. There are two operating houses on the north side of the street with two lagoons,
one in front of the houses (lagoon 2) and one behind (lagoon 1).
The facility has fields that are supposed to be planted with Bermuda hay, however, they have not
been maintained and are overgrown with weeds.
Figure 1. Aerial map of facility with approximate facility boundaries outlined in red and lagoon
locations identified.
2

^"U4.n 2 1 l
JN
115
Figure 2. Topographic map of facility with approximate boundaries outlined in red and lagoon
locations identified.
7Datelssued
mber AWS310522 ❑ individual 0 general (State)
❑ co available on site
October 1, 2009
Expiration Date September 30, 2014
Number of Animals the Facility is permitted for 2400
Compliance Schedule 0 no ❑ yes, provide a brief description
Facility has NMP 0 yes ❑ copy available on site
0 copy maintained by consultant
❑ no ❑ the Facility has a nutrient budget
❑ the Facility has an environmental management plan
Includes Maps of Production and Land Application Areas 0 yes ❑ no
RECORD14. KEEPING
Inspections of Waste Storage System ❑ yes 0 'no ❑ some, explain
Liquid Systems, Freeboard Records 0 yes ❑ no . ❑ some, explain
❑ not a liquid system
Inspection of Storm Water Controls ❑ yes 0 no ❑ some, explain
Rainfall 0 yes ❑ no ❑ some, explain
t1
J

Records of Manure Transferred Off Site
❑
yes
0 no
❑
some, explain
Records of Land Application of Manure
0
yes
❑ no
❑
some, explain
Maintenance Records
0
Spray
yes
❑ no ❑ some, explain
un calibrated in December 2010.
Annual Reports
❑
yes
❑ no
0
NIA
Emergency Response Plan
❑
yes
❑ no
0
Did not review
Soil Sample(s) 0 yes ❑ no ❑ some, explain
10/15/2010; 7/22/2009
Manure Samples 0 yes ❑ no ❑ some, explain
8/29/2011; 2/4/2011
Manure Storage Structure(s)
❑ holding pond
0 lagoon
❑ concrete structure
❑ under house structure
❑ manure pack house
❑ manure lot
❑ composting
❑ other
Description of Storage Structures
❑ clay lined
❑ aerobic digestion
O.clay lined
❑ concrete slab
❑ synthetic lining
0 anaerobic digestion
❑ synthetic lining
❑ tarp/cover
The two operating houses flush waste into lagoon 1, behind the houses. The waste is then pumped
into lagoon 2 by a lift station located near lagoon 1 (See Figure 7). Lagoon 2 requires a heavy
rainfall freeboard of 26.5 inches. Lagoons 1 and 3 are required to maintain 19 inches of freeboard.
Designed to NRCS or State Required Standards 0 yes
❑ no
❑ do not know
Visual Inspection of Structure
Structure(s) appears to be maintained to state standards ❑ yes 0 no ❑ concerns, explain
Structure(s) appears to be stable 0 yes ❑ no 0 concerns:
banks of lagoons 1 and 3 are stable,
but vegetation is overgrown.
Rain gauge installed and maintained ❑ yes ❑ no 0 did not see rain
gauge
4

lei, f;
Ov

5:0.
*161
tow
41
"0 !Pl sh,

All photos included in this report were taken by EPA representatives during the inspection.
MANURE7. •
OF
Manure Transferred Off Site ❑ yes
0 no ❑ some, explain
The Facility is following state approved 0 yes
❑ no ❑ some, explain
protocols for transfer of manure
NMP Calculated Application Rates and 0 yes
❑ no
Areas for Application
Manure is Land Applied on Farm 0 yes
❑ no ❑ some, explain
Description of Land Application System
Spray gun applies_ waste at a rate of 205 gallons per
minute. The spray gun was calibrated in
December 2010.
The Facility has Adequate Land Available
0 yes ❑ no
21.52 acres available to land apply see Figure 8
Facility has a schedule for Land Application and is
❑ yes 0 no ❑ some, explain
following the schedule
The facility is not following the crop and spray
schedule. Fields -are overgrown and contain
little Bermuda grass.
Facility has appropriate setbacks and buffers
0 yes ❑ no ❑ some, explain
r •j7
r"V-1
R' JFf••�i�w _
Gt''9
Figure 8. Facility map with spray
4 i�
ocations marked.
0
7

Visual Inspection of Land Application Areas
Field Identification
Crop Growing__BMPs
1 Buffers
Concerns
Field 2, pulls 3-6
Bermuda hay.
Overgrown and being overtaken with
weeds and other grasses.
Field 1
Bermuda hay
Recently cut, but also has been
overtaken with weeds and other
grasses.
Photos of Application Areas
Figure 10. Field 1, more recently cut grass.
►eeds and grasses.
8

Mortality Management According to the NMP
❑ burial
❑ incineration
0 rendering
❑ composting
NMP gives specifies location for mortality management ❑ yes 0 no
NMP specifies management required ❑ yes 0 no
Visual Inspection of Mortality Site
Mortality Management On Site
❑ burial
❑ incineration
0 rendering .
❑ composting
Facility is Managing Mortality According to the NMP ❑ yes ❑ no 0 NIA
Comments
Rendering boxes are located at entrance to the operational houses. One box was turned on its
side and not in use. The other box did not have a lid to cover the mortality (See Figures 11 and
12).
Figure 11. Two rendering bins, one without a lid and the second on its side with cracked bin walls.
E

Figure 1 2. Rendering bin with dead hogs without a lid.
NMP addresses the storage, handling and management of all chemicals ❑ yes 2 no
Chemicals stored on site
❑ fertilizer
❑ herbicides
❑ pesticides
❑ cleaning supplies
❑ fuel
❑ veterinary
❑ other
Method of Disposal of Chemicals
N/A -- did not see any chemical storage on site.
Has the Facility had a Discharge? 0 no
❑ yes
Description of Actions taken
None, no representative was available on site.
Exit Time 3:30 nm
❑ date
❑ reported to the State and/or EPA
❑ description of discharge
❑ sampling, description
ff

Participant Selection
Due to current funding levels for the CLEANEAST
Program, not all eligible applicants to the program
may be selected to receive technical services. A primary
objective of the CLEANEAST Program is to improve
environmental quality in impaired watersheds in the
Eastern United States. Selection of the owner/operator
participants receiving technical services may be
prioritized based on site location with respect to impaired
surface waters and other factors. Every effort will be made
to ensure equitable selection of participants across animal
types, farm sizes, and geographic regions.
Program Confidentiality
Confidentiality of non-public information and findings
for each individual livestock or poultry operation will
be maintained by the assigned TAP and the CLEANEAST
Program administrators. Distribution of the final EA
report, NMP amendment, or new RCMP for an individual
operation to other parties is at the sole discretion and
approval of the owner/operator.
More information
To learn more about the CLEANEAST Program including
the program services, how eligible owners/operators
apply to participate in the program, and the qualifications
of RTI, NCSU, and the TAPS, visit the CLEANEAST Program
web site:
http:liiv--sif;Ck ti_0rs
Program Administration Contacts
Mark Rice
North Carolina State University
E-mail: mark—[e-mail]
Telephone: [phone]
Marion Deerhake
RTllnternational
E-mail: med�urti.org
Telephone: [phone]
3GJ6cupiesorthuspuabc:Ucurndnl::ereprinudctaresrof5i,Q.9,cr5.35per copy.
n� M -aj
m� o
Z Z 99 0 3
La
m
m 5
`° E.
i# i�
EAST
y
MANAGEMENT
PLANS
a
z
n
mC.
^�
a �
C.
Corrlprehensive Livestock
Environmental Assessment and
:Nutrient Managernew Pion
Support for Owners and Operators of
Livestock and Poultry Operations in
the Eastern United States
For addreional in o(motion or m request
an enrollmenr form call L866.a81.1191 (toll fre ej.
7:08—I tA—DYCIKE'_ w08 5I S70

The CLEANEAST Program provides confidential, no -
cost technical support to owners and operators of
beef, dairy, swine, and poultry operations located
in the Eastern United States to help there identify
and implement farm management practices that
protect the environment. Owners/operators who
apply and are selected by the program receive on -site
support services from a qualified Technical Assistance
Professional (TAP).
Program Services
The technical services offered by the CLEANEAST
Program are:
• Environmental Assessment (EA). The TAP conducts
a confidential on -site environmental review of the
owner/operator's livestock or poultry operation and
prepares recommendations that can be implemented
to address any identified environmental issues.
• Existing Nutrient Management Plan (NMP) Review
and Update. The TAP reviews the owner/operator's
existing NMP, then identifies and prepares necessary
NMP documentation to update the plan for the current
livestock or poultry operation.
• New NMP Development. The TAP collects the needed
information and performs the required analyses to
prepare an NMP for implementation at the owner/
operator's livestock or poultry operation.
Program Administration
The CLEANEAST Program is developed and
administered jointly by RTI International (RTI) and
North Carolina State University (NCSU). Funding
support for the program is provided under a
cooperative agreement with the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency. TAPS are independent
subcontractors to RTi with certifications and expertise
specific to the states where they are assigned to work
for the CLEANEAST Program.
Benefits to Program Participants
• Provide owner/operator with an objective, confidential.
review of site operations, identify any environmental
issues and suggest potential remedies.
• Determine if a livestock or poultry operation is
in an impaired watershed and whether manure
management practices can be implemented to
contribute to improving water quality.
• Help owner/operator formulate long-term nutrient
management strategies.
• improve manure management efficiency.
Costs to Program Participants
The services of the TAP are provided at no cost to
the owner/oper ator. The owner/operator fills out an
operation profile for the TAP and meets with the TAP at
the owner/operator's site.
Participant Eligibility
Owners/operators of livestock and poultry operations
located in any of the 27 eastern states shown in the
map below are eligible to apply for technical services
from the CLEANEAST Program.
How the Program Works -
1.Owner/operator applies for program services and is
selected.
2. Qualified TAP is assigned to complete requested
service for livestock or poultry operation.
3. TAP contacts owner/operator and schedules date for
on -site visit.
4. TAP conducts site visit to meet with owner/operator
to collect information about the site, livestock,
poultry and crop operations.
5. TAP uses collected information to perform site -
specific calculations and prepare documentation for
requested service.
6.Owner/operator receives final EA report, NMP
amendment, or new NMP as appropriate for the
requested service.

,f\ llniled Sums
�r Environmental F'rolectinn
/ - Agancy
Ol7ice cif Enforcement and Compliance Assur.tncc; (2201 A)
EPA-300-17-1 1-006 June 2011
The United States Environmental Protection Agency provides an array of resources, including workshops, training
sessions, hotlines, websites and guides, to help small businesses understand and comply with federal and state
environmental laws. In addition to helping small businesses understand their environmental obligations and
improve compliance, these resources will also help such businesses find cost-effective ways to comply through
pollution prevention techniques and innovative technologies.
EPA's Small Business Websites
Small Business Environmental Homepage - www.smalibiz-enviroweb.org
Small Business Gateway - www.epa.gov/smalibusiness
EPA's Small Business Ombudsman - www.epa.gov/sbo or 1-800-368-5888
EPA's Compliance Assistance
Homepage
www,epa,gov/compi iance/assistance/
bt1si11e55.h1n1l
This page is a gateway to industry
and statute -specific environmental
resources. From extensive web -based
information to hotlines and compliance
assistance specialists.
EPM, Compliance Assistance Centers
www.assislancecenlers. net
EPA's Compliance Assistance Centers
provide information targeted to
industries with many small businesses.
They were developed in partnership
with industry, universities and other
Federal and state agencies.
Agriculture
ww w.Cpa.gov/agriculture/
Automotive Recycling
www.ecarcentenorg
Automotive Service and Repair
w%vw.c=-g wnlink org or 1-888-GRN-LINK
Chemical Manufacturing
www.chemalliance.org
Construction
www.cicacenter.org or 1-734-995-491 1
Education
www.campuserc.org
Food Processing
www. ('peac.org
Healthcare
www.herccnter.org
Local Government
www.Igean.org
Metal Finishing
www.nrnfrc.org
Paints and Coatings
www.paintcenter.org
Printed Wiring Board Manufacturing
www.pwbrc.org '
Printing
www.pneac.org
Ports
www.portcomptiance.org
U.S. Border Compliance and
Import/Export Issues
www.bordercenter.org
Hotlines, Helplines and
Clearinghouses
www.epa.gov/epahome/hatline.htm
EPA sponsors many free hotlines and
clearinghouses that provide convenient
assistance regarding environmental
requirements. Some examples are:
Antimicrobial Information Hotline
info-andmicrobial(rvepa.gov or
1-703-308-64 11
Clean Air'Iechnology Center (CX117C)
Info -line
www.epa.govian/catc or 1-919-541-0800
Emergency Planning and Community
Right -To -Know Act
www.epa.gowsuperfund/resources/
infocenter/epera.htm or 1-800-424-934.6
EPA Imported Vehicles and Engines
Public Helpline
www.epa.gov/otaq/imports or
734-214-4100
National Pesticide Information Center
www.npic.orst.edu/ or 1-800-858-7378
National Response Center Hotline -
to report oil and hazardous substance spills
www.nrc.uscg.mil or 1-800-424-8802
Pollution Prevention Information
Clearinghouse (PPIC)
www.epLt.gov/opplititr/ppic or
1-202-566-0799
Safe Drinking Water Ilotline
www.epa.gov/safewater/hotIineJindex.
him[ or 1-800-426-4791
Stratospheric Ozone Protection Hotline
www.epa.gov/ozone or 1-800-296-1996
„� �[ ; � E ��� •Aaf t:�;:<z; ..�� :.A 4! - K.t: atY •¢- .f;:R., p Yie :�� � �88.., n�I••°��t=A".r41.':1f?.��.. !:h.: �:z 'S�.n GI^_`�:�.*
'-"�Y Yi' ""it`
L �'i.�,J.`r¢,`ii� : l•+.'c�0y:4rr+.�C'4 �F# .�ItL4 � GI�11CIlC :31�(���,[)ll�p�3 3RlM Et/� �I lw•Cr i I10EtX: rE1V\V Y,:i'p �w�C(Nlll li`rrTni� �'�.xtr�Yi '!" •�. e *�r1� .-' - :_� :

+
, �i-*' ,Y�_7'rwa7u.uar],„i»
r�4tiRFl t;. `S# n}t},.°�'r� - I .`,i) 6iZPr.,&_3`PiW-l�'�,L
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Hotline
(Self-lit}[e-mail] or 1-202-554-1404
Wetlands Information Helpiine
www.epa.gov/owow/wetIancis/wctline.htinI or 1-800-832-7828
State and Tribal Web -Based Resources
State Resource Locators
www,ciivc,ip.org/statetools
The Locators provide state -specific contacts, regulations and
resources covering the major environmental laws.
State Small Business Environmental Assistance Programs
(SBEAPs)
w%vw.smal I biz-cnviroweb.org
State SBEAPs help stnall businesses and assistance providers
understand environmental requirements and sustainable
business practices through workshops, trainings and site visits.
The website is a central point for sharing resources between
EPA and states.
EPA's Tribal Compliance Assistance Center
www.epa.gov/ti-ibalcoiiipIiaiice/ii)dex.hti-nI
The Center provides material to "Tribes on environmental
stewardship and regulations that might apply to tribal
government operations.
EPA's Tribal Portal
www,epa.gov/tribalportal/
The Portal helps users locate tribal -related information within
EPA and other federal agencies.
CTA.Compliance incentives
EPA provides incentives for environmental'compliance. By
participating in compliance assistance programs or voluntarily
disclosing and promptly correcting violations before an
enforcement action has been initiated, businesses inav be
eligible fbr penalty waivers or reductions, EPA has two such
policies that may apply to small businesses:
I
EPA'Small Business Compl
iance Policy
tvvt'w.epa-guvicomplianceii ncentiveslsmal lbusiness/i ndex.li tml
i I
This Policy offers small businesses special incentives to come
into compliance voluntarily.
EPA's Audit Policy
w�vw.epa-govtcorrtpliance/incentives/atidi ting/auditpolicy,huJJl
ro
The Policy provides incentives to all businesses that
voluntarily discover, promptly disclose and expeditiously
Correct their noncompliance.
Commenting on Federal Enforcement Actions and
Compliance Activities
The Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act
(SBREFA) established a SBREFA Om budsinan and 10 Regional
Fairness Boards to receive comments irom small businesses
about federal agency enforcement actions. If you believe that
you fall within the Small Business Administration's definition
of a small business (based on your North American Industry
Classification System designation, number of employees or
annual receipts, as defined at 13 C.F.R. 121.201; in most cases,
this means a business with 500 or fewer employees), and wish
to comment on federal enforcement and compliance activities,
call the SBREFA Ombudsman's toll -free number at 1-888-
REG-FAIR (1-888-734-3247), or go to their website at www,
sba.gov/ombudsman.
Every small business that is the subject of an enforcement or
compliance action is entitled to comment on thcAgency's actions
without fear of retaliation. EPA employees are prohibited from
using enforcement or any other means of retaliation against any
member of the regulated community in response to comments
made under SBREFA.
Your Duty to Comply
It' you receive corripfiance c :stance or submit a comment
to the SBREFA Ombudsman Regional Fairness Boards,
YOU still have the duty to comply with the law, including
providing timely responses to EPA information requests,
administrative or civil complaints, other enforcement actions
or communications. The assistance information and comment
processes do not give you any new rights or defenses in any
enforcement action. These processes also do not affect EPA's
obligation to protect public health or the environment under any
of the environmental statutes it enforces, including the right to
take emergency remedial or emergency response actions when
appropriate. Those decisions will be based on the facts in each
situation. The SBREFA Ombudsman and fairness Boards do
not participate in resolving EPA's enforcement actions. Also,
remember that to preserve your rights, you need to comply with
all rules governing the enforcement process.
'EN is disseminating this infortttation to you rvithoret tnakhnkq
a determination that your business for or anizatio►t is a small
business as defined by Section 222 of the Small Business
Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act or rebated provisions.
June 2011 2

Date of Visit: 10 J? I =1 Arrival Time: /p° Departure Timer County: Region:
Farm Name: LuurN Te w�'A (I,,A Owner Email:
Owner Name: L I.aNN LA EbZ 1 W Phone: yn16— _W6_ 9T) a e "i
Mailing Address: 1V3 �� C___Ll /V ION 4
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Sack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design Current
Design
Current
Swine
C►apacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
Capacity
Pap.
Wean to Finish
Layer Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
I)r, Poultr,. Ca aci P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
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?
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 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[]NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continuer)

[Facility -Number: - Date of Inspection:
JJ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
T❑�
❑ 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
nn R gCQbS
Identifier: QRCK d% J f�r9D
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 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
No
9
❑ 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
1XNo
❑ 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 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 ❑ 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
[:]No
❑ NA
NE
9NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA'0
NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
M(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 1� NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 12�NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

acilit Number: - Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
aNE
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
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
❑ 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
No
T❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comrrients: '. .;9..'
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)..»:.
J�fnrwoo GowaS ONSiTE is FrND c mu_s 1r)TED 3L� AccLovom,y7- 95 yAurxl r
TI+F �na57 6EG�mtai�l� cou�GZAFC. CSNs �rE 4r R-E f ir-7 1paO A
Moo�t_E , 1!it_sc� ONS/TE� S6HN CruC�t`�E fl�u� So��4wATE.�.
i +E IE�flS �-/AvF 577A_L )uo%ge6WC"7 45 OwnlE2 5iglb ,1 HE!:� woc�L4) Qi
pL,e ;ca FIEL-DS GUIVC LXNct�Li 17wAS Z)IW(:JC(A.T 10 pE-fCaMIX& LA301CH
��5 -TOE 0\03 CU(F_RG . SHL5w CouCn DCTC-R 01.A1 WEB
L„k7-
(,L t.-4 * `IQ of q>L LL to .
LA_�+ ILC- (3,vs / TC, T 071C-;.D THAT -7 HERE wAS A gAtk� D�ccan.�c�l r_
NaG !N TNF_9Er1Z> gOX La17H DEAD 1-14C,S (.tJuDi~I�Ju�fa71-1 7i#Ar wERE��oTAS
al,A. NeeDTc)�LrcfAJ cI Q pr,—WE(?- T14AT pGAb AAI(MALi 146LE 70 QE Dtg0a5ED CF
�o y �Rg. #AF7aEfZ AN CMAIc GxGNAnlFiC w)C"6E Z �AWli�E HE. i-)E ioD BOA
�LI) G 00y­ I N 7'0 1 1,
IS SN aEb w� SpnnC OT HER pAdtmS SHE. SAit SHC
H E_CKI x! F ON THIS 14i�-M 110 m AxE s c+Gt c �4�oox� S %r E,� �pS
ra n.E f� E LNG naAw�ltti ED p�'� ���
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Mr. Lynn Tew
PO Box 796
Salemburg, NC 28385
August 1, 2011
Dear Mr. Tew,
On Wednesday, July 27, 1 made a follow up visit to your swine farm
located on Fussell Rd., near Wallace, facility 31-522, at your request, to reassess
the stands of bermudagrass on the sprayfields. While I did note that stands were
better than I had observed in June, the coverage of bermudagrass overall was
not more than one-third of the acreage. I would note, however, that on the ridge
behind the red barn, coverage was around 90% or better, and this area should
not require any renovation, if you choose to keep bermudagrass as the receiving
crop. All the lower fields, however, I feel would need to have sward destruction
and renovation to get the vaseygrass infestation under control.
Given the lateness in the season, and the hot dry conditions, I would not
recommend attempting to renovate at this juncture, but rather try to adjust PAN
rates to suit the vegetation present, provided that grass is harvested and
removed. I would estimate that the combination of vaseygrass and crabgrass that
is present would produce around two tons per acre of dry matter yield between
now (Aug. 1) and mid October, when lower night temperatures would reduce the
growth rates of the grasses. Using typical N rates for forage grasses, therefore, I
would expect the fields dominated by crabgrass and vaseygrass to be able to
remove around 100 lb/acre PAN during this time period. The irrigation pulls
behind the red barn which had good stands of bermudagrass could continue to
receive the normal rates given in the WUP. I don't have a farm map, and do not
know which pulls this would include, and therefore you would need to resolve
that with your technical specialist and Ms. Gaines of NCDENR-DWQ.
This recommendation is intended as an interim option for this summer
only, until the winter annual can be established. The poorer fields should have a
normal receiving crop, either bermudagrass or some other crop, established next
winter or spring. I know these are challenging times, Mr. Tew, and I hope these
recommendations will assist you in managing through them. If I can answer any
questions, please call.
Sincerely yours,
Tim Hall
Regional Agronomist
NCDA&CS
[phone]

3I-sad
Steven W. Troxler North Carolina Department of Agriculture
Commissioner and Consumer Services
Agronomic Division
Amanda Gaines
NCDENR-DWQ
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
July 25, 2011
Dr. Colleen Hudak -Wise
Director
�f
JUL 2 6 � I�
J
Dear Amanda,
Here is a summary of my opinions of the crop management issues on the Duplin County
swine- operations we visited on June 14 of this year.
Schmalbach Farm (31-26), Warsaw NC. The bermudagrass was under competitive stress
from annual ryegrass, which, presumably, had been oversown as the winter annual receiving
crop in the rotation. The ryegrass was fully headed and senescent, and in many areas badly
lodged, making it problematic to'cleanly harvest, and also potentially shedding much seed that
may germinate in the fall. There was bermudagrass in many places beneath this cover, but it
was apparent that the stand was being adversely affected by the competition. In some of the
most badly lodged spots, there did not appear to be any recoverable stand of bermudagrass
remaining, but the assessment was difficult due to the cover. Only after this material is removed
would we be able to more clearly determine what areas needed to have the bermudagrass-
reestablished.
recommended the immediate harvest of the winter annual cover and frequent harvesting of the
bermudagrass over the course of the summer to allow the stand to thicken and recover.
Harvesting at four week intervals would be essential to promote stolon growth and thickening of
the stand, and would also help manage the inevitable flush of competitive summer annual
grasses such as crabgrass and goosegrass. The use of metsulfuron (Ally, Cimmarron) herbicide
would have helped suppress the ryegrass after the initial harvest in April, but in this case it was
not clear that any harvest had yet been made. I advise against using ryegrass to overseed
sprayfields and against waiting so far into the growing season to remove the winter crop. The
combination of those practices has the potential to destroy entire stands of bermudagrass.
Nethercutt Farm (31-82), Beulaville, NC. This farm had sprayfields with moderate to good
stands of bermudagrass, but some issues with wetness especially on the field just below the
4040 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1040
[phone] 0 Fax [phone]
TTY:1-800-735-2962 Voice:1-877-735-8200
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

facility. The soil had the potential to drain well, texturally, but there were uneven surface
conditions and no real ditching to allow subsurface outflow. Subsequently, and not
unexpectedly, the bermudagrass in the wetter areas appeared to be predominantly common
bermudagrass; I would not expect hybrids to be able to withstand the wet conditions during the
winters on that landscape position, when the water table could be quite high for prolonged
periods. The solution of course would be ditching along the field perimeters but that could lead
to reduced wettable acreage due to setback requirements, and there must also be adequate
slope to move the water offsite. The more practical answer is probably to evaluate the
application rates and adjust if needed to the lower common bermudagrass rates. The back field,
the largest field, appeared to have adequate hybrid bermudagrass surviving.
[ Lynn Tew Farm (31-522) near Wallace,, NC? We walked the sprayfields here and determined
there was little if any surviving bermudagrass in the fields designated as bermudagrass. There
was an adequate stand of tall fescue in one field that could be salvaged and restored. For the
bermudagrass fields, I advised against attempting to reestablish bermudagrass during the heat
and drought conditions; the preferred time to resprig would be late.winter_.around March 1: 1
suggested an interim summer crop and we discussed using either soybeans or millet. If the
facility that had been demolished was not rebuilt right away, an evaluation- could be made by the
technical specialist as to whether bermudagrass was resown at all, or whether annual crops
were rotated on the land instead.
If you have any further questions, Amanda, please call and I can clarify the remedial
recommendations.
Sin( rely,
Alt
Tim Hall
Regional Agronomist
NCDA&CS
910-324-9924

Gaines, Amanda
From: Hall, Tim
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 7:37 AM
To: [e-mail]
Cc: [e-mail]; Gaines, Amanda
Subject: Clarifying Lynn Tew recommendations
Greer,
On Tuesday June 14, Amanda Gaines asked me to accompany her to the Lynn Tew farm near Wallace to assess the
Bermuda stands on the sprayfields. We walked the fields and found very little bermudagrass surviving. The predominant
cover was senescent annual ryegrass which would not take up any N, and a mixture of annual and perennial weeds
including trumpet vine, curly dock, some panicum, horsenettle, etc. I don't think anyone could argue that this is an
adequate receiving crop. Weeds do remove some N, in adequate stand, but what is the end use for them?
My immediate thought was to kill those fields with herbicide and plant no -till soybeans to get a receiving crop in the
ground. If that isn't practical, (and I would not want to sow soybeans after the fourth of July since yields will not be
economical), pearl millet is an option. Millet can be sown anytime during the summer, though as you wait later the yield
and N rate should be adjusted downward. Additionally, with late planted crops, you will need to take measures to manage
against armyworm outbreaks which could wipe out young seedlings. He is allowed to pump thirty days ahead of planting
the crop. it didn't look to me like he needed to pump, but I wouldn't want to wait for rainfall to catch up without a crop to
pump on. Additionally, he did have some fescue in adequate stand which needed harvesting badly, but appeared N
starved and could utilize low levels of N immediately, if necessary. I would hold summer PAN to around 20 to 25
Ibslaclmonth from May through August on fescue, and would not apply any at all unless necessary.
I am sorry for Lynn and know he is going through a rough period in his personal life, but 1 was asked for a professional
opinion and provided one. I think everyone has done what they can to give him the leeway to correct the problems prior to
harsher action. I think you would also agree that a farm in that condition doesn't reflect well on the many producers who
manage their farms well. i know this takes time and money to establish a crop, but I don't know any free or low cost option
here.
Tim
My address has changed, the new address is [e-mail]. Please update your records!
Tim Hall
Regional Agronomist
NCDA & CS
[phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.

Gaines, Amanda
From:
[e-mail]
Sent:
Friday, July 29, 2011 10:49 AM
To:
Gaines, Amanda; [e-mail]
Cc:
Hall, Tim; College, John; Stehman, Charles
Subject:
RE: Lynn Tew Follow-up
Amanda, I do know that Lynn's long term plan is to transition into a WA/SA rotation,
starting this fall with a WA. I've had a plan written for some time now in case Lynn ever
decided to take this route. Also, speaking with Lynn this a:m, he is plannning to start
cutting and baling all fields. Thank you for keeping me updated and we will certainly keep
you guys updated as well!
------- Original Message -------
From : Gaines, Amandafmailto:amanda.gainesoncdenr.gov1
Sent : 7/29/2011 10:17:02 AM
To : rockinmfarms(@intrstar.net
Cc : tim.hall(@ncagr.gov; [e-mail]; charles.stehman(lncdenr_gov
Subject : RE: Lynn Tew Follow-up
Greer, You asked me to keep you updated. As discussed at the June 23, 2011 I had with you
and Lynn Tew, I went back on July 28th as a follow-up to check the progress of the fields. I
invited John College with Soil and Water to join me so he could maybe help Lynn with any
technical assistance. You called and let us know that you would be unable to attend on the
28th, Lynn did not attend the meeting either. I did speak with Lynn after the meeting and he
said he got hung up at work and did not have my cell number. Prior to my inspection, I spoke
with Lynn and he said that after cutting down the weeds that he saw a lot of Bermuda in the
fields. I did ask that he not pump on the fields until he had a reevaluation of the fields by
an agronomist. I spoke with Tim Hall on July 27, 2011. He said he had been back out to the
farm that day. He noted that there was one section that had 90% Bermuda coverage on a ridge
by the red barn. He also stated that most of the rest of the farm was 20% or less in Bermuda
coverage - that is quoting from a phone conversation, I have not received anything in writing
yet. He was checking to see if I would accept a temporary plan to allow pumping at a reduced
PAN rate on the crabgrass and another non -Bermuda grass on the farm. I told him I would like
to go to the farm and meet with Lynn to discuss his long term plan before agreeing. As I
said, Lynn did not attend our scheduled meeting. However, I called Tim the afternoon of July
28th and told him that I would accept a temporary plan. I did speak with Lynn on the phone
prior to leaving the farm. I asked about the cutting of the fields because the crabgrass was
tall and seeding out. He stated that he had bush -hogged the fields two weeks ago. He also
stated that he had someone that was going to come in and spray or put cows on the fields to
clean them up. I asked when that was scheduled to occur. He stated that it was scheduled for
next week. I told Lynn that I would drive by in two weeks to check the progress. I may at
that time bring John College with me again, I have not decided as of yet. I told Lynn that he
did not need to be there in two weeks, unless he just wanted to be, I will call him after I
look at the farm. If he has someone spray for the weeds rather have cows clean up the fields,
he cannot use the plan with the reduced PAN rate because he will be killing the crabgrass and
other non -Bermuda grasses.
Therefore, if he sprays for weeds, he can only pump on the fields where Tim gives him 70% or
better coverage with Bermuda until he plants a cover crop. I will defer to Tim Hall on the
specifics, but if he chooses to stay with a Bermuda plan rather than a summer/winter annual,
I think he will have to seed or sprig new Bermuda on most of the fields in the spring. I
really need a long term plan from Lynn that covers what he plans to do with the fields to get
1

them back into a condition that is acceptable for irrigating waste. I will mail a copy of
this email as well as his copy of the inspection report for the 28th to Lynn.
I will mail you a copy of the 28th inspection report for your records. I will continue to
keep you informed since you are the Technical Specialist keeping Lynn Tew's records. Amanda
GainesEnvironmental SpecialistNCDENR-DWQWilmington Regional Office127 Cardinal Drive
ExtensionWilmington, NC 28405910-796-7327
(office)910-617-8823 (cell)910-350-2004 (fax) NOTICE: Email correspondence to and from this
address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.
z

M
Gaines, Amanda
From:
Gaines, Amanda
Sent:
Friday, July 29, 2011 10:17 AM
To:
'[e-mail]'
Cc:
'Hall, Tim'; '[e-mail]; Stehman, Charles
Subject:
Lynn Tew Fallow -up
Greer,
You asked me to keep you updated. As discussed at the June 23, 20111 had with you and Lynn Tew, I went back on July
28'h as a follow-up to check the progress of the fields. I invited John College with Soil and Water to join me so he could
maybe help Lynn with any technical assistance. You called and let us know that you would be unable to attend on the
28th, Lynn did not attend the meeting either. I did speak with Lynn after the meeting and he said he got hung up at work
and did not have my cell number.
Prior to my inspection, I spoke with Lynn and he said that after cutting down the weeds that he saw a lot of Bermuda in
the fields. I did ask that he not pump on the fields until he had a reevaluation of the fields by an agronomist. I spoke with
Tim Hall on July 27, 2011. He said he had been back out to the farm that day. He noted that there was one section that
had 90% Bermuda coverage on a ridge by the red barn. He also stated that most of the rest of the farm was 20% or less
in Bermuda coverage — that is quoting from a phone conversation, I have not received anything in writing yet. He was
checking to see if I would accept a temporary plan to allow pumping at a reduced PAN rate on the crabgrass and another
non -Bermuda grass on the farm. I told him I would like to go to the farm and meet with Lynn to discuss his long term
plan before agreeing.
As I said, Lynn did not attend our scheduled meeting. However, I called Tim the afternoon of July 281h and told him that I
would accept a temporary plan. I did speak with Lynn on the phone prior to leaving the farm. I asked about the cutting
of the fields because the crabgrass was tall and seeding out. He stated that he had bush -hogged the fields two weeks
ago. He also stated that he had someone that was going to come in and spray or put cows on the fields to clean them
up. I asked when that was scheduled to occur. He stated that it was scheduled for next week. I told Lynn that I would
drive by in two weeks to check the progress. I may at that time bring John College with me again, I have not decided as
of yet. I told Lynn that he did not need to be there in two weeks, unless he just wanted to be, I will call him after I look at
the farm.
If he has someone spray for the weeds rather have cows clean up the fields, he cannot use the plan with the reduced
PAN rate because he will be killing the crabgrass and other non -Bermuda grasses. Therefore, if he sprays for weeds, he
can only pump on the fields where Tim gives him 70% or better coverage with Bermuda until he plants a cover crop. I
will defer to Tim Hall on the specifics, but if he chooses to stay with a Bermuda plan rather than a summer/winter
annual, I think he will have to seed or sprig new Bermuda on most of the fields in the spring. I really need a long term
plan from Lynn that covers what he plans to do with the fields to get them back into a condition that is acceptable for
irrigating waste.
I will mail a copy of this email as well as his copy of the inspection report for the 28th to Lynn. I will mail you a copy of the
28`h inspection report for your records. I will
I continue to keep you informed since you are the Technical Specialist
keeping Lynn Tew's records.
Amanda Gaines
Environmental Specialist
NCDENR-DWQ
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405

910-796-7327 (office)
910-617-8823 (cell)
910-350-2004 (fax)
NOTICE: Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third
parties.

-� I -S DD,
Gaines, Amanda
From:
[e-mail]
Sent:
Friday, July 08, 2011 2:26 PM
To:
Gaines, Amanda
Subject:
RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
thanks girl, i will, hope weather is nice P
------- Original Message -------
From : Gaines, Amanda[mailto:[e-mail]]
Sent : 7/8/2011 8:22:06 AM
To : [e-mail]
Cc
Subject RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
Thanks Greer. I agree. I would prefer the summer/winter annual over trying to get that
Bermuda back, but I cannot dictate that to him. Hopefully, whatever he decides, he keeps up
with management.
Have a great time at the beach. Sip a beverage by the water for me. :)
Talk to you soon.
Amanda
-----Original Message -----
From: [e-mail] [ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent: Thursday, July 07, 2011 16:19 PM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
Hey Amanda, just gettin chance to get back with you .....................
i really wish he would go ahead with a summer/winter annual, he would get right much more
PAN. This area has gotten enough rain now, so i know the ground could.handle it. looks to me
it would be a cheaper way out in the long run, rather than trying to micro manage getting the
bermuda to spread, and if he is allowed to go the bermuda route, sure wouldn't overseed to
heavy, and needs to be ready to get small grain off just as soon as time allows, or keep it
grazed close. The kids and i are leaving for the beach on Sunday, but I'm coming home on Wed.
for some training I've got to be in on Thurs and Fri., i told Lynn to let me know if he meets
Tim or another agronimist out at the farm so that i can be sure me and you get copies. He
got Tim's # from me, so i think he is going to try to get Tim to meet with him on the farm
next week. We'll keep in touch! Thanks so much! Greer
------- Original Message -------
From Gaines, Amanda[ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent 7/7/2011 11:53:27 AM
To [e-mail]
Cc
Subject RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
I had a very nice relaxing holiday. It must be nice to spend a little one on one time Elam
since the girls are away.
1

I agree I would like to see Lynn have his lagoons lower coming into hurricane season.
However, if he isn't going to plant a crop this summer, as discussed, he cannot pump unless
it is a 30 day pre -plant event. If he thinks he has enough Bermuda out there to pump on, he
needs to get Tim Hall or another agronomist to reevaluate the fields now that they are bush
hogged. If the fields are reevaluated, please send me a copy of the report for the files.
Let me know if anything changes with the fields and I'll let you know when I will conduct my
follow-up this month.
Thanks,
Amanda
-----Original Message -----
From: [e-mail] [ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 4:14 PM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
hey, yes we had a nice 4th, hope you did? we took elam to see Cars 2, the girls are at camp
all week,
miss them, but kinda gettin a
break! OK, good I'm glad Lynn called you, his lagoons are still not werhe they need to be
for this time
of year, in order to prepare for
hurricane season, and i will keep reminding him of this. He really needs to be drying up the
lagoon
where there are no hog houses, and
then start getting the other one on down - know what i mean? I will keep emphasizing this to
him!!
Take Care,
Greer
------- original Message -------
From : Gaines, Amanda[ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent : 7/6/2011 11:09:32 AM
To : [e-mail]
Cc
Subject RE: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
Greer,
Thanks for the update. Lynn did call on 6/24/11 and let me know about the transfer. I've been
busy with
another matter and out of the
office so I have not called him yet to let him know that Charlie agreed to what we had
discussed as a
plan for the fields. I will go out
towards the end of this month and to check on the condition of the lagoons and the fields. I
will call
Lynn today or tomorrow and let him
know.
Hope you had a great 4th.
2

Thanks,
Amanda
Amanda Gaines
Environmental Specialist
NCDENR-DWQ
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7327 (office)
910-617-8823 (cell)
910-350-2004 (fax)
NOTICE: Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to
third parties.
-----Original Message -----
From: [e-mail] [ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 11:04 AM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: FW: Lynn Tew (Ouplin)
Sorry u recieved this email twice, my send key wants to stick sometimes.
thanks again,
greer
------- Original Message -------
From : [e-mail][ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent : 7/6/2011 11:02:43 AM
To : [e-mail]
Cc
Subject FW: Lynn Tew (Duplin)
Amanda, just letting you know, in case Lynn hasn't, that the farm did get bush -hogged last
week and I t
went by to take a look at the
grass
conditions. I told Lynn that now would be the ideal time to go ahead and put cows on farm to
keep
grasses grazed down, also needs to go
ahead and spray pastures and lime, therefore have fields ready to get a WA planted. Lynn
wanted me to go
by and take a look at a large
patch of Bermuda, behind the house. Yes, there is a large patch of Bermuda (common, i
think?). Also,
not sure what back lagoon level is
currently, has he contacted you about the transfer?
Thanks,
3

Type of Visit: 901compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint XHollow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: j ! Arrival Time: J® Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: iJLAN/v TG LA _�j Pry �NL Owner Email:
Owner Name: -y N /Y C Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator. -
Back-up Operator:
Location of farm:
Title: Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Swine apacitYA
Wean to Finish
Design C►urrent
et Poultry Capacity Pop.
ILayer I
Design
Cattle C►apacity
Dairy Cow
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
I
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Design Current
l) , P.oultr: Ga acity P6o
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Nan -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other"Turkey
Other
Turke s
Poults
I I 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?
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 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 N.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
ElYes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] NA ❑ NE
[� NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

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
Struc lz 1_ j� Structure�T`Struc tA � tructure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: i�LISF}C n 1 ' )
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): e
Observed Freeboard (in):� �3
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [X 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 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes to 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 M No 0 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
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 ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ Nc
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA kNE
E
NA
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
21412011 Continued

F eili umber: jDate of Inspection;FEW
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ 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? 0
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes W 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 0 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 [:]No
❑ NA
ly"r: NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes V
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
t] Yes [:]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).
ilmaNcA C Awe m 1AALL, AC, RCW0m/sT &1CDR) a NS 1r€ i o G u P LCA A TE
IELb3
'r
y. LAc�oN ONCE 3Huc�Ln & KIEV) C 901
1 -) fic MG'4S(Ac1.EA F�EEr�oActo t�A 15 , TN�a�
WAS 14 LEAK IN ONE C3F T4E FR-E M wP7E9 PIES !N t3uit-.f lwe -A waRicE(Z
WAS w�► �tAt6 Ta F: X. Si-IpL,L� > (3E FMLrz TcU 1 RpIVSFEft A LITTLE lU &Qooni�
1,5. -rI rin HA L -t s w%t_t_ R3 C S E )1 T i c� M a . Trz w
-- 1 trn la�t_L S�ATE{S T Hr�-i THE2r� wAS 1J� ukSEAi3�E Cfta(� CH 1 NC FiCI-DS
wtiH 11-1 �cLEP7IoN aP 43Nr. TfV14(-t_ Ca(i:.)V&R_ 0 F FESCUE TO 4T CQLAt_n QE
SpLUA (C--n
33. mR. ►Ew u"Rs 1-407IFICLC-F slTc VISIT vIA GqLEER MC>QQF�TEc)4,u/cASeEC/o Ml
(r g. 16w O�L A 2C--9aG_5'6N7ATI UE wE(LE A)G7 P(tE.s E��, -TH%5 R;Lr pod L -4
_'T1 rn NALC5 9_9_ pOLT w1 LIL Ge fY)AILE6
3y QQp(S(LGSS WILL Vt%C�4e'CIcC TH15 SctAAM6tsWQ
Il,4jll
sgo"V" M9I 1Ety dr wCwiLL 63vr mEF_71,%)C R1 7IiE 5:142M c0I93jll 'f0t"Sct&SS
>NAT NEEDS T0 PE DaNC .iwILL tiEu UI`R -[+115 R.e�XR7 A 1 THAT I L tAe.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q 1C�����
Date: W��'� !
21412011

Type of Visit: 9kcompliance inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint xFollow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: L[ Arrival Time: Departure Time: ® County:
Farm Name: r� uk:5 Owner Email:
l
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current Design Current
Design
Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish Layer
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,oult . Ca aei l;o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La;ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Other
4urkeyPoultsOtther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ 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 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)
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 �Vo
❑ Yes tANo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

]Fnili 'Number: 31 - S Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? lAYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 � Structurt�Struc�D\ Structure 4
�onL ' )
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
�N.
❑ 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
CNo
❑ 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
I No
T
❑ 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
❑ 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
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
[I No
M NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Ayes
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA]
NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
(g] NE
T
Required 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
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [] Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
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 0 NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 1] NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �Q'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 ❑ No ❑ 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? 9�
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. -0
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, Freeboard problems, over -application)
T�
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Yes
[]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).
. SAC Li9 hoc 1 S @c 13 DES cGnl�� 1-- ELF o�aQ.D � 5 c[j" c2E L,,�S
F syv rC-L�c F��G�4S� wGEK. {r%�lVN L^,jL _ CALL /?7� °#crE'TNEE_ )WOW
PLC-_ rE�,
>, T �+ C_ NK �o � e D I �S S
1S. (DNSi� `�
Goal i i o�! o F F I f- 0~�S
S S��S 1� C 7 N Ai t� L- vJ 1�--L �3uS .4 1-lDCa 4 S e 1 til EEbS
��-r1t,OL. le�� wAA/i5 70 HOOp d LF1n1T MI��ETT
(�rIDE� R-i Nrz_CAN p
6R5EDoh! 1 i ran lea��-`5 �- To AD u"
,itnA l�A�-�W� c.� N��D A 1S
CA C_' (-�ESSA��
S�PE�UISofz �i,S��ctwTH
c.v I L �d �� �H 47 w C C AID
-i r~►� i � r
coµ D 1 OX/ f a r /rCC 1
BF� rt M I MONTH
Ttr o GHCCK uQ.7 �tC
Conk (Lo GVC�SS 15 NOT M IOF/
.w
ACTION tj31tA_,Hfft1 T4 bf,- TAK-EIJ-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412011

Gaines, Amanda
From: Kraig Westerbeek[[e-mail]]
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 7:54 AM
To: Hall, Tim; '[e-mail]'
Cc: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: Re: Clarifying Lynn Tew recommendations
The rain that the area received on Saturday and Sunday should allow for the soil moisture necessary to plant an interim
crop.
From: Hall, Tim fmailto:tim.hall@ cagr.aovl
Sent: Tuesday, June 21, 2011 07:37 AM
To: [e-mail] <rockinmfarmsC&intrstar.net>
Cc: Kraig Westerbeek; Gaines, Amanda <[e-mail]>
Subject: Clarifying Lynn Tew recommendations
Greer,
On Tuesday June 14, Amanda Gaines asked me to accompany her to the Lynn Tew farm near Wallace to assess the
Bermuda stands on the sprayfields. We walked the fields and found very little bermudagrass surviving. The predominant
cover was senescent annual ryegrass which would not take up any N, and a mixture of annual and perennial weeds
including trumpet vine, curly dock, some panicum, horsenettle, etc. I don't think anyone could argue that this is an
adequate receiving crop. Weeds do remove some N, in adequate stand, but what is the end use for them?
My immediate thought was to kill those fields with herbicide and plant no -till soybeans to get a receiving crop in the
ground. If that isn't practical, (and I would not want to saw soybeans after the fourth of July since yields will not be
economical), pearl millet is an option. Millet can be sown anytime during the summer, though as you wait later the yield
and N rate should be adjusted downward. Additionally, with late planted crops, you will need to take measures to manage
against armyworm outbreaks which could wipe out young seedlings. He is allowed to pump thirty days ahead of planting
the crop. it didn't look to me like he needed to pump, but I wouldn't want to wait for rainfall to catch up without a crop to
pump on. Additionally, he did have some fescue in adequate stand which needed harvesting badly, but appeared N
starved and could utilize low levels of N immediately, if necessary. I would hold summer PAN to around 20 to 25
lbs/ac/month from May through August on fescue, and would not apply any at all unless necessary.
am sorry for Lynn and know he is going through a rough period in his personal life, but I was asked for a professional
opinion and provided one. I think everyone has done what they can to give him the leeway to correct the problems prior to
harsher action. I think you would also agree that a farm in that condition doesn't reflect well on the many producers who
manage their farms well. I know this takes time and money to establish a crop, but I don't know any free or low cost option
here.
Tim
My address has changed, the new address is Tim. [e-mail] . Please update your records!
Tim Hall
Regional Agronomist
NCDA & CS
[phone]
E-mail correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records Law and may be
disclosed to third parties.

15, 2011
Subject: NoV
NOV-2011-PC-0194
Lynn Tew Farm AWS310522
Dear Mr. Stehman,
4'°��
I am responding to the Notice of Violation my farm received March 10, 2011. Cows
were removed from my farm Spring 2010. 1 have recently found a neighbor that is going
to place cows back on my farm and keep pastures managed. I know that it is my full
responsibility to ensure that my spray fields are kept in adequate condition as required by
my Waste Utilization Plan. I will continue efforts to improve my bermuda crop. I will
apply lime as recommended by my annual NCDA soils report and spray for weeds as
needed.
Thank you,
Lynn Tew

III III Fit TIl!lijj111111fillFill
tl
�613a?N
r ��0
d
....'.: _,w+'�""•..�_ �,._- �r:��:r`��i-,� 'ri'9�i_i'.-i�_i�ki`�:_4,�'r+ iw.� :;r:���m; �[1 /i��,yi�
m
Is
.�N S
M't /

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
October 25, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
7010 0290 0003 0834 5145
Mr. Lynn Tyner Tew
103 Cake Drive
Clinton, North Carolina 28328
Subject: Recommendation of Enforcement Action
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2T .1304
Lynn Tew Farm Facility No. 31-522, Permit No. AWS310522
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Tew:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
This letter is to advise you that this office is considering recommending enforcement action to
the Director of the Division of Water Quality. The recommendation for enforcement concerns the
violations cited in the Notice of Violation dated September 2, 2011, previously sent to you.
If you wish to present an explanation for the violations cited, or if you believe there are other
factors which should be considered, please send such information to me in writing within ten (10) days
following receipt of this letter. Your explanation will be reviewed, and, if an enforcement action is still
deemed appropriate, your explanation will be forwarded to the Director with the enforcement package
for their consideration.
Wilmington Regional Office One
127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, NC 28405 Norffarolina
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone]
Internet: www.ncwateraualitY Qra vah(rallff
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Customer Service 1-877-623-6748
50% recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Lynn Tew Farm
Notice of Intent for Recommendation for Enforcement
31-522
October 25, 2011
Page 2 of 2
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact Amanda Gaines at [phone].
Yours very truly,
TBaardtmental Regional Supervisor
Aquifer Protection Section
Wilmington Regional Office
cc: APS CAFO Unit
Billy Houston, Duiplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy Brown LLC
John College, DSWC-WiRO
DWQ Wilmington Animal Files 31-522
SAWQSIANIMALSOUPLIN12011131-522N01
• ■Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Signature
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑ Agent
■Print your name and address on the reverse X dresses I
Ln so that we can return the card to you. B. Received by (Printed Name) G. Date of Delivery
li"" t� •� i Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
;m
� A RN;�,ry Postage ffi D. Is delivery address different rom item 17 ©Yes i
i M ICW WV � { 1. Article Addressed to: If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
m certuled Fee ���N jj^Ew r I
C3Rse Receipt Fee 0 P i . r !� W 1 A kz m
Cal (EndorsememRequlredj L /`r
Restricted Delivery Fee
0 (EndorsememRequlredl
Er
e Type
ru Toul Postage & Fees + ; C� s N row, 3. Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
© _ �p
Sent C ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
1 _ n
"� -------- - - ---------• ��........�_�__. S.a._. 11 Insured Mail O.D.
p straer, dpr.: --- i 4. Restricted Delfvery? (Extra Fee)
or PO9-No. /Q-S LQIC-E T cal V[ _
------- ------- ---------------
Yes
City, State, ZIPrI ..... ..... ... : 2. Article Number `rf I f f j i ` ' ; r - r
C"rs( TON NG "3 g?- -- ` (transfer from sen4ce label)MOOt' a 7010 ? Q 9 l 000311 p 8 3 4'' S 1 �l $' j
__ ... PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-1540 ;

ZDlI Wke� �/�
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization
This plan has been prepared for:
Lynn Tew Duplin Farm
Lynn Tew
103 Lake Drive
Clinton, NC 28328
11-10-2011
This plan has been developed by:
Greer Moore
Clear Run Farms Consulting Services
PO Box 338
Harrells, 28444
(910)314;6 ,
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal
waste utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the
Required Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with
this plan.
]/—Iv—r�
ature (owner) Date
Signature (manager or producer) Date
This plan meets the minimum;
Agriculture - Natural Resourc4
adopted by the Soil and Water
Plan Approved By:
Technical Specialist
288302 Database Version 3.1
and specifications of the U.S. Department of
'ation Service or the standard of practices
tion Commission.
Date
--------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------
Date Printed: 11 - 10-2011 Cover Page 1

The following Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization table provides an estimate of the number of acres needed for
sludge utilization for the indicated accumulation period. These estimates are based on average nitrogen
concentrations foreach source, the numberof animals in the facility and the plant available nitrogen application
rates shown in the second column.
Lagoon sludge contains nutrients and organic matter remaining after treatment and application of effluent. At
clean out, this material must be utilized for crop production and applied at agronomic rates. In most cases, the
priority nutrient is nitrogen but other nutrients including phosphorous, copper and zinc can also be limiting. Since
nutrient levels are generally very high, application of sludge must be carefully applied.
Sites must first be evaluated for their suitability for sludge application. Ideally, effluent spray fields should not be
used for sludge application. If this is not possible, care should betaken not to load effluent application fields with
high amounts of copper and zinc so that additional effluent cannot be applied. On sites vulnerable to surface water
moving to streams and lakes, phosphorous is a concern. Soils containing very high phosphorous levels may also
be a concern.
Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization Table
Crop
Maximum
PAN hate
Ib/ac
Maximum Sludge
Application Rate
1000 gal/ac
Minimum Acres
5 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
10 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
15 Years Accumulation
Swine Feeder -Finish Lagoon Sludge - Standard
Corn 120 bu
150
13.16
30.09
60.17
90.26
Hay 6 ton R.Y.E.
300
26.32
15.04
30.09
45.13
Soybean 40 bu
160
14.04
28.21
56.41
94.62
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11-10-2011 Sludge Page I of I

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage
capacity, this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated.
If available storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design
storage volume of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval
in the waste utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Availahle Waste Storage C:anacity
Source Name
Swine Feeder -Finish La oon t_i uid
Design Storage Capacity (Days)
Start Date
9/ l
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)
l
1
123
1
2
ill
1
3
112
1
4
122
1
5
140
1
6
159
1
7
177
1
8
180
1
9
180
1
t0
165
1
11
151
1
12
136
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
------------------- - ------ --- ----- ---
288302 Database Version 3,1 Date Printed: I I-10-201 1 Capacity Page 1 of I

The Irrigation Application Factors for each field in this plan are shown in the following table. Infiltration rate varies
with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you must apply at a rate that will not result in
runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be applied to each field selected to
receive wastewater. It also lists the maximum application amount that each field may receive in any one application
event.
Irrigation Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
(inches/hour)
Application Amount
(inches)
1048
1
Autryville
0.60
1.0
1048
10
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
11
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
12
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
2A
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
2B
Autryvillc
0.60
1.0
1048
2C
Goldsboro
0.50
1.0
1048
2D
Goldsboro
0.50
1.0
1048
3
Goldsboro
0.50
1_0
1048
4
Goldsboro
0.50
1.0
1048
5
Goldsboro
0.50
1.0
1048
6
Goldsboro
0.50
1.0
1048
6a
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
7
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
8
Norfolk
0.50
1.0
1048
9
orfolk
0.50
1.0
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 11/10/2011 lAF Page I of I
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
S7
Swine Feeder -Finish Lagoon Liquid waste generated 2,224,800 gals/year by a 2,400
animal Swine Finishing Lagoon Liquid operation. This production facility has waste
storage capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
5124
Incorporated
8800
Injected
9691
Irrigated
5570
Max. Avail.
PAN (lbs) *
Actual PAN
Applied (lbs)
PAN Surplus/
Deficit (lbs)
Actual Volume
Applied (Gallons)
I Volume Surplus/
Deficit (Gallons)
Year i
1 5,570
6120
-550
2,444,770
-219,970
--------------------- ------------ --- -- -- --- ------ ----- -- -- ------ ---- --- --- -------------------.._---------------------•-------•----
Note: In source [D, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
* Max. Available PAN is calculated on the basis of the actual application method(s) identified in the plan for this source.
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11-10-2011 Source Page I of 1

The table shown below provides a summary of the crops or rotations included in this plan for each field. Realistic
Yield estimates are also provided for each crop in the plan. In addition, the Leaching Index for each field is shown,
where available,
Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Leaching
[ndex (LI)
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE
1048
1
1.23
1.23
NIA
Autryville
Wheat, Grain
45 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
30 bu.
1048
to
0.67
0.67
NIA
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1048
11
1.87
1.87
NIA
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1049
12
1.12
1.12
NIA
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1048
2A
2.25
2.25
NIA
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1048
2B
1.02
1.02
NIA
Autryville
Wheat, Grain
45 bu,
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
30 hu.
1048
2C
1.85
1,85
NIA
Goldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
2D
0.78
0.78
NIA
Goldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
3
I'll
I'll
NIA
lGoldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
4
0.49
0.49
NIA
Goldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
5
1.09
1.09
N/A
Goldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu,
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
6
1,87
1.87
N/A
Goldsboro
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
1048
6a
1,83
1.83
N/A
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 hu.
1048
7
1.63
1,63
NIA
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1048
8
2.26
2.26
N/A
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
1048
9
1 1,62
1.62
N/A
Norfolk
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 11/10/2011
PCs Page I of 2
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

II I I I Soybeans, Manured, Full Season I 42 bu.l
PLAN TOTALS: 22.69 22.69
LI
Potential Leaching
Technical Guidance
w potential to contribute to soluble
None
< 2nutrient
leaching below the root zone.
>= 2 &
Moderate potential to contribute to
Nutrient Management (590) should be planned.
soluble nutrient leaching below the root
r 10
zone.
High potential to contribute to soluble
Nutrient Management(590) should be planned. Other conservation practices that improve
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
the soils available water holding capacity and improve nutrient use efficiency should be
> 10
considered. Examples are Cover Crops (340) to scavenge nutrients, Sod -Based Rotations
(328), Long -Term No -Till (778), and edge -of -field practices such as Filter Strips (393) and
Riparian Forest Buffers (391).
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed 11/10/2011
PCS Page 2 of 2
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of
cropland needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements,
and proper timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or
other by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each field in
order to supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included. A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is
included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the manure generated by the operation.
Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
D
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use,
Acres
Crop
RYE
Appfic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
OWA)
Canm.
Fen.
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Res.
(1bs1A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Liquid
Man
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
IOOD
gaVA
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1048
1
S7
Autryville
1.23
1.23
Wheat, Grain
45 bu.
9/1-4/30
104
0
20
brig.
84
33.55
0.00
41.27
0.00
1049
1
S7
Autryville
1.23
1.23
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
30 bu.
411-9115
119
0
0
Irrig.
119
47,53
0.00
58.47
0.0
1048
10
S7
Norfolk
0.67
0.67
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
41.94
0.00
28.10
0.00
1048
10
S7[Norfolk
0.67
0.67
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
164
65.51
0.00
43.89
0.0
1048
11
S7Nor-folk
1.97
1.87
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
41.94
0.00
78.43
0.00
1048
11
S7
Norfolk
1.87
1.87
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu,
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
brig.
164
65.51
OX
122.50
0.0
I
12
S7
Norfolk
1.12
1.12
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
41.94
0.00
46.97
0.0
1048
12
S7
orfolk
1.12
1.12
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
164
65.51
0.00
73.37
0.00
1048
2A
S7
Norfolk
2.25
2.25
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/14/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
41.94
0.00
94.37
0.00
1048
2A
S7
Norfolk
2.25
2.25
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
164
65.51
0.00
147.39
0.00
1048
2B
S7
Autryville
1.02
1.02
Wheat, Grain
45 bu.
9/1-4/30
104
0
20
Irrig.
84
33.55
0.00
34.22
0.0
1048
2B
I S7
uttyville
1.02
1.02
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
30 bu.
4/1-9/15
119
0
0
Irrig.
119
47.53
0.0
48.48
0.0
1048
2C
1 S7
Goldsboro
1.85
1.95
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9114/30
136
0
20
Irrig,
116
46.34
0.00
85.72
0.00
1048
2C
S7
kidsboro
1.85
1.85
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
4/1-9/15
176
0
0
Irrig.
176
70.30
0.00
130.06
0.00
1049
2D
S7
Goldsboro
0.78
0.78
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9/1-4130
136
0
20
Irrig.
116
46.34
0.00
36.14
0.00
104$
2D
S7
Goldsboro
0.78
0.78
Soybeans, Manurcd, Full Season
45 bu.
411-9115
176
Q
1 0
Irrig.
176
70.30
0.00
54.84
0.00
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11/10/2011 WUT Page 1 of 2

Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
m
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
pbs/A)
Cantu
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Res.
(lbs/A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Liquid
Mao
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Feld)
N
N
N
N
1000
gWA
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1048
3
S7
Goldsboro
1.11
1.11
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9/1-4/30
136
0
20
Inig.
116
46.34
0.00
51.43
0.00
1048
3
S7
3oldsboro
1.11
1.11
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
4/1-9/15
176
0
0
Irrig.
176
70.30
0.00
78.04
0.00
1048
4
S7
loldsboro
0.49
0.49
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9/14/30
136
0
20
brig.
116
46.34
0.00
22.70
0.
1048
4
S7
Idsboro
0.49
0.49
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
4/1-9/15
176
0
0
Irrig.
176
70.30
0.00
34.45
0.00
1048
5 1
S7
k1ldsboro
1.09
1.09
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9/1-4/30
136
0
20
Irrig.
11
46.34
0.00
50.51
0.00
1048
5 1
S7
k1ldsboro
1.09
1.09
Soybeans, Mantued, Full Season
45 bu.
4/1-9/15
176
0
0
brig.
176
70.30
0.00
76.63
0.00
1048
6
S7
Goldsboro
1.87
1.87
Wheat, Grain
65 bu.
9/1-4/30
l36
0
20
Irrig.
116
46.34
0.00
86.65
0.0
1048
6
S7
Goldsboro
1.87
1.87
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
45 bu.
4/1-9/15
176
0
0
brig.
176
70.30
0.00
131.46
0.00
1048
6a
S7
Norfolk
1.83
1.83
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/14/30
125
0
20
brig.
105
41.94
0.00
76.75
0.00
1048
6a
S7
orfolk
1.83
1.83
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
164
65.51
0.00
119.88
0.00
1048
7
S7
Norfolk
1.63
1.63
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
41.94
0.00
68.36
0.00
1048
7
S7
Norfolk
1.63
1.63
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
164
65.51
0.00
106.78
0.00
1048
8
S7
Norfolk
2.26
2.26
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
1 105
41.94
0.00
94.79
0.00
1048
8
S7
Norfolk
2.26
2.26
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
Irrig.
1 164
65.51
0.00
149.05
0.00
1048
9
S7
Norfolk
1.62
1.62
Wheat, Grain
60 bu.
9/1-4/30
125
0
20
Irrig.
105
4L94
0.00
67.95
0.00
1048
9
-S7
Norfolk
1.62
1.62
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9/15
164
0
0
brig.
164
65.51
0.00
106.12
0.0
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
2,444,77
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
2,224.8
Balance, 1000 gallons
-219.97
Total Applied, tons
0.00
Total Produced, tons
700
Balance, tons
0.0
Notes: 1. In the tract column, -- symbol means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11/10/2011 WUT Page 2 of 2

Crop Notes
The following crop note applies to field(s): 2C, 21), 3, 4, 5, 6
Wheat: Coastal Plain, Mineral Soil, low -leachable
In the Coastal Plain, wheat should be planted from October 20-November 25. Plant 22 seed/drill row foot
at 1-1 1/2" deep and increase the seeding rate by 5% for each week seeding is delayed beyond the
optimum time. See the seeding rates table for applicable seeding rate modifications in the current NCSU
"Small Grain Production Guide". Also, increase the initial seeding rate by at least 10% when planting
no -till. Adequate depth control when planting the wheat is essential. Review the NCSU Official Variety
"green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding variety with the
characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Apply no more than 30 lbs/acre N at planting.
Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test can also be applied at this time. The remaining N
should be applied during the months of February -March. The total N is dependent on the soil type. Plant
samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor the nutrient status of the wheat. Timely
management of diseases, insects and weeds are essential for profitable wheat production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 10, 11, 12, 2A, 6a, 7, 8, 9
Wheat: Coastal Plain, Mineral Soil, medium leachable
In the Coastal Plain, wheat should be planted from October 20-November 25. Plant 22 seed/drill row foot
at 1-1 1/2" deep and increase the seeding rate by 5% for each week seeding is delayed beyond the
optimum time. See the seeding rates table for applicable seeding rate modifications in the current NCSU
"Small Grain Production Guide". Also, increase the initial seeding rate by at least 10% when planting
no -till. Adequate depth control when planting the wheat is essential. Review the NCSU Official Variety
"green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding variety with the
characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Apply no more than 30 Ibs/acre N at planting.
Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can also be applied at this time. The remaining
N should be applied during the months of February -March. The total N is dependent on the soil type.
Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor the nutrient status of the wheat.
Timely management of diseases, insects and weeds are essential for profitable wheat production.
---------------------------------- -------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- I------------------
2ss3o2 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: I I-10-2011 Crop Note Page 1 of 3

The following crop note applies to field(s): 1, 2B
Wheat: Coastal Plain, Mineral Soil, medium leachable
In the Coastal Plain, wheat should be planted from October 20-November 25. Plant 22 seed/drill row foot
at 1-1 1/2" deep and increase the seeding rate by 5% for each week seeding is delayed beyond the
optimum time. See the seeding rates table for applicable seeding rate modifications in the current NCSU
"Small Grain Production Guide". Also, increase the initial seeding rate by at least 10% when planting
no -till. Adequate depth control when planting the wheat is essential. Review the NCSU Official Variety
"green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding variety with the
characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Apply no more than 30 lbs/acre N at planting.
Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can also be applied at this time. The remaining
N should be applied during the months of February -March. The total N is dependent on the soil type.
Plant samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor the nutrient status of the wheat.
Timely management of diseases, insects and weeds are essential for profitable wheat production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 2C, 21), 3, 4, 5, 6
Soybeans -Full Season, Coastal Plain: Mineral Soil, low -leachable
The suggested planting dates for soybeans in the Coastal Plains are from April 20-May 20. Review the
NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding
variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 2-4 seed/row foot for 7-8"
drills; 4-6 seed/row foot for 15" rows; 6-8 seed/row foot for 30" rows and 8-10 seed/row foot for 36"
rows. Increase the seeding rate by at least 10% for no -till planting. Seeding depth should be 1-1 1/2" and
adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can be
broadcast or banded at planting. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbs/acre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable soybean production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 10, 11, 12, 2A, 6a, 7, 8, 9
Soybeans -Full Season, Coastal Plain: Mineral soil, medium leachable
The suggested planting dates for soybeans in the Coastal Plains are from April 20-May 20. Review the
NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding
variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 24 seed/row foot for 7-8"
drills; 4-6 seed/row foot for 15" rows; 6-8 seed/row foot for 30" rows and 8-10 seed/row foot for 36"
rows. Increase the seeding rate by at least 10% for no -till planting. Seeding depth should be 1-1 1/2" and
adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can be
broadcast or banded at planting. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbslacre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable soybean production.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11-10-2011 Crop Note Page 2 of 3

The following crop note applies to field(s): 1, 2B
Soybeans -Full Season, Coastal Plain: Mineral soil, medium leachable
The suggested planting dates for soybeans in the Coastal Plains are from April 20-May 20. Review the
NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding
variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 2-4 seed/row foot for 7-8"
drills; 4-6 seed/row foot for 15" rows; 6-8 seed/row foot for 30" rows and 8-10 seed/row foot for 36"
rows. Increase the seeding rate by at least 10% for no -till planting. Seeding depth should be 1-1 1/2" and
adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can be
broadcast or banded at planting. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbs/acre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable soybean production.
------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -------•-----------------------• ------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11-10-2011 Crop Note Page 3 of 3

Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer
either owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to
properly apply the waste. if the producer does not own adequate land to
properly dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an
agreement with a landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity,
allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It is the
responsibility of the owner of the waste production facility to secure an
update of the Nutrient Management Plan when there is a change in the
operation, increase in the number of animals, method of application,
receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre
per year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per
acre per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 -Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste
will be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11/10/2011 Specification Page 1

7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not
be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is
applied from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and
public right-of-ways.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -.-.-------------------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed. 11/10/2011 Specification Page 2

15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied at agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift
from the site.
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
r
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
------------------------------------------ -------------------------- - ---------------------------- -- -
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11/10/2011 Specification Page 3

22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when
these metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and
maintained for optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis
records shall be kept for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste
application records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years.
Waste application records for all other waste shall be maintained for five
(5) years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
288302 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 11/10/2011 Specification Page 4

November 6, 2011
Dear Mr. Stehman,
I am responding to the NoV I received on September 2, 2011 as a result of a high
freeboard level in a transfer lagoon. My transfer lagoon level reached 15 inches of
freeboard as a result of Hurricane Irene dumping approximately 6" of rainfall on my farm
from August 27t' -- August 28 h. During a site inspection by DWQ on August 29,', 2011
DWQ found my transfer lagoon at 15" of freeboard, and I began transferring water to my
front lagoon the same day (August 29`"). I transferred my back lagoon and got it to 24"
of freeboard by August 31"-
As you are probably aware I have been working with your office staff and Mr.
Tim Hall (NCDA) about better crop establishment. As you will see from my irrigation
records I have not clone a lot of irrigating this summer due to your staff requesting that I
not irrigate until receiving crop advice from an agronomist. As of July 271h, 2011 Mr.
Tim Hall (NCDA) did a follow-up visit of my farm and made the necessary PAN
recommendations for my fields so that I may resume irrigating.
I have decided to row crop my farm,with a wheat/soybean rotation. My neighbor
has started preparing my fields to plant wheat for the 2011/2012 crop year, soybeans will
follow wheat. Please also note that I will not have hogs through the winter months, and I
am also hoping to start building my new hog houses, which are replacing my Mo houses,
very shortly.
Thank you for your time in this matter and please call me at [phone] if
you have any questions.
Sincerely,
AV,-. ax j-
Lynn Tew

Grower: Ivey Knowles DesigippO By-, KBW
Address, 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11 /20/09
County: Du fin Sheet 1 of 12
ANAEROBIC WASTE LAGOON DESIGN 1st STAGE
FARM INFORMATION
Farm Population:
Nursery:
0
Wean to Finish: ---- -----
0
Finishing: --- -----
1200 Hd.
Farrow to weanling: .--_----...----_--
0
Farrow to feeder: --------- ------
0
Farrow to finish: ----. -------- -..----
0
Boars:
0
Storage Period: ----------------
180 Days
25 Yr. 124 Hr Storm Event ------------ w-----
7.5 In.
"Heavy Rain" Factor Not Applicable i-ven if Vnlue Shown
Rainfall in Excess of Evaporation ----------------
7.0 In,
Additional Water Usage:
0
Additional Drainage Area: -------------M-
0
LAGOON INFORMATION
Is Lagoon Designed as an Irregular Shape? (YIN) ------------
Y
Does Operator Want Emergency Spillway?
(YIN) ------------
N
Was This Design Built Prior to 9196?
(YIN) ------------
Y
Is Drain Tile Req'd to Lower SHWT?
(YIN) ------------
N
Seasonal High Water Table Elev:
------ -----
0.00
Freeboard:
- ------ ..
1.0
Ft.
Emergency Spillway Flow Depth:
Noi Applic*�64,N E=vem if Value Sht)wn
Side Slopes:
------- W-- ------
3
:1
(H:V)
l-rorli i..ugoorn Volume; Cho(;k C"nntour.;
0.0
r r110: r .are ,:rs atac sh^rl ? +�f '�...
0.0
Top of Dike Elevation:
------------ --• Depth
99.16
Ft.
Finished Bottom Elevation:
--------------- 13.16 Ft,
86.00
Ft.
I1
Start Pump Elevation:
---------------• 20.16 In.
97.48
Ft.
Stop Pump Elevation:
---••--------- 27 In.
96.91
Ft.
TOTAL VOLUME NOT ADEQUATEIIII
LAGOON VOLUME REQUIRED VOL. DESIGN VOLUMES % REQ'D.
Storm Stor =
15996 (Cu.Ft.)
14,990
(Cu.Ft.) 93,71 %
Temporary =
0 (Cu.Ft.)
12,333
(Cu.Ft.)
Permanent =
162000 (Cu.Ft.)
148,313
(Cu.Ft.) 91.55%
Total Volume =
177,996 (Cu.Ft.)
175,636
(Cu.Ft,) 98.67%
112 Treatment Volume = 81,000 (Cu.Ft.)
112 Treatment Volume Elevation = 92.24 Ft.
Additional Permanent storage provided in 2nd stage
Min. Required Liner Thickness --------
Lagoon Surface Area: (Inside TOD)---------------
Murphy-Brown, UC Engineering R 0. Box 856, Warsaw, NC 28398
83.06 in.
1.9 Ft,
25,594 S.F.
(9101 293-3434

Grower: Ivey Knowles es gne y: KBW
Address: 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
Countv: Dur)lin Sheet 2 of 12
ACTUAL DESIGN VOLUME CALCULATIONS
BASE VOLUME: Cu. Ft.
LAGOON STAGE -AREA VOLUMES
Contour
Elevation (FTC
Area SF
86.00
1,944
87.00
4,967
88.00
8,695
89.00
12,805
90.00
14,711
91.00
15,859
92.00
16,626
93.00
7,365
94.00
18,116
95.00
19,183
96,00
20,241
97.00
21,284
98.00
22,317
99.00
23,356
99.16
25,594
Incr. Vol. (Cu.-FT.�
3,456
6,831
10,750
13,758
15,285
16,243
11,996
12,741
18,650
19,712
20,763
21,801
22,837
3,916
Cumul. Vol. (Cu. FT)
0
3,456
10,287
21,037
34,795
50,080
66,322
78,318
91,058
109,708
129,420
150,182
171,983
194,819
198,735
These volumes were calculated using the vertical average end area method.
TOTAL REQD VOL
177,996
CF
CUMULATIVE
VOL.
ZONE VOL.
98.67%
END PUMP = = = =
96.91
FT
148,313 CF
TR'MT
148,313
91.55%
START PUMP = =:
97.48
FT
160,646 CF
TEMP
12,333
MAX STORAGE =
98.16
FT
175,636 CF
STORM
14,990
93.71 %
Murphy -Brown, LLC Engineering P.O. Box 656, Warsaw, NC 28398 [phone]

{rower: ivey Knowles uesignea by: mb.vv
Address: 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rase Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
County: Duplin Sheet 3 of 12
FARM INFORMATION
Nursery:
Wean to Finish:
Finishing:
Farrow to weanling:
Farrow to feeder:
Farrow to finish:
Boars:
Storage Period:
25 Yr. / 24 Hr Storm Event
"Heavy Rain" Factor
Rainfall in Excess of Evaporation
Additional Water Usage:
Additional Drainage Area:
LAGOON INFORMATION
Farm_ Population:
Not Applicable Even if Value Sn(woi
Is Lagoon Designed as an Irregular Shape?
(Y/N)------------ Y
Does Operator Want Emergency Spillway?
(YIN) ------------ N
Was This Design Built Prior to 9196?
(Y/N)------------ Y
Is Drain Tile Req'd to tower SHWT?
(Y/N)------------ Y
Seasonal High Water Table Elev:
Freeboard:
- _ ----
Emergency Spillway Flow Depth: Not Aphficahlo
Emergency
F-ven if Vzilue Shown
Side Slopes: -- . -----
---
Top of Dike Elevation:
Finished Bottom Elevation:
Start Pump Elevation:
Stop Pump Elevation:
1 i,orn I_�uaoon Voiume ChE�Ck COntours
l:nnlour irc ras see sheet 2 of r
Depth
_------------ 9.30 Ft.
---------------- 26.52In.
-------- -- 81.6 1n.
LAGOON VOLUME REQUIRED VOL. DESIGN VOLUMES
0
0
1200 Hd,
0
0
0
0
180 Days
7.5 In.
0
7 In.
0
25,594 S.F.
0.00
1.0 Ft.
3 :1 (H:V)
0.0
0.0 l�
100.90 Ft.
91,60 Ft.
98.69 Ft, U�
94.10 Ft,
0/6 REQ'D.
Storm Stor = 37803 (Cu.Ft.) 37,860 (Cu.Ft.) 100.16%
Temporary = 100833 (Cu.Ft.) 117,563 .(Cu.Ft.) 116.59%
Permanent = 0 (Cu.Ft.) 48,030 (Cu.Ft.)
Total Volume = 138,636 (Cu.Ft.) 203,452 (Cu.Ft.) 146.75%
90 Temporary Storage Volume Elevation = 96.74 Ft.
Min, Required Liner Thickness ---- ------
Lagoon Surface Area: (Inside TOD)-----------------
49.98 In.
1.5 Ft.
34,890 S.F.
1
Murphy -Brown, LLC Engineering P.O. Box 856,Warsaw, NC 28398 [phone]

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designed By: KBW
Address: • 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
Countv: Duplin Sheet 4 of 12
ACTUAL DESIGN VOLUME CALCULATIONS
BASE VOLUME: Cu. Ft.
LAGOON STAGE -AREA VOLUMES
Contour
Elevation (FTC
Area SF
91.60
17,129
92.00
17,765
93.00
19,407
94.00
21,120
95.00
22,904
96.00
24,760
97.00
26,688
98.00
28,687
99.00
30,758
100.00
32,900
100.90
34,890
Incr. Vol. (Cu. FT)
6,979
18,586
20,264
22,012
23,832
25,724
27,688
29,723
31,829
30,506
Cumul._ Vol. (Cu. FT)
0
6,979
25,565
45,828
67,840
91,672
117,396
145,084
174,806
206,635
237,141
These volumes were calculated usinq the vertical average end area method.
TOTAL REQD VOL
258,477
CF
CUMULATIVE
VOL.
ZONE VOL. 146.75%
END PUMP = _ _ =
94.10
FT
48,030 CF
TR'MT
48,030
START PUMP = =
98.69
FT
165,592 CF
TEMP
117,563 116,59%
MAX STORAGE =
99.90
FT
203,452 CF
STOR
37,860 100.15%
Murphy -gown, LLC Engineering P.O. Box 856 ,Warsaw, NC 28398 [phone]

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designed By: KBW
Address: 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
County: Duplin Sheet 5 of 12
MINIMUM REQUIRED VOLUME CALCULATIONS 1st STAGE
Permanent Storacte:
Required Treatment Volume:
Animal ype Capacity ALW (cu.ft./lb)- ota
Nursery
0
30
1:00
0
Wean to Finish
0
115
1.00
0
Finishing
1,200
135
1.00
162,000
Farrow to weanling
0
433
1.00
0
Farrow to feeder
0
522
1.00
0
Farrow to finish
0
1,417
1-001
0
Boars
0
400
1 1.00
1 0
Total Requireq Treatment Volume (cu. ft.)=
Sludge Storage Volume:
162,000
AnRaIT956 Capacity A cu. t. = ota
Nursery
0
30
0.00
0
Wean to Finish
0
115
0.00
0
Finishing
1,200
135
0.00
0
Farrow to weanling
0
433
0.00
0
Farrow to feeder
0
522
0.00
0
Farrow to finish
0
1,417
0.00
0
Boars
0
400
0.00
0
Total Required Sludge Storage Volume (cu. ft.)=
Storm Storage:
Vol.=(Lagoon Surf. Area + Addt'I Drainage Area) " 25Yr.l24Hr. Storm(in)1 121n.01,
Vol.= (25594 sq.ft + 0 sq.ft.) 7.5 in. 112 in./ft.
Total Required Volume for 25Yr.124Hr. Storm Event (cu.ft)=
"Heavy Rain" Storage:
Voi.=(Lagoon Surf. Area + Addt'I Drainage Area) ` "Heavy Rain" Factor (in)112in.1ft.
Vol.= (25594 sq.ft + 0 sq.ft.) " 0.0 in. 112 in./ft.
Total Required Volume for "Heavy Rain" (cu.ft.) =
(for Extended Periods of Chronic Rainfall)
wn,
0
15,996
Total Required Storrs Storage
(25Yr, 124Hr. Storm +'Heavy Rain')= 15,996 (CU.FT)
Total Required Permanent Storage
(Treatment + Sludge) = 162,000 (CU.FT)
TOTAL REQUIRED 1st STAGE VOLUME = 177996 (CU.FT.)
w
0.

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designed By: KBW
Address: . 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
Countv: Duolin Sheet 6 of 12
Temporary Storage Volume:
Manure Production:
Animal pe Capacity Sto. Period= Total
Nursery
0
180
. 0.30
0
Wean to Finish
0
180
1.17
0
Finishing
1,200
180
1.37
295,920
Farrow to weanling
0
180
4.39
0
Farrow to feeder
0
180
5.30
0
Farrow to finish
0
180
114.38
1 0
Boars
0
180
1 4.061
0
Total Manure Production (gals.)= 295,920
Total Manure Production (cu.ft.)= 39,561
Excess Fresh Water
Animal ype Capacity to. Period=Total
Nursery
0
180
0.00
0
Wean to Finish
0
180
0.00
0
Finishing
1,200
180
0.90
194,400
Farrow to weanling
0
180
0.00
0.
Farrow to feeder
0
180
0.00
0
Farrow to finish
0
180
0.00
0
Boars
0
1 180
1 0.00
1 0
Total Fresh Water Excess (gals.)= 194,400
Total Fresh Water Excess (cu.ft.)= 25,989

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designed By: KBW
Address: 539 Fussell Rd Checked By: DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
Countv: Duolin Sheet 7 of 12
Temporary Storage Volume: (Cont.)
Rainfall in Excess of Evaporation:
Vol.=(Lagoon Surface Area 1 st + Lagoon Area 2nd + Additional Drainage Area) * Rainfall 112in./ft
Vol. (25594 sq.ft. + 34890 sq.ft. + 0 sq.fl.) * 7.0 in. 112 in./ft.
Total Required Volume for Rainfall in Excess of Evap. (cu.ft.)= 35,282
Storm Storage:
Vol.=(Lagoon Surface Area 1st + Lagoon Area 2nd + Additional Drainage Area * 25Yr./24Hr Storm(in.)112in.lft
Val.= (25594 sq.ft + 34890 sq.ft. + 0 sq.ft.) * 0.0 in.
Total Required Volume for 25Yr.l24Hr. Storm Event (cu.ft)= 37,803
"Heavy Rain" Storage:
Vol.=(Lagoon Surface Area 1 st + Lagoon Area 2nd + Additional Drainage Area) * Heavy Rain Factor(in)1 12in.1f
Vol,= (25594 sq.ft + 34890 sq.ft. + 0 sq.ft.) * 0.0 in. 112 in./ft.
Total Required Volume for "Heavy Rain" (cu.ft.) = 0
(for Extended Periods of Chronic Rainfall)
Additional Water Storage:
No Additional Water Storage is Required
0
01
Total Required Storm Storage
(25Yr.124Hr. Storm +'Heavy Rain')= 37,803 (CU.FT)
Total Required Temporary Storage
{Manure Prod. + Excess Fr. Water + Rainfall Excess + Additional Water Storm 100,833 (CU.FT)
Total Required Permanent Storage
(Treatment + Sludge) = 0 (CU.FT)
TOTAL REQUIRED 2nd STAGE VOLUME = 138636 (CU.FT.)
w

Address: 539 Fussell Rd
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Countv: Duplin
LAGOON DESIGN SUMMARY 1st STAGE
Checked By: DSE
Date: 11/20/09
Sheet 8 of 12
Top of Dike Elevation ---------
99.16
FT.
Emergency Spillway Crest Elevation
Not AF Applicable
Top of 25Yr.1241-1r. Storm Storage
98.16
FT.
Top of "Heavy Rain" Storage ----- - -----
Not
Applicable
Start Pump Elevation --_ --
97.48
FT.
End Pump Elevation ------
96.91
FT.
Top of Sludge Storage -----_-
Not
Applicable
Seasonal High Watertable Elev.-------------
0,00
Finished Bottom Elevation ------------------
86,00
FT.
Inside Top Length -----------------
Not
Applicable
Inside Top Width ---- - -- -
Not
Applicable
Side Slopes -
3.0:1
H:V
Lagoon Surface Area ---- - ------
25,594
SF
Min. Liner Thickness (if required) ----------
1.9
FT.
Freeboard Depth - - -
1.00
FT.
Temporary Storage Period ----
180
Days
Zone Depths:
TOTAL DESIGN VOLUME = 175636 (CU.FT.)
Treatment 1 Sludge Storage Zone Depth ----- --- 10.9 FT,
Temporary Storage Zone Depth -- — 0.6 FT.
Freeboard 1 Storm Storage Zone Depth ----------- 17 FT.
Total Lagoon Depth ----------- 13.2 FT.

Grower: Ivey Knowles
Address: 539 Fussell Rd
Rose Hill, NC 28458
County:
Checked By: DSE
Date: 11 /20/09,
Sheet 9 of 12
LAGOON DESIGN SUMMARY 2nd STAGE
Top of DIke.Elevation ------ ---
100.90
FT.
Emergency Spillway Crest Elevation -----------------
Not
Applicable
Top of 25Yr.1241-1r. Storm Storage - -
99.90
FT.
Top of "Heavy Rain" Storage
Not
Applicable
Start Pump Elevation --------- . -
98.69
FT.
End Pump Elevation ---------•---------
94.10
FT.
Top of Sludge Storage -. --. -
Not
Applicable
Seasonal High Watertable Elev.------------------
0.00
Finished Bottom Elevation ___w -___ .__ w
91.60
FT,
Inside Top Length --------- -
Not
Applicable
Inside Top Width ------------------
Not
Applicable
Side Slopes -----------------
3.0.1.
H:V
Lagoon Surface Area ----- -- ..........
34,890
SF
Min. Liner Thickness (if required) -------------------
1.5
FT,
Freeboard Depth ------------------
1.00
FT,
Temporary Storage Period ------ ------
180
Days
Zone Depths;
TOTAL DESIGN VOLUME = 203452 (CU.FT.)
Treatment 1 Sludge Storage Zone Depth ----------- 2.5 FT.
Temporary Storage Zone Depth ---- ---- -- 4.6 FT.
Freeboard 1 Storm Storage Zone Depth ----------- 2.2 FT.
Total Lagoon Depth --- ----- 9.3 FT.

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designe KBW
Address: 539 Fussell Rd Checke< DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
County: Duplin Sheet 10 of 12
STRT PMP EL.= 97.48
END PMP EL. = 96.91
Mumhv-Brown_ LLC Enaineerina
1
1
1
i
1
1
1
1
1
1
ZONE ELEVATIONS 9st STAGE
TOP OF DIKE ELEV = 99.16
TOP OF STORM ELEV = 98.16
TOP OF TEMP STORAGE ELEV = 97.48
TOP OF TREAT ELEV = 96.91
FINISHED BOTTOM ELEV = 86.00
P.O. Box 856. Warsaw NC 28398
1
f t
1
1
f
SHWT = 0.00
293-3434

Grower: Ivey Knowles Designe KBW
Address: 539 Fussell Rd CheGke(DSE
Rose Hill, NC 28458 Date: 11/20/09
County: Duolin Sheet 11 of 12
ZONE ELEVATIONS 2nd STAGE
TOP OF DIKE ELEV = 100.90
1 1 tt
I 1 TOP OF STORM ELEV = 99.90 1 1
1 1
1 /
STRT PMP EL.= 98.69 ! TOP OF TEMP STORAGE ELEV = 98.69 l
1 1
END PMP EL. = 94.10 1 TOP OF TREAT ELEV = 94.10 SHWT = 0.00
1 1
1 1
1 1
FINISHED BOTTOM ELEV = 91.60
LLC Engineering
m
28398
10)

Grower: Ivey Knowles
Address: 539 Fussell Rd
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Checked By: DSE
Date: 11 /20/09
Sheet 12 of 12
This livestock waste treatment lagoon is designed in accordance with the North Carolina
Natural Resources Conservation Service PRACTICE STANDARD 359- WASTE TREATMENT
LAGOON, revised prior to June, 1996.
Emergency Spillway:
An Emergency Spillway is not required.
=,N CARp
NOTE: See attached Waste Utilization Plan ; vSSip�� .,
SEAL
DESIGNED: .023994
DATE: I 6 T ��,9�. LtN
ID
COMMENTS: The lagoon has been designed as an irregular shape.
This design is update of start and stop pump elevations and to show the 112
treatment volume level for sludge storage. This design does not supercede the
original certification of the farm.
Murphy -Brown, LLC Engineering A.O. Box
10)

CAe-. � 0% Inesa-�-
FoRM FRBO-1 ��g �1...�;�S'�acj �or.s ` Q&,�y�
t�r,ti St 1 e i �81•ti .�n gr� 'is.."1 s .c1-e.
Gh-� e..GL-1 D•i. Fe �. yv T
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Preeotepttatior� Record'. ��{^--5� t��t�
Farm Owner �� w Facility Mumbe 3 I S}y
operator
Effie
"Waste
stnutture
Freeboard
arches
*Precipitation
inches
Initials
# t
t l%
# 3
#..
#
#
l- 7— tf
33
>"X
&_-r
—! q
If
3-1
1-4
]-to
s,�.,, r
cf
�_yt
rf
3)
rl.
-
+-tji
-
kr-
3 3
2-<
. S
f✓f.
> i
T` }
1-t
• Y
t­r
2 Y
3
3
3(,
tr x
ur
1'i
y i
0 �-
`I- } )6-
L
3 -
L
�'
S'- Ity
Lea
T t 8
3
2 tr
3 j
34
�.-ty
•f '
17
Y- LM
y
1
y3
2-0
17
7,u
L(
i
)3
G -
34
--
r
3r�-r
-7
off
to
53
i(-
L i
3
i T
1. Lagoon freeboard Is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the level of liquid
For lagoons with spiftways. the difference between the kW of liquid and the bcltom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard pkm aYaitable storage capacity must be recorded at least weeldy.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event. W14/03

FORM FRBo-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner T w
Operator I e. w
Facility Numbe 3 I ?t —
�
FI
- r:fl • � -
1. Lagoon freeboard Is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embanlatrent and the level of liquid
For lagoons with spillways, the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spilfway should be recorded. l
2. Freeboard plus available storage opacity must be recorded at least weeldy.
& Rairdaii must be recorded for every rain event. 3/14/03

/ /'lam/ t �Yl S ;G(au Gov "7� �c ��a �. D,-t �1 e �l/s Grf� 7 j � 7 ter
C
Form ERR-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract #
Field size (wetted acres) = (A)
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's' Phone #
Facility Number
Irrigation Operator Lynn Tew
Irrigation Operators Address
OtC#
Operator's Phone 0
From Waste Utilization Plan
Recommended PAN
Crop Type ISG Loading (Ibs/arre) a (B) 50
fI1 (91 131 fdl f51 IAA (71 fRl M f1n) fill
Field # 1
1.23
Lynn Tew
Lagoon ID
Date
(mm7ddlyr)
Start Time
End Thna
Total MWwws
(3}(2)
i of Sprinklers
DW�sa
Flow Rate
70W VOrurne
(
(0)hc(5)xW04 (1}
Volume per
Acre (ysVarse)
MI(A)
wate Angels
PAN' (ma7700fi
WO
PAN Applied
p wacre)
(51979! —
low
NIftgan
Batsnca
(Id4ve)
(BWIDI
weaUrr Code
Inspectors
(1}"
2
2i712010
8:00 AM
10:00 AM
120
1
165
19800,00
16097.56
1.5
24.15
25.85
C
2
2f712010
10:30 AM
12:30 PM
120
1
165
19800.00
16097.56
1.5
24.15
1.71
C
END
Crop Cycle Totals I I Total PAN I I
Owners Signature Operators Slgrrature
Certttfed Operator Operators Certirimticn S
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent- At a minEmum, waste analysis Is requhed within 60 days of land apphcaton events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). C wortue subtracting column (10) from cotmn (11) following each irrigation event
"Enter nubient source Cie. LegoordStofage Pond ID, commercial fartitzer, dry filter, atc.)
'Weatcr Codes: C-Clear. PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Clcudy, R-Rain, S-SrwwlSieat, W-Windy
—Person's campletlng the irrtgadon inspections must kAal to signtry that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If condlioms beyond the permltee's control have caused noncompflance with the CAWMP or permit. e)04tn an reverse.
I

Form IRR-2
Tract 4
Field size (wetted acres) = (A)
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's' Phone #
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Field # F 2a
2.25
Lynn Tew
Facility Number
Irrigation Operator Lynn Tew
Irrigation Operator's Address
OIC#
Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Recartnnended PAN
Crop Type SG Loading (ibalaere) _ (6)
rll 171 M rat f41 fR1 f7l M M /in) rill
O
Loomn 1D
Data
(MNddlyt)
Stan TWO
End Time
TOW Mud"
(3N(2)
i of Sprinklers
Oparatinp
Flow Rats
TOW Vok"
(go'-*)
( ,)
Volume per
�eue)
Ao
Waste Analysis
PAN- (9W 1o00
we
PAN APOW
(NW—)
13W91
Mtrog-
Balance
obfaae)
(aw DI
Weather fntla
InspftW
(Initials)'•
IM
2
12/6/2010
8:00 AM
11:30 AM
150
1
165
24750.00
11000.00
1.5
16.50
33.50
C
2
12/7/2010
8:30 AM
11:00 AM
150
1
165
24750.00
11000.00
1.5
16.50
17.00
C
2
12116/2010
8:00 AM
10:30 AM
150
1
165
24750.00
11000.00
1 1.5
16.50
0.50
C
END
torop t yt:re I amts I I
Owner's Signature
Certified Operator
t oiar rnry i
operaws somdure
Operaws Certification
-NCaA waste Analysis or Equtval"L At a mi d num. waste arudysis is required within 80 days of land apprwtion everts.
"Enter the value recehred by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subh wring cohurvt (10) from column (11) following each Option event,
"'Enter nutrient source (le. Lagoon/Storepe Pond 10, commemlel fertilizer. dry litter, etc.)
'Weatef Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cl%*, Cl-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowSleet, W-W[ndy
"Person's completing the irrigation inspections must irudal to sigrr(ry that inspections ware completed at least every 12D minutes.
Note: N conditions beyond the penntrtee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, e*lain on reverse.

FORM iRR-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 1 2c
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.85
Farm Owner Tew
Owners Address
Owners Phone #
Facility Number 1 82
Irrigation Operator TOW
Irrigation Operators
Address
Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type SG Recommended PAN 5o
Loading (Iblacra)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) 0 1)
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mm/ddlyr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(lb11000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(lblacre)
Weather
Code
inspections
(Initials)
Start
Time
End
Tlme
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gaVmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gal/acre)
(7)1(A)
50
2
2/1 512011
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
10703
1.5
16.05
33.95
c
2
2/16/2011
10:10 AM
12:00 PM
110
1
165
18150
9811
1.5
14.72
19.23
c
2
2/17/2011
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
1
165
19800
10703
1.5
16.05
3.18
c
end
Crop Cycle Totals a I
1 46.82
Owner's Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operator's Certification No.
NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"**Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/20/2006

Form IRR-2
Tract #
Field size (wetted acres) = (A)
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owners' Phone #
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Field # 7
1.63
Lynn Tew
Crop Type ISG
111 191 rR! fd1 f51 (Rl r7)
Facility Number
Irrigation Operator Lynn Tew
Irrigation Operator's Address
O)C#
Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Recommended PAN
Loading pbslarxe) _ (B) 50
fRl fQl 11ri1 1111
Lagoon I0
DotsTmel
(
rime
Start me
End Fens
Mreaes
NFt�I
* of Sprinklers
+
Flow Rafe
ToW Volume
(gsoons)
(8A5)"
Volume Per
Am Ipcn eVa)
(TN(A)
Wests Aruhlysla
PAN' pbs/100o
9m1
PAN Applied
(Ibslaue)
rahwel _ __
Nisopen
ae4rree
(lbracre)
Weether Cane
inspectors
prridefs)"
2
12123=10
9:00 AM
11:30 AM
150
1
165
24750,00
15184.05
1.5
22.78
27.22
C
2
12131/2010
8:00 AM
10:30 AM
150
1
165
24750.00
15194.05
1.5
22.78
4.45
C
END
crop Cycle Totals I I
Owners Skgnahue
Certified Operator
Total PAN I I
Operator's Slgnabue
Operators Certification 0
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a i ni nh i to n, waste analysis is required wlkhin 60 days of land application events.
"Enter Ira value received by subtraciinp column (10) from (B). Continua subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation evert
'—Ender nutrient source (ie. LagoonfStorage Pond ID, commercial fer61 m, dry utter, etc.)
'Wexler Codes: C-C1ear, PC -Partly Cbudy, Cl-Cloudy. R-Rain, S-Srww/Sleet, W-Wh*
—Person's completing the irrigation inspections must initial to sigrdry that inspections were completed at feast every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the permittee's cordial have caused noncomplianoe with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.

Form iRR-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract #
Field size (wetted acres) = (A)
Farm Owner
Ownet's Address
Ownees' Phone #
Facility Number
Wgation Operator Lynn Tew
(rogation Operator's Address
OiC#
Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Recommended PAN
Crop Type SG t_oeding (IbW—) _ (e) 50
(11 121 (3) 141 (5) (6) (7) fal (91 (10) f111
Field # 8
2.26
Lynn Tew
Leyaen l0
Ilan
(� )
Stan Tuna
End Time
ToW Mtrwtes
(3X2)
0of Sp&klew
OW+asn4
Flow Rate
Total Volume
4pallona}
(6)x(sM(4)
Volume per
Aae (7evaaal
QY(A)
Waste Analysts
PAN' (16s11060
00
PAN Applied
(Ihs—)
(sh(ol
NRmpen
Be*=
(!blacse)
vvamw code(InftN)"
Inspectors
2
102011
10:00 AM
12:30 PM
150
1
165
24750.00
10951.33
1.5
16.43
33.57
C
2
1/11/2011
830 AM
11:00 AM
150
1
165
24750.00
10951.33
1.5
16.43
17.15
C
crop cycle Totals I
Owner's Signature
Total PAN {
Operator'a 5ignahme
Certified Operator Operators Certification #
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a mitmnurn, waste analysis is re4uirad within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting cohenn (10) from column (11) folowing each irrigation event
'—Enter nutrient source (re. LegoonfStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry titter, etc.)
'Wester Codes: C-Cleer, PG -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cioudly. R•Raln, S-Snow/Sieet W-Windy
"Person's completing the irrigation Inspections must initial to signify that inspettlens were compksed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused nonoomphance with the CAWMP or pemul, expiain on reverse.

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 11 Facillty Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.87
Farm Owner Tew Irrigatlon Operator Tew
Owner's Address Irrigation Operator's
Address
Owner's Phone # Operator's Phone #
From waste UUllzatlon Plan
Crop Type SG Recommended PAN 50
L- - I Loading (Iblacre)
l - - -- I
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (a) (9) (10)
0 1)
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(lb11000 gal)
PAN Applled
(lb/acre)
(a) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(Iblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
Start
Tlme
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# Of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gal/min)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gal/acre)
(7) ! (A)
50
2
2120/2011
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
1
165
19800
10588
1.5
15.88
34.12
c
.2
2/21/2011
9:30 AM
11:35 AM
125
1
165
20625
11029
1.5
16.54
17.57
c
2
2/22/2011
11:00 AM
1:10 PM
130
1
165
21450
11471
1.5
17.21
0.37
c
end
Crop Cycle Totals =
1 49.63 }
Owner's Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
' NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
" Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
'Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12120l2006

FORM )RR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 12 Facility Number 62 - 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.12
Farm Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tew
Owners Address Irrigation Operator's
Address
Owners Phone # Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type SG Recommended PAN 50
Loading (lb/acre)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mm/dd/yr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(Ib/1000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
MIX (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(lblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gaVmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
50
3
2124/2011
11:00 AM
12:10 PM
70
1
165
11550
10313
1.5
15.47
34.53
c
3
2/25/2011
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
165
9900
8839
1.5
13.26
21.27
c
3
2/26/2011
10:30 AM
11:35 AM
65
1
165
10725
9576
1.5
14.36
6.91
c
Crop Cycle Totals z I
1 43.09 1
Owner's Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
" NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"* Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
" Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/20/2006

Mr. Lynn Tew
PO Box 796
Salemburg, NC 28385 �®
August 1, 2011
Dear Mr. Tew,
On Wednesday, July 27, 1 made a follow up visit to your swine farm
located on Fussell Rd., near Wallace, facility 31-522, at your request, to reassess
the stands of bermudagrass on the sprayfields_ While I did note that stands were
better than I had observed in June, the coverage of bermudagrass overall was
not more than one-third of the acreage. I would note, however, that on the ridge
behind the red barn, coverage was around 90% or better, and this area should
not require any renovation, if you choose to keep bermudagrass as the receiving
crop. All the lower fields, however, I feel would need to have sward destruction
and renovation to get the vaseygrass infestation under control.
Given the lateness in the season, and the hot dry conditions, I would not
recommend attempting to renovate at this juncture, but rather try to adjust PAN
rates to suit the vegetation present, provided that grass is harvested and
removed. I would estimate that the combination of vaseygrass and crabgrass that
is present would produce around two tons per acre of dry matter yield between
now (Aug. 1) and mid October, when lower night temperatures would reduce the
growth rates of the grasses. Using typical N rates for forage grasses, therefore, I
would expect the inated by crabgrass and vaseygrass to be able to
remove around 100 lb/acre PAN)during this time period. The irrigation pulls
e in e r am w is ad good stands of bermudagrass could continue to
receive the normal rates given in the WUP. I don't have a farm map, and do not
know which pulls this would include, and therefore you would need to resolve
that with your technical specialist and Ms. Gaines of NCDENR-DWQ.
This recommendation is intended as an interim option for this summer
only, until the winter annual can be established. The poorer fields should have a
normal receiving crop, either bermudagrass or some other crop, established next
winter or spring. I know these are challenging times, Mr. Tew, and I hope these
recommendations will assist you in managing through them. If I can answer any
questions, please call.
Sincerely yours,
Tim Hall
Regional Agronomist
NCDA&CS
[phone]

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 1 Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.23
Farm Owner Taw Irrigation Operator Tew
Owner's Address Irrigation Operators
Address
Owners Phone # Operators Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading (lblarre)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
Lagoon
ID
Data
(mmlddlyr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(lb/1000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(Iblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
Start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gallmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
100
2
8/30/2011
8:30 AM
10:00 AM
90
1
165
14850
12073
0.65
7.85
92.15
c
L
2
8/30/2011
10:30 AM
12:10 PM
100
1
165
16500
13415
0.65
8.72
83.43
c
.
2
W112011
9:00 AM
10:35 AM
95
1
165
15675
12744
0.65
8.28
75.15
c
�.•r
2
8/31/2011
11:00 AM
12:35 PM
95
1
165
15675
12744
0.65
8.28
66.87
c
i
2
9/1/2011
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
16098
0.65
10.46
56.40
c
L
2
912/2011
10:30 AM
12:35 PM
125
1
165
20625
16768
0.65
10.90
45.50
c
2
913/2o11
1:30 PM
3:30 PM
120
1
165
19800
16098
0.65
10.46
36.04
c
2
9/4/2011
11:00 AM
1.10 PM
130
1
165
21450
17439
0.65
11.34
23.70
c
Crop Cycle Totals =
Owners Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
` NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
" Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"`Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/20/2006

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 2a Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 2.25
Farm Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tow
Owner's Address Irrigation Operatar's
Address
Owner's Phone # Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading (Iblacre}
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (s) (7) (8) (9) (10)
HE
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN•
(Ib11000 gal)
PAN Applied
(Iblacre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(lb/acre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
Start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gaVmtn)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gavacre)
(7)1(A)
100
2
311/2011
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
1
165
19800
8800
1.50
13.20
86.80
c
L
2
3/3/2011
10:00 AM
12:05 PM
125
1
165
20625
9167
1.50
13.75
73.05
c
L-+"
2
314/2011
9:45 AM
12:00 PM
135
1
165
22275
9900
1.50
14.85
58,20
c
C
2
W712011
11:00 AM
1:10 PM
130
1
165
21450
9533
0.65
6.20
52.00
C
2
9/8/2011
9:00 AM
11:15 AM
135
1
165
22275
9900
0.65
6.44
45.57
C
( r
2
9/9/2011
12:30 PM
2:20 PM
110
1
165
1 181 &0-1
8067
0.65
1 5.24 1
40.33
c
2
9/10/2011
9:50 AM
12:00 PM
130
1
1
165
21450
9533
0.65
6.20
34.13
c
2
9/13/2011
12:30 PM
2:20 PM
110
1
165
18150
8067
0.65
5.24
28.89
c
C r
Crop Cycle Totals = I _ J
Owner's Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operator's Certification No.
NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"*'Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12120/2006

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 2c i Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.85
Fans Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tew
Owners Address Irrigation Operator's
Address
Owners Phone # Operators Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading (lb/acre)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
0 1)
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mm/ddtyr)
irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(lb19000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lblacre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance**
(lb/acre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(initials)
start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3)-(2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gaVmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
100
2
9/16/2011
12:30 PM
2:30 PM
120
1
165
19800
10703
0.65
6.96
93.04
c
Ur-
2
9/20/2011
9:45 AM
12:00 PM
135
1
165
22275
12041
0.65
7.83
85.22
c
T
2
9/21/2011
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
10703
0.65
6.96
78.26
c
L :�
2
9P2212011
11:45 AM
1:30 PM
105
1
165
17325
9365
0.65
6.09
72.17
c
3
9/25f2011
10:50 AM
12:45 PM
115
1
165
18975
10257
1.70
17.44
54.74
c
-r-
3
9/2812011
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
10703
1.70
18.19
36.54
c
-r
3
9/30/2011
9:50 AM
11:45 AM
115
1
165
18976
10257
1.70
17.44
19.11
Crop Cycle Totals
80.89
Owners Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
*� Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
*"Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/2012006

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # e Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.87
Farm Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tew
Owners Address Irrigation Operator s
Address
Owners Phone # Operators Phone #
From Waste Utlllzatlon Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading pblacre)
(1) (2) (3) (4) (51 fal (71 181 (91 (101 fill
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN*
(Ib/1000 gal)
PAN Applied
(Iblacre)
(8)—AL9l
1000
N€trogen
Balance"
(lblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Init€als)
start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate.
(gal/min)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(8) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
100
3
8/25/2011
9:30 AM
11:30 AM
120
1
165
19800
10588
1.7
18.00
82.00
c
C"r�
3
912e/2011
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
10588
1.7
18.00
64.00
c
r
3
9/27/2011
9:OO AM
11:10 AM
130
1
165
21450
11471
1.7
19.50
44.50
c
3
9128/2011
10:30 AM
12:40 PM
130
1
165
21450
11471
1.7
19.50
25.00
c
Crop Cycle Totals = 1 1 75.00 1
Owners Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
***Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/2012006

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone 0 7 Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.83
Farm Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tew
Owners Address Irrigation Operators
Address
Owner's Phone # Operators Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading (lb/acre)
r11 (21 M (dl r5l IAl M IAN ION rinl rill
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mrrVdd/yr)
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN'
(Ib11000 ga{)
PAN Applied
(ItVacre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(Iblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gal/min)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gatlacre)
(7) I (A)
100
3
3/7/2011
12:00 PM
1:45 PM
105
1
165
17325
10629
1.5
15.94
84.06
c
3
3IB12011
9:15 AM
11 A 0 AM
115
1
165
18975
11641
1.5
17.46
86.50
c
3
3/9/2011
12:30 PM
2:20 PM
110
1
165
18150
11135
1.5
16.70
49.89
c
tv--,-
3
3/1012o11
1015 AM
12:00 PM
105
1
165
17325
10629
1.5
15.94
33.95
c
irr
3
3/11/2011
11:30 AM
1:15 PM
105
1
165
17325
10629
1.5
15.94
18.01
c
t.�--'
3
1 3/12/2011
1 1010 AM
12:00 PM
110
1
1 165
18150
11135
1 1.5
16.70
1.30
c
GrOp GyC16 Total8 - I J I 98.70 I END
Owners Signature Operator's Signature
Certfed Operator (Print) Operators Certification No.
' NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source lie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
1212012006

FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # t 1 Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.87
Farm Owner Tew Irrigation Operator Tew
Owner's Address Irrigation Operators
Address
Owner's Phone # Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilisation Plan
Crop Type BP Recommended PAN 100
Loading (Wacre)
III t2i r9i (41 rsi W rn 1e1 191 1101 rill
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mrnlddlyr)
Irri anon
Waste Analysis
PAN*
(lb11000 gal)
PAN Applied
(Iblacre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance**
(Iblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
Start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# Of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gallmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
100
3
9/19/2011
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
1
165
19800
10588
1.7
18.00
82.00
c
C . e
3
g12ol2o11
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
1
165
19800
10588
1.7
18.00
64.00
c
C
3
9/21/2011
10:00 AM
12:05 PM
125
1
165
20625
11029
1.7
18.75
45.25
c
i
3
9/23/2011
11:35 AM
1:30 PM
115
1
165
18975
10147
1.7
17.25
28.00
c
U
Crop Cycle Totals a l 1 72.00 J
Owner's Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operator's Certification No.
" NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
" Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
—*Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/2012006

•
FORM IRR-2 Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Zone # 12 Facility Number 82 522
Field Size (wetted acres) = (A) 1.12
Farm Owner Tew irrigation Operator Tew
Owner's Address Irrigation Operator's
Address
Owner's Phone # Operator's Phone #
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type 9P Recommended PAN 100
Loading (Iblacre)
(1) (2) (3) W f51 fat (71 ra) f91 rlol f111
Lagoon
ID
Date
(mmlddlyr)
Irrigation
lasts Analy
PAN"
(lb11000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
(8) x (9)
1000
Nitrogen
Balance"
(Iblacre)
Weather
Code
Inspections
(Initials)
Start
Time
End
Time
Total
Minutes
(3) - (2)
# of
Sprinklers
Operating
Flow
Rate
(gallmin)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(6) x (5) x (4)
Volume
per Acre
(gallacre)
(7)1(A)
100
3
3/4/2011
11:00 AM
12:20 PM
80
1
165
13200
11786
1.5
17.68
82.32
c
(. E
3
ats/2011
10:30 AM
12:00 PM
90
1
165
14850
13259
1.5
19.89
62.43
c
T
3
9/25/2011
9:30 AM
11:00 AM
90
1
165
14850
13259
1.7
22.54
39.89
c
C- 1-
3
9/26/2011
10:00 AM
11:30 AM
90
1
165
14850
13259
1.7
22.54
17.35
c
Crop Cycle Totals - I I l_
Owner's Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator (Print) Operator's Certification No.
' NCDA Waste Anaylsis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"*"Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/20/2006

NG" a Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web site: www.neagr.gov/agronond/
Report: W02542
Grower.•
Tew, Lynn
103 Lake Dr
Copies to:
!s
Clinton, NC 28328
A
{Waste A nalysis Report
\l1F.V l
Farm:
Received: 10/12/2011
Completed: 1011812011 Links to Helpful Information
Duplin County
Sample Information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
Sample ID:
N
P Z Ca
Mg
S
Fe Mn
Zn
Cu
B Mo
CI C
T-F
Total 102
2&2 266 113
23.8
13.4
5.43 0.31
1.44
0.45
0.42
INN
Waste Code:
NH4
ALS
NO3
Na Ni Cd
A
Al
Se Li
PH
SS
C.N DM%
CCE% ALE )
89.6
7.48
Description:
OR-N
Swine ULwn Li .
Urea
Recommendations:
Nutrients Available for First Crop
lbs/1000 !Ions
Other Elements
lbs/1000 allons
Application Mdbod
N Pa05 K20 Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
Zn Cu
B Mo
CI
Na
M Cd Pb
Al Se Li
Irrigation
0.42 0.38 2.1 0.66 0.14 0.08 0,03
T
0.01 T
T
0.75
Sample information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
Sample M.
N
P R Ca
,fig
S
Fe Mn
Zn
Cu
B No
CI C
T-i
Total 420
109 1180 175
37.7
522
16.4 1.18
5.68
1.64
1.20
IN-N
Waste Code:
-NH4
Na Ni Cd
A
Al
Se Li
PH
SS
C.•N DM%
CM ALH )
ALS
-NO3
306
7.81
Description
OR-N
Swine L n Li ,
Urea
R n tion :
1 Nutrients Available for First Crop
Ibs/1000 MHons
Other Elements
lbs/10o0 allons
Application Metbod
N P205 W Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
2h Cu
B Mo
CI
Na
Ni Cd A5
Al Se Li
Irrigation
1.8 1.5 9.5 1.0 0.22 0.30 0.10
0.01
0.04 0,01
0.01
2.6
North Carolina Reprogramming of the laboratory4nformatlon-management system that makes this report possible Is being fundedd
'- through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
lobaccol-rust Fund Commission - SteveTroxler, Commissioner ofAgrieulture

N92yWS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web site: www.ncagr.gDv/agronomi/
Report: W01374
R1L711TL?pt- 1
F'
Grower:
Tew, Lynn
103 Lake Dr
Clinton, NC 28328
Copies to:
y
Waste Analysis Report
Farm
Received: 08/29/2011
Completed: 09/01/2011 Links to Helpful Information
Duplin County
Sample Information
laboratory Results (parts per miWon unless otherwise noted)
Sample 10.
N
P K Cd
44
S
Fe Mn
Zn
Crr
B MO
C1
C
Total 398
76.6 631 146
31.7
51.9
12.2 0.95
6.33
1.48
o.6o
1
1N-N
Waste Code:
-NH4
AlS
NO3
Na Ni Cd
A
At
Se Li
PH
SS
C.•N DM%
CCE%
ALE(Kgol)
165
7.06
Descrtpthm
OR-N
Swine Lapon Li .
Urea
Comm n on :
Nutrients Available for First Crop
1bs/1000 gqlkm
Other Elements
ibs/1000
Aons
Application Me"
N P203 K20 Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
Zn Ca
B MO
C1
Na
Ni Cd F5
At
Se Li
Irrigation
1.7 1.0 5.1 0.85 0.18 0.30 0.07
0.01
0.04 0.01
T
1.4
Sample information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
Sample ID:
N
P K Ca
Mg
S
Fe Mn
Zn'
Cu
B MO
C1
C
Total 156
19.3 221 t24
24.6
26.1
6.07 0.46
4.95
0.80
0.48
2-F
rN N
Waste Code:
NH4
ALS
-NO3
Na M Cd
A
At
Se 1i
pH
SS
C•N DM%
CC6516
ALE }
71.3
7.37
DescripUm
OR-N
Swine Lapon Ll ,
Urea
Recommendations:
Nutrients Available for First Crop
IbS110009allons
Other Elements
lbs/1000
Moss
Application Met1w
N P205 K20 Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
Zn Cu
B MO
C1
Na
M Cd F6
Al
Se 1i
Irrigation
0.65 0.26 1.8 0.73 0.14 0.15 0.04
T
0.03 0.01
T
0.59
North Carolina Reprogramming of the laboratory4nformation-management system that makes this report possible is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
F,
iL y. r
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
Tobacco Trust Fund Commission - Steve Troxler, Commissioner of Agriculture

NT4W Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web site: www.neagr.gov/agronanil/
Report: WO545O
11111 T1'RF
Grower
Tew, Lynn
103 Lake Dr
Copies to:
Moore, Greer/CRC
Clinton, KC 28328
Waste A nalysis Report
Farm;
Received: 02/04/2011 Completed: 02/11/2011 Links to Helpful Information
Duplin County
Sample Information
laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
Smuple ID:
N
P K Ca
lug
S
Fe Mn
Zn
Cu
B Mo
Cl C
l
Total 354
22.3 559 115
41.3
37.6
2.96 0.21
0.76
0,29
0.67
IN-N
Waste We..
-NH4
Na Ni Cd
A
Al
Se G'
pH
SS
C•N DM%
CCE% ALE )
ALS
-NO3
132
7.52
Descrtpfim,
OR-N
Swine LWon L1 .
Urea
R mmen on :
Nutrients Available for First Crop
lbs/1000gauans
Other Elements
lbs 1000 allans
Appikaffon Metbod
N P2O5 K2O Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
Zn Cry
B No
Cl
Na
Ni Cd
Fb Al Se G
Irrtption
1.5 0.30 4.5 0.67 0.24 0.22 0.02
T
0.01 T
0.01
1.1
Sample Information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
Sample ID
N
P K Ca
Mg
S
Fe Mn
Zn
Cu
B Mo
Cl C
2(F)
Tota! 362
25.5 559 96.5
37.5
38.0
3.07 0.26
0.92
0.36
0,85
EV-N
Waste Code:
NH4
AL5
NO3
Na Ni Cd
A
Al
Se L!
PH
SS
C.-N DM%
CCE% ALE(KO)
F 121
7.32
Descrfptfon.•
OR-N
Swine Lagpon Li .
Urea
R mm n on :
Nutrients Available for First Crop
lbs/1000 gaUons
Other Elements
lbs11OOO
Application Metbod
N F2O5 K2O Ca Mg S Fe
Mn
Zn Ca
B No
CI
Nd
Ni Cd
A Al Se W
InigWon
1.5 0.34 4.5 0.56 0,22 0.22 0.02
T
0.01 T
T
1.1
_North Carolina
ina Reprogramming of the laboratory4nformation-management system that makes this report possible is being funded
r` through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
Iblaacco Frust Fund Commission - Steve Troxler, Commissioner of Agriculture

. FORM TRAN-1
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's Phone #
Tew
Animal Waste Transfer Record
Record Each Transfer of Waste Between Lagoons or Third Party
Facility Number 31 - 522
Irrigation Operator
Irrigation Operator's
Address
Operator's Phone #
Tew
Lynn Tew
Date
Time
Nutient
Analysis
Transfer From
(lagoon ID)
Transfer To
(lagoon ID or third party)
!Volume
Transferred
"Third Paily Information
Permit #
Name
Phone #
29-Aug
10:00 - 2:00
back
front
30-Aug
10:00 - 2:00
back
front
31-Au
9:30 - 1:00
back
front
*Volume Transferred must be recorded in gallons, tons, or cubic yards.
**Third Party must be provided with nutrient analysis.
Waste Transfers over 4 cubic yards must be accepted by a permitted facility or a field in the permittee's WUP.
3/14/2003

7W

.�l
AA1)Ma
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
September 2, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED
7010 0290 0003 0834 5084
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
Mr. Lynn Tyner Tew �.
P.O. Box 796
Salemburg, North Carolina 28385
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
NOV-2011-PC-0493
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2T .1304
Lynn Tew Farm Facility No. 31-522, Permit No. AWS
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Tew:
Natural Resources
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On August 29, 2011, staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), Aquifer Protection Section (APS),
inspected the Lynn Tew Farm and the permitted waste management system.
As a result of this inspection, you are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -discharge permit
for the subject animal waste management system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1304, you have been found to be in
violation of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) and the Swine Waste System General
Permit No. AWG 100000 as follows:-'
Violation 1:
Failure to maintain waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance with the facility's CAWMP in
accordance with Condition V. 2. of Swine Waste System General Permit No. AWG 100000.
.1.
On August 29, 2011 a lagoon/storage pond level (Lagoon 1 — back transfer lagoon) was documented at 15 inches
of freeboard at a level of 19.5 inches is the maximum level allowed by your permit.
Required Corrective Action for Violation 1:
Continue to follow the proposed actions outlined in you Plan of Action (POA) dated August 31, 2011 and
received in the Wilmington Regional Office on August 31, 2011. Take all necessary additional steps to insure
lagoon levels remain in compliance with Section V of your permit.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension Wilmington, NC 28405 One
Phone: [phone] / FAX: [phone] NorthCarollina
Internet: www.ncwateraualiiy.org lf �atra`l%/
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer Customer Service 1-87-7-623-67448
50% Recycled/ 10% Post Consumer Paper

Lynn Tew Farm
Notice of Violation
31-522
September 2, 2011
Page 2 of 2
Violation 2:
Failure to notify Division of Water Quality of inadequate waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance
with Condition 111. 13 of Swine Waste System General Permit No, AWG100000.
Required Corrective action for Violation 2:
In the future you must_, notify the Division of Water Quality of the occurrence of any reportable events in
accordance with your permit.
The Division of Water Quality requests_that, in addition to the specified corrective action above, please submit the
following items on or before October 3, 2011:
1. An explanation from the 01C for this farm regarding how these violations occurred.
2. A list from the 01C concerning the steps that will be taken to prevent these violations from occurring in
the future.
3. Copies of all the pumping records, lagoon levels, rainfall records and waste analyses for this farm from
January 1, 2011 to the present along with.a copy of your CAWMR
You are required to take any necessary action to correct the above violations on or before September 30,
2011 and to provide a written response to this Notice by September 30, 2011. Please include in your response
all corrective actions already taken and a schedule for completion of any corrective actions not addressed.
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact Amanda Gaines at [phone].
Yours very truly,
COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DELIVERY
.2- , , ■ Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete A. Signature
AIWK
co item 4 If Restricted Delivery is desired. ❑ Agent
: ■ Print your name and address on the reverse X Addressee
` so that we can return the card to you. p g, Received by {Printed Name C. Date of Delivery
i
■ Attach this card to the back of the mail iece,
} crn
o or on the front If space permits.
AMt7� 'Postage $ D. Is delivery address different from Item 1? es
1. Article Addressed to:
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
Certified Fee -� j
Q Retum Reeelpt Fee �~ C-w L 1
+ C 3 (Endorsement Required)
p.o. �3cax'�9 C� j: 6 (_ate e. b n
Restricted Delivery Fee �7� j�
(Endorsement Required) SALCM(3M�"1 �C r� 1Y, �v
Cr
J f ~� rU Tatar Ponta a Fees 3. service Type� f�G.3�
l� ❑ Certified Mall ❑ Express Mail
II ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
Cal
r l sent o.4 N�- E w-__•__• _ El Insured Mall ❑ C.O.D. ;
�irser c.� ...............:
apt. n-
N or Po Box No, �, . � OX �Cr(o § 4. Restricted Dellvery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
City, State, Z1F44 � f •"--n•"p"'-^•""
:,,AC.FMirGcR�] /�� 0�6 3�5 2. Article NumberPS Form
(rransfer from service tat' 7 010 10290 00113 0834 5084
PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-tut-15401

41,
INV-
s a P W
t\ , i- nT
_ • �r.r
� III }y Sir P'� J .Ij� •? -.i / ��
It '� ,r i ��'} y�' '� ti!r•�� ,� . • ' ,
f � Lpr,f I � 7rr y
.� I ,d ♦ ,�r i� v �'�'!r Yr'r'1` ?1 i'E"', r•PI �rYt •i ��r i• ►rs
♦MB'
1 y ` . �, - i y %, ' ~• , y iP � ,a�q='�.�Y'I !£ �`• ((("'��"' n;,;w�yyld� 11 � ''' � �,,, ,yi+a+•, I,
�. � i 1 tr�Y. r. li \� rrY. rl,�-�!� •1' �' 'S;'1'� �;
,!' "�' t ��'�'J�tMJ•j, j,.; q i",i y �>., .� !�,'+� r . 'J- � '�w I
rY
rtT f �P` • P`{ M`fP n�j/ i r f �. ep
�: �I f7 •4 � Pr � Y 5 1 �` 1 r.: F �l•: � •
io
r\ ♦� '� 1 'r 1�� �t �y 1: 3 i i� J }r 1. '� fA ,i,� •` fly f :f � �, .
\.: r, ar d'- ���J��# ¢Y{✓}� r. y5e�rl + f•+ ', t `- � •', •�� 1 � I.
•• ,J1 r '';� r+Y Jrr) 'Syk�'ti};b�c��' 1'I'• .�f �' .�} * r ,i •r, ..%... �,J� a t !{K - E ly',' r� 1
L a
r'!: J��y� 14ik. \� '�e �, r� `! l r .�� '.. 1 .r}i t�r•� � I � �i~r„S} `�4 7
'� � ��rtyk .r ', t rr >• 't? t, ., S i } � f - � , n+� ''�1j�yy' 1
r. _ 1M� {_ /J .S ;fCr' Yf • 'L're. � r I ''�� //• .�� `! s�� '1 !�. ��.. � ' �. `L# 1 ��
r
�' �• I� - aPai' � r
�. .1`. a ,+r y •N 1
lira

Type of visit: Wompliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
xeason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint Follow-up 0 Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: f 1 Arrival Time: / Departure Time: ® County: �.,pC_ar! Region:
Farm Name: LLAN/y 1 G t._-� Owner Email:
Owner Name: LA3 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: �~ Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Desigu Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pap. Wet Poultry C*apacity Pop.
Design Current
Cattle C*apacity Pop.
can to Finish
I
ILayer
I
ow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
alf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Design Currcnt
Dr, P,oultr, Ca aci P,o ,
Layers
Dai heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
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?
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 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 �6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: J -rj Date of Inspection: 11
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes W 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
RCflts
Identifier: �A GCi v1v, AOSs
Spillway?: l
Designed Freeboard (in): 90 on:�_ 19.5
.5
Observed Freeboard (in): Q 3 __�s �
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 00 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 0 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 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 101bs. ❑ 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
❑ 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
Required 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
VION 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
N NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" 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
21412011 Continued

Facility N mber: jDate of Inspection: !
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
the appropriate box(cs) 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 rNE
E
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑No ❑ NA
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
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
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
1ANE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
MNA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
% Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other:comment& :.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary),
1y,-t15. ON -THE FAaj,'& Wj jow v COc-LCCE icy rnEET w) LLyVN'16L,_i.LA3H1Lr=
L,.)AIr1A16 f:� HIM 7C5 PaRIuE T- IfMV3- 10„3 is A FOLLOLi-4
1 o I X IN5pECTia�vljnE F-71,v6' iN S u�E dot\ . L 3 VOILE w TI (0 H (4 Lc �F s, C- RoR
�r }-!E Q.CEuAwR;r�iHC F-rELDS (! euALVA-�oN aN �k �t E 1�oIIEDkl�
G2�r �►EST�. �� NOTr=�'TH47' Aq-tDC'C (LED RAC -AI NASA O')oRE
�E��nuOA Gc�cs�AC;E 114A-N 0gLjGINr4LL ipocxC;NT•Zi 1HELESi 5F7HC
!1f Dlt uATC Q�Qv�^tcDH �Ul-iLK15- ,�O*Al4Z WAc-1«t� G?LL
�a brut 5 11 LL HAb I R �j,
1� pS 1 A SJE�,uF1i C CauEQCA—'I
tD�c�IIS� c1cL
TO AGE. i �Ir cRA3 GGtASS
�c -Ds jnrDlcrgC T HE F IC-Lj
CST 13.Ir GL wE es) S -
(� - q�LkSA-NOC'it;C�-THE [rAST-wCEK /N ��N�C 1
6cGLG
CY16cx3_E GAUEtij �OHN GOt<t_ECE G GAFL-%Z mR- I CIt1G� M 50A&I C,X
l�5 S N c � �'`�� AI 1 HE FARM 1.
wag Na; Off/- 0CC-WtAk Fp(ZouR 11C .o0att.fA;7IX6. HE SAID SIC N Ai�Q i:N 7a E�
�c �aDt - T NAUE 1T) CPI_L�, i A�kED.Htnn wN&NTHC Ftc11
Lb NA
A
BPS EEN cuT d NE sToo rLD'[ HE g�ENA
tka•P1NC, N5 TA Cb 1ACI_ StA5T D D LCW6 6)00.614
ALSO 5KE
(O[L-T QuSN- ►A0667oLt3 v4iry)7NlccRgf�6,a'4sS w 4 S
TO qutL_ t-I 1,5 ti1E E L- I At i
ACL-A SGEo,N6 acui. NE S-TRTI=I�!,-r1iA-i k-kE iq 41� 5omEp,NC 71I4Tw-RS 6p1NC T6
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 91� ���'�� T
Date: --� lam! 1
21412011

Date (if lnspcction:1�4MR/j I
Additiq'n'al'C6'mments'nd/dfDra'w'-Ings-.
To r-- e- � S 6N F I & Llb N 6 Y-T W 1;--- 70 CL64," Li
.T4e 4�116 LrYl T L"S(3uL-V') C-o(Y)03ACK- /A/
.
-CIL -THC- CON Z� I T) ON 0 P T 14 G- P I C- LIS'R
C) C_�4G : C -Trod
L(_ rn op ) �L_ ()19 ' )F- 7H(E -T G LA-
4/30/97

VI-110-14P5
jp-+ Caa.o,x,4L-
rON / �u0,5
l
pASPN
44e{1THF.Y B04VES
02 1 R $ 00.440
0006559826 SEP06 2011
MAILED FROM ZIP CODE 28405
N'lx:r€ 28z CE 1 Q6 O9109111
RETURN TO SENDER
mOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSMO
UNABLE TO FORWARD
*02-54--00270-06-41

Type of Visit: Q,Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: l ! Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:Region:
Farm Name: t �/\//V E L�Z �/I�. N� Owner Email:
Owner Name: �LA /V AI (-A/, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title: Phone:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Dischart!es 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 DWQ)
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?
Page I of 3
Longitude:
❑ Yes �q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Ycs ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued

Facility Ntltnber: Date of Inspection:
J
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
Structure I 2 Structure 3` Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
nnStruoiure
Identifier: �jn Ct� d o' �rUNi �� Al ar111 )
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):, ., ) S r ! al
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 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 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 1� No ❑ NA [] NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes (A 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
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.
Yes ❑ No
Yes [:]No
ti
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes `❑ No
�N
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [] No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
/';
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? D Yes Q No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA 0 NE
❑ NA ENE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA NE
❑ NA [ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Fadlit Niintber: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
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 + 1
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?
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:
❑ NA �( NE
❑ NA [ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
[:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
\. - r
❑ Yes No
r
❑ Yes © No
[( Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes .❑ No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA C:] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
1,
❑ NA NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? 0 Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor.any additional recommendations orrany,other comments 4" xx (
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations use additional pages as necessary).
�i)Ai Ins �i �o,-IN > �1Al[-.t_L LABttC ON 1TC CCwJ1 c_IiAje� VC- C (;o�)rz
G,Arr-_.E,Z C.UNr,-LA(.701,1r ( aO F pM, (�.�� /YU71� 06 1) p(-- Q+5t7. il,s< OwNC L)vN cw
�,,ta5 XIGi 5,90Kr.N 7O[-)t4LCc I��-1 . 1 NC Far C 2CA91� on( 7M1 An,A w,as jt coAje-C ;env
pNC U� ri � 1� S u � W� r f i= c h C �A/ n I O ON S 1 H C tl C NAB L Al � C: a' _4 �.17 7 � c T Gr
(�Ihlf Al i14I� q.AClr i-r� 11II SL'{inMi�.
-� • 11-1L (A� 1C LAC,c�NF�Z.E G C�Csr1'+Z� nR
I S
j . 't)W C Lk 071 F Ii 4-1 A 1 -1 GA l? A S O(n ; G F C G r., i-C 0-) C r f
r
01VCU1NfC ISSUCL1)r_ .
PI�IUNC C0/V -071Q.v C(t I/V C71C,)v� ?1 ,2 N1Go E S i�;C`�'I!l►�r'1'.
�•v�L tb&Cnrn AA//klciiA7Ftlt;��CoRr
[» �7R ?L A.A/7 w1111]Uw r 1UC�• i 7uc D [ l ;Z i N Fl I ;ou�vt) �.S rc ,'� y,,07
i I�,a i R, G cr,tE t4Ir r '^+'��� N� ri c �F ) -? o C u+ i 6 IWO> . s7oL- <TU R,,+.tSN 1-10C�1Nf
S1NC1< A1C��str�tI)IAlr �l�15 +�.f.�/DUNF-3i��1�1 5/louti� `,;r rIAtc.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
IA INC S' ' _\nNtv `Ai7Nr- CL
l A -0
JVWA
Phone: �jl o -) 1f
Date:
21412011
- - '

Type of Visit: Wompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 / Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: LLA1VN / F cy POI M Owner Email:
Owner Name:-LtANn/ 1 LAN O- / E W Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title: Phone:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
Current Design C*urrent
Pop. W=t@-apacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er I
Design Current
It
Cattle
aig Cow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Farrow to Finish
ILayers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
6
Pullets
I
113eef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
TurkeyPoults
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 DWQ)
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 X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

FAcility Number: 1 - 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
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
giIdentifa� 1(Rop�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ac—>
Observed Freeboard (in): 1 5 D93 oC
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 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 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 04 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 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
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
Required 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
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
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 CR NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA b�NE
❑ NA ,XNE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

179eill Number: -
Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
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:
❑No ❑NA NE
❑ No ❑ NA NE
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 ❑ No ❑ NA NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes tx 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?
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
t4Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA kNE
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 [:] No NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes ❑ No [] NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any, additional recommendations or-anyother;comments :'r F
Use, drawings.of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
f_)M-}NDI�) &4INES z% �ONIV �A(LNGLL (ONS 17'E CCItp"-cTIA/Oq F(LCE OC)A2a c1CS.
eQX-_6(L Moog. CCIV&(ALTaN r �-O� FAitn^, W 14% into 7 ► F I E 1S pi IS 1 T. ! HOE OWN[ R� Lt�NN JLcw,
Wi�S X1C3TSPd�F�C>`/ TO DI"CTL i I-iL- F4LCCgaaQla one 70#� Ir14Rwk wr4S ►_r_0NcCQN
bUc TO oNCoINF ISSAE5 w� CrIF_LtS CONri) iloNS T�IESLC NaS BEEN VC-fL�L.177LETU
No P� M(�lI<r' p�TTJM Cr14Cl�I7�i1-i1S 13LtpA AGE -
QA-C.K LA 00V `) wR5 P, 1511- T14G- REF,uIRC� �QEE�OA6Z� �o2'TH1 S
C- sA 000V 1 S aQ r 1
sb �C.vQ wAS N07 N071F1E1)Tt-1A"i THE FR-ECROAQ-6 L.
s ov.� �F con�Sx rAfvcr
p.+IS . i F FALF_ Aq-E ONCCMIVF ISSUES w) F IEL-1S CorrD1 Tj0'V3.
*IN A PHONE CONUGiiZSAT)ON 1¢F-7E�l­ INSPQc71oN,/ 099-F-EK MOoRE S74TC=b_P-)A
M�• i r- wILc 6E 601AtCC To A scmirnmGQ IwIAl7cR ANNw'0 (Zo-rA)IOA/ 't -1gGaF09-C
I S 3C) D4-kA - QG14A/7_ wt1V (JOW 700LO • L TOLD WE T 14M SQu/VDF_ I) Coot (rice.
�yEQuMPC N€TtE bEF�'To cui f�1ELDS. SSE suc;��S;cD s1� +4o6�r�C5
SII+ICF NvPtAMpl�tc F ¢Fa45 Q�EJ� DONI I SNOUC.D 63C q� IIVE,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 2MANDO1 AIN - S ' J\\0HN I`A(LN 6 CC -,Phone: /10 %-332�-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _I�Q� / Date: iyi91
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Gaines, Amanda
From: rockinmfarms@!ntrstar.net
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 9:15 AM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: RE: 31-522
thanks amanda, i will let you know just as soon as the hay gets cut and baled, if it does?M
------- Original Message -------
From : Gaines, Amandafmailto:amanda. aines,ncdenr.govl
Sent : 8/9/2011 8:12:36 AM
To : rockinmfarms0intrstar.net
Cc
Subject RE: 31-522
Thanks. I know your frustration. At some point he is going to have to follow through. You do
what you think is best for the two pulls.
-----Original Message -----.
From: rockinmfarms(faintrstar.net [ mailto:[e-mail] ]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 1:59 AM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: RE: 31-522
he told me he was going to start getting the farm cut and baled last week, then mentioned
today
that james lucas would be cutting and baling, amanda i get ill because he tells me things are
going to happen but then you know they never do. i'think i will only allow full rate for the
one pull (7) that has the most bh. i really hate getting into overlaps/splits with different
rates, i will take the lower rate that Tim recommended for pull 6. Lynn and one or two other
producers share the dead box, i will try to find out what the deal is though.
thanks, greer
------- Original Message -------
From Gaines, Amanda[ mailto:amanda_.gaines(lncdenr.gov ]
Sent 8/8/2011 3:28:34 PM
To [e-mail]
Cc : [e-mail]; tim.hall(incaer.eov; charles.stehman(lncdenr.gov
Subject RE: 31-522
Greer,
I went out to Lynn Tew's farm(31-522) today as you had requested. I took John College from
Soil and Water along so we would have two eyes looking at the map. I have attached a scanned
copy of the map we had onsite. It appears that the
two pulls referenced by Tim Hall would be Pulls 6 and 7. Pull 6 would be a split pull and I
am
not sure the whole pull should be included. The pull from the hydrant away from the road has
plenty of Bermuda, that is the one I would use. If you and Lynn need
1

ebtv� r '
tter determination, you will have to get Tim hall to look at the map and perhaps he can
be
more specific.
It was very difficult to see anything out in the fields because they have not been mowed or
sprayed for weeds. The crabgrass seed head was up to my shoulder. I have attached some
pictures
of the fields for you to see what I mean. Lynn told
me when I last spoke to him that the fields were set to be sprayed or have cows put on them.
The timeline he gave me for this would have been last week. I am trying to work with him on
this, but he needs to properly maintain his fields. Even with the PAN given
by Tim Hall, he still needs to harvest the crop. As tall as this crabgrass is, I am not sure
that he should be pumping on it now and then bailing it for hay or putting cows out to
pasture. Additionally, the crabgrass and weeds were so thick that we could
not find all the hydrants in the field by Lagoon 3. Lynn might want to have those marked
before cutting the fields.
Also, we noticed in the dead box, a hog that was severely decomposing. The hog under that one
was not nearly in that bad of shape. I know in this heat it doesn't take long in this heat,
but
we need to make sure Lynn, or whoever is going
through his houses, knows that dead animals are to be disposed of within 24 hours. I have
also
attached a picture of the dead box.
I will fill out an inspection report and send Lynn his copy with a copy of this email. I will
also send you a copy of the inspection report for Lynn's books. I will call Lynn tomorrow or
Wednesday, as my schedule allows, and discuss with
him again his plans for cutting the fields.
Thanks,
Amanda
Amanda Gaines
Environmental Specialist
NCDENR-DWQ
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7327 (office)
910-617-8823 (cell)
910-350-2004 (fax)
NOTICE: Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
2

Gaines, Amanda
From: [e-mail]
Sent: Tuesday, August 09, 2011 1:59 AM
To: Gaines, Amanda
Subject: RE: 31-522
he told me he was going to start getting the farm cut and baled last week, then mentioned
today that fames lucas would be cutting and baling, amanda i get ill because he tells me
things are going to happen but then you know they never do. i think i will only allow full
rate for the one pull (7) that has the most bh. i really hate getting into overlaps/splits
with different rates, i will take the lower rate that Tim recommended for pull 6. Lynn and
one or two other producers share the dead box, i will try to find out what the deal is
though.
thanks, greer
------- Original Message -------
From Gaines, Amandafmailto:[e-mail]]
Sent 8/8/2011 3:28:34 PM
To [e-mail]
Cc iohn.college(@ncda.gov; tim.hall(@ncagr.gov; charles.stehman(lncdenr.gov
Subject : RE: 31-522
Greer,
I went out to Lynn Tew's farm(31-522) today as you had requested. I took John College from
Soil and Water along so we would have two eyes looking at the map. I have attached a scanned
copy of the map we had onsite. It appears that the two pulls referenced by Tim Hall would be
Pulls 6 and 7. Pull 6 would be a split pull and I am not sure the whole pull should be
included. The pull from the hydrant away from the road has plenty of Bermuda, that is the one
I would use. If you and Lynn need a better determination, you will have to get Tim hall to
look at the map and perhaps he can be more specific.
It was very difficult to see anything out in the fields because they have not been mowed or
sprayed for weeds. The crabgrass seed head was up to my shoulder. I have attached some
pictures of the fields for you to see what I mean. Lynn told me when I last spoke to him
that the fields were set to be sprayed or have cows put on them.
The timeline he gave me for this would have been last week. I am trying to work with him on
this, but he needs to properly maintain his fields. Even with the PAN given by Tim Hall, he
still needs to harvest the crop.' As tall as this crabgrass is, I am not sure that he should
be pumping on it now and then bailing it for hay or putting cows out to pasture.
Additionally, the crabgrass and weeds were so thick that we could not find all the hydrants
in the field by Lagoon 3. Lynn might want to have those marked before cutting the fields.
Also, we noticed in the dead box, a hog that was severely decomposing. The hog under that one
was not nearly in that bad of shape. I know in this heat it doesn't take long in this heat,
but we need to make sure Lynn, or whoever is going through his houses, knows that dead
animals are to be disposed of within 24 hours. I have also attached a picture of the dead
box.
I

I.wt17 dill out an inspection report and send Lynn his copy with a copy of this email. I will
also send you a copy of the inspection report for Lynn's books. I will call Lynn tomorrow or
Wednesday, as my schedule allows, and discuss with him again his plans for cutting the
fields.
Thanks,
Amanda
Amanda -Gaines
Environmental Specialist
NCDENR-DWQ
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405
910-796-7327 (office)
910-617-8823 (cell)
910-350-2004 (fax)
NOTICE: Email correspondence to and from this address may be subject to the North Carolina
Public Records Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
2

3/-,5a�-
PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number: 31-522,L
Facility Name: Barbara Lynn Tew Farm
Certified Operator Name: Lynn Tew
County: Du, ;' , ) �-
Operator Numt
1. Current liquid level(s) in inches as measured from the current liquid leve
lowest point on the top of the dam for lagoons without spillways; and from t
in the lagoon to the bottom of the spillway for lagoons with spillways.
4
Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagc
Lagoon Name/ID: #1 #2 #3 (transfer) !/r
Spillway(Y or N): N N N !
Level(inches): 19 18 `
4 '
2. Check all applicable items
Liquid level is within the designed structural freeboard elevabons�v!-vrie,or'more`stru`ctureS.
Five and 30 day Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
within 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. Volume 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 DWO 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: as field conditions permit
i
I hereby certify that 1 have reviewed the Informatlon listed above and Included within the
attached Plan of Action, and to the best of myrknowledge and ability, the information is
accurate and correct.
-qw�Ak I Phone:
Facility Owner/Manager.(print)
Facility,Owner/Manager„(signature). ,,,
,DEC 17 2009

PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Namelidentifier (ID): Tew #11 #2
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr.124 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker
19A inches
b. designed 25 yr.124 hr. storm & structural freeboard
26.0 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) =
7.0 inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
100.9 ftz
e. line c112 x line d x 7.48 gallons/W
440 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 39,561 ft3
h. current herd # r----9-5--51 certified herd #1 1200
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 31484 ft'
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 7.46 x 30 days/line f=
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I. current waste analysis dated 1 11/9/2009
m. ((lines e + k)11000) x line I =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
25989 ft3
35282 ft3
115635 gallons
1.20 Ibs11000 gal.
139.3 lbs. PAN

e
11. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 25 YR.124
HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
2. Structure ID: Tew #11 #2
line m = 139.3 lb PAN
3. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
4. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
5. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
6. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
n. lines 1 + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 = 139.3lbPAN
III. 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
(lb/acre)
t TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (Ibs.)
column r x a
u. application window'
1
SG
1.23
6.92
8.5
9101 /09-3/31 /10
2
SG
2.25
5.04
11.3
9101/09-3/31/10
3
SG
1.11
33.00
36.6
9/01/09-3/31110
4
SG
0.49
50.00
24.5
9/01109-3/31/10
5
SG
1.09
22.75
24.8
9/01/09-3/31/10
6
SG
1.87
35.15
65.7
9/01/09-3131110
7
SG
1.63
50.00
81.5
9/01/09=3/31/10
8
SG
2.26
41.35
93.5
9/01/09-3/31110
9
SG
1.62
36.75
59.5
9/01/09-3/31/10
10
SG
1.85
32.00
59.2
9/01109-3/31/10
11
SG
0.78
50.00
39.0
9/01109-3/31/10
12
SG
1.87
28.75
53.8
9/01 /09-3/31 /10
'State current crop ending application date or next crop application beginning date for available
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 558.0 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from section 11) = 139.3 lb. PAN
x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from section III) Q 558.0 lb. PAN
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) _ -419 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.
NARRATIVE -
Producer has contacted Hog Slat, Inc. to install cup waters.

f'rom:blackri4verfarms 910 532 2898
!�) 350,r
EI
ii, ' I
f � V;
02/11/2010 15:13 #133 P.001/005
o? �b
FES
al,/ 44lul 1111I114a/7,-
i�"�' '4��, •},, ail � a � � r : ,

From:blackriverfarms 910 532 2898
J
02/11/2010 15:13 #133 P.0021005
-) OQ cam,
PLAN 'OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facillty'Num1! ber: County: Duplin
Facility Name: 8artiara Lynn Taw Farm j
�. Certified Operator Name: Lynn Taw Operator Number.
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 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
Lagoon Name/ID: #1 #2' #3 (transfer)
5pillway(Y or N): N N N
Level(inches): 19 Ilse
2. Check all applicable Items
Liquid level is within the designed st uctural freeboard elevations of one or more structures.
Five and 30 day. Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
within acceptable ranges.
X t E Liquid level is within the 25 year 24 hour storm elevations for one or more structures. A
' y' , 30 day Plan of aon is attached. Agronomic balance is within acceptable range.
Waste Is to be pumAed and hauled to ofl 'site.locations. Volume and PAN content of waste
116be pumped and. hauled Is reflected in section III tables. Included within this plan is a list
:-1hf the proposed sites wlikrelated facility numbers, number of acres and receiving crop
formation. Contact and secure approval from the DWO prior to transfer of waste to a site
riot covered in lhe'facllitj i CAWMP.
Operation will be partially or fully depopulated.
*Attach a complete schedule with corresponding animal units and dates?ro depopulation
'if animals are to,be moved to another permitted facility,'provide facility number, lagoon
freeboard Wells and herd population for the receiving facility
3. Earliest possible date to begin land application of waste: 2111/2010
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
i accurate 'd correct.' .r ,
/ifs /eo,
�1101 1
�;� �� ' ' ' � Phone: r
Facility NManager (print) /� 1
Date: �+ / e
Facility Owner/Manager (signature)
% (4r
!' Ifs ! y `hi .i l i I•v .. � r
i

F�,rom:blackr;ilverfarms' 910 532 2898 ! 02/11/2010 15:13
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
1. TOTAL PAN TO BE LJ ND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1, Structure NameAdentifier (ID): Tew 02
` 2. Current liquid volume In 25 yr.u'24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a, current liquid level according to marker
19.0 Inches
b: designed 25 yr.124 hr. storm & structural freeboard
27.D Inches
C. line b - line a (inches in red zone) —
8.0 inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
'
(area at below strut tural,freeboard elevation)
100.9 ft�
it
I
i e: tine c/12 x line d x 7.48 gaifons1W
503 gallons
L,
Projected votume,of waste liquid produced during draw doom period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design
180 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design
39 561 ft3
h. current herd # 1200 Certified herd # 1200
actual waste produced = currertherd # x line g =
39661 fe
"
certified' herd #
!.''volume of wash water according to structural design
I
excess rainfall over evaporation according to design,
k. (lines h + i + j) x 7.48 x : 30 days/line ' } a fa
4? Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I.Current waste anaiysis'dated 1219/2009
m. ((lines e + ku1000).x ilne 1 W '
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE,
(Click on the next Strueture'tab shown below)
®fe
35282 fie
93304 gallons
#133 P.003/005
I
1.80 Ibs11000 gal.
150.1 lbs. PAN

Froc blackriverfarms 910 532 2898 02/11/2010 15:14
1
��ad 'rk 'FFI � .•
PLAN, OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
4 30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
1. TOTAL PANTO BE LAND'APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1.� Structure Name/identifier (ID): Transfer lagooh
i
2.i Current liquid volume In 26 yr./24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
#133 P.004I005
,Current liquid level according to marker 16.D in ,
1
b. Resigned 25 yr./24 hr, storm & structural freeboard 2D.D inches
` c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = 4.0 inches
I�'i
Ii.l
hFl
Vi f1r IP
I
N V
d
d�!
1
l
•I
�
i'
d. 'top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) 21738 ftz
e, line'c/12 x line d x 7.48'gailonsW' 54195 gallons
'3, ?Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. (temporary storage period according to structural design days
volume'of waste produced according,to structural design fe
K current' herd #' 1200 certified herd # 1200
i 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
' I: current waste anaI ' is dated
I�N , m. ((lines e + k)110D0) x line I
!ki�' REPEA%SECTION I, FOR:EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on,the ne,' Structuretab shown below)
'..PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00
i,
1
gal Ions
Ibs/1000 gal.
0 lbs. PAN
i
i
1 i

From: bIackr•iverfarms 910 532 2898 02/11/2010 15,14 #133 P.005/005
lip"
'o I
I.
II. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 26•YR 24
i3 I
' ! HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
• 1 1 , N
I
i
1. Structure ID:
line m a
lb PAN
2. Structure ID: Tew #2 1 C,
line m =
.i
150.1 lb PAN
3. ',Structure ID: Transfer lagoon �G
line m=
Ib PAN
4. Structure !D:
line m =
lb PAN
5. Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
' 6. Structure ID: E
line m =
lb PAN
i n. lines I + 2 4 3 + 4 + 5 + 6
150.1lbPAN
Ili. TOTAL PAN BALANCE, REMAINING FOR AVAILABLE
CROPS DURING 30 DAY DRAW DOWN f
PERIOD: 166 NOT LIST F1EL68 TO WHICH PAN CANNOT BE APPLIED DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD.
O. tract #A;'
(
p. field # !'
q. crop
? ,
r. acres
s. remaining IRR
2 PAN baW nw
QblacTe}
t TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (n».)
eatu nn r x s
4. apppegm Wndm+
I
1
SG
1.23
6.92
8.5
9/01/09-3131/10
i
2a
SG
2.25
5.04
11.3
9101109-3/31/10.
i
2b
SG
1.06
50.00
52.6
9101/09-3/31110
2c
SG
1.86
13.02
24.1
9101109-3/31/10
k
2d
SG
0.78
50.00
-39.0
9101/09-3/31/10.
3
SG
1.11
60.00
85.6
9/01/09-3/31/10 .
'
4
SG
0.49
50.00
24.5
9101/09-3/31110 d
6
SG
1.09
50.00
' 64.6
9/01/09-3131110 '1
6a
SG
1.87
19.45
36.4
9101109-3/31110
6b
SG•
1.83
50.00
91.5
9101109-3I31/10
7
SG
' 1.63
60.00
81.5
9101/09-3/31/10
8
SG
2.26
15.03
' 34.09101/09-3131/10
9
SG
1.62
23.$3
38.6
9101/01-3/31/10
10
SG
1.86
50.00
02.5
9101109-3/31/10
-------------
11
SG
0.78
20.66
16.1
9/01109-3/31/10
P+ l ' ;
12
SG�
1.87
50.00
93.5
9/01/09-3/31 /10
; ,I ' . State current crap ending application date or next crop application beginning date for available
1 I receiving ` ,crops during'30 deydraw down period..
Total PAN, avallable tor, all fields (sum of column t) 754.0 lb. PAN
I I IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
I, w, ,Total PAN to be land applied (tine n from'section 11) - 150.1 Ib. PAN
'Crop'$;remaining PAN valance (line v from section 111) @Ib. PAN
y! ' Overall PAN balance (w - x) _ 404 lb. PAN
Line y must show as a deficit: 11llne y does not show as a deficit, list course of action here including pump and
haul, depopulation; herd raducti' , etc. For pump & haul and herdEreduction options, recalculate new PAN
!' based on niw information.) If new fields are to be included as an option for lowering lagoon level, add these
fields to the PAN balance' tatile and recalculate the overall PAN balance. If animal waste is to be hauled to
l another pwrnitted"facility,provide Information regarding the hard population arid. lagoon. freeboard levels at the;

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 1�4 Routine C) Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: j S�io Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �l/l� Region:
r
Farm Name: LUNN Ew �fYl Owner Email:
96-�_:R
Owner Name: �- N cm L/� Phone:Qtb- 5�o _tom C G
Mailing Address: 0 •�� f< / YC O� i���,�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ,�Title:
tf�
Onsite Representative: - `OUP a_ Integrator•
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = t Longitude: = ° = I = "
Design Current
urrent Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Pou9ft_rAYJK@MaW[D--)a—*citvPoiulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
ID Layer
El Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
JVLjCC> 1
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Paultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
ElNon-Dairy
El Stocker
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Non-LayNetsers
ElBeef Feeder
El
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
it e
❑ Other
10 urkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
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 V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes )vNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes v$No
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

;y
Facility Number: -Sa
Date of Inspection S /D
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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 14 "z }L 3 4C(iCts51 Y�ED
Spillway?: n
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): $ p�
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 J&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes 'KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes
;�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ 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 stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ 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 10 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1� 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) Au-IV,t,tUILLE )V4CtkV—IC (2, 0LQ5f eit$
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? X YeslNo
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ yesNo ❑ NA [I NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments, (refer 6 yuesti6' #): ° Explain'any YES: answers and/ort anyarecomrnendations or any other,comrnents
Use drawings pf facility to Better explain situation's: &(use add honal pages ss necessary} ; r r r
C14u6�1c�� � ova
��• w�r� A �3oou� �oA
n- r4GTUG
CA'D �' p14T A1Je'eC6ms
GC7C0P(:S
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 �J/t H
G A//y.6'.. - r # s Phone: 910 110
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection S C�
Reuuired Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Design � Maps ❑Otherthe appropriate box. ❑ WUP [] Checklists
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
A
❑ NA
ElNE
ElWaste Application [] Weekly Freeboard ElWaste Analysis ElSoil Analysis El Waste Tran ❑/nnual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ �/rop Yield 0 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections 0
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
-23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
XNo
❑ 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
04 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? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
\
32.
Did ReviewerAnspector 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?
mYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IS, E`p s a� S tD� �� LpG�o'�
77 emu- T J��-��t�s�� 70
F, 43E �c4 uC�c r �v�
Q7N +�-I�cDS HAUE
�aLA_'�% aN F I f-,c.D
wAS,�G �aA�uS�ER-S 7a � a
)LA -re - I n�E, w�.'Tc .
33.
cd,�.. C S3pUc !N • �rrfs %(5 C!C D fl C�""ow N 4 (p C oo�
12128104

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint X Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: u"V Region:
Farm Name: Q9 Foam Owner Email:
Owner Name: L� mry Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: 1 ' rn yn2�4' _rRQ� Jlr aywcG��
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e =' =" Longitude: 0 ° ='
= "
s •, v <y .:F r i f .. _ ,: s l :-,' i � r'z x v 8-` 4;3 A
(Design Current`-.,`,?;r;kDesign Current P.rt
,''st k' i i?, r # $, S: Xk�£t'oC
- . p ".. - ,. `'T'8:5 44
Des�grl Current''
SWltl 3 ss <rg,
Ca aci rl'o
p tY
ulatton Wet Poultry Ca acs Po ulation
i fir,
Cattle
Ca aci �.:
Po Mahon
I?,.�.H.,.n�
;pa: rip e,z'�nl�p ae�rc
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
- ❑ Wean to Feeder
I❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf I's
' ❑ Feeder to Finish
a a tt r i ` i t
El Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
i
i } f jr e a rn i'x
Dr Yr ,gUitryj3 .,.._ . fit..
fit,.
El Dry Cow
El Farrow to Feeder
..
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑Beef Stocker
" ❑ Gilts
❑ Beef Feeder
";. El Boars
❑ Beef Brood Cow
r--�—
F
Other_ } 4rz r,ak >.:
�a ❑Other
s
Number of Structure `
yy
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Points
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ 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 DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

r'
Facility Number:
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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: !n SEC
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 1
19
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 ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
Structure 5
El NA ❑NE
El NA [I NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 J� 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?
I. 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA �NE
❑ No ❑ NA KNE
❑ No ❑ NA-M NE
❑ No ❑ NA NE
❑ No ❑ NA NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain an`y YES ans4ers, and/or, any, recommendations,or3any other, comments t:
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) , U ;t t�ra M�1`' f
�oA A�CZ-A F1LE ._.TC_ArnC- CLA--T To Cr, (-Gur=LS E3&cAUSrZ
'r NAu G_ FZCcE i uC% u�(J�Tru� c�4�oo�v pF�S i C n) S �f� oM
ReviewerAnspector Name 4mP?VC (6/a 7 A/>= ; , �' « Phone:
� 4 3�-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: I 1
12128104 Continued

l
r �
Facility Number: —$ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA jgfNE
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 [I 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 ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
�NE
.23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
kNE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ElNA
NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
❑ 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 4 NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
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 V No
❑ NA
El 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 X 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
;
Addrtio a1Corri nffi�and/or Dings:
flfaCc��
C_ CCAD04(Z + s 01
o� J
•
Fyi
12128104

L
f Visit 'qCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
n for Visit O Routine O Complaint VFollow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: . , Arrival Time: %d 1 Departure Time: County: U A/ Region:
Farm Name: ��%24AfZA 1JN w L"t t Q—m Owner Email:
Owner Name: (LN/u E iA_�� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = 6 = Longitude: = ° = ` 0 "
Design Current
Design C+urrent
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
ID Layer I 1
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
11 IE] Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
El Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl I
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ 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 DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
ElNA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverseimpacts to the Waters of the State
ElYeso
kN
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Sj =5
Date of Inspection I
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 RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: C C J
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 C1 9 Lo1
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes N 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 ANo ❑ 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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA XNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA XNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ANE
❑ 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
XNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
AYes
❑ No
❑ NA
[-INE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ElNA
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
r'C NE
;Comments (refer to'question'#) ' Explain any YES answers and/or any recummendationys,ar any otlfir;comments,
,: Use drkt`wtng£s:'of facility to better explain ns. srtuatio:(use uiiditiogal page.s:as�neycessary)_i�
(_� S l N �oCz t tt — l� u Ta QA ITI� P 1 �v
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

1
Facility Number: I — Date of Inspection
Required 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
El the appropriate box. WUp El Checklists Design ❑Maps ❑Other Checklists , \ 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 ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" 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 [XNE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
6NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
4NE
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
NNE
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
'NNo
❑ 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
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
tNA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Coinmerifsandl�orD avings:
AadttionalAL
1! Now Tt4AP5 f4 poA V,,cxxt<S:� NEEb To �SE S-)LEt�' AG A1N BCCAZE
'rH CAN . 0T/ F1 L-c- P-XQ) CZE S ) 0Q j 13109 4 Tf# E c_A- Gout S
AIo'T 6 � / C�m(tx-1 A 1V Gr G & �ZE -T E�cI
46_ I N FdM F fl jai F- ] -9 47T 15+? Pv WCC CC,P wA7c
fAJ5-1;9(_LEks s44�L'�) SnME U-"ATH C0P/,V7PJ/V/.4
C_ACoc»U C-F-,0PL IN 7/46 V-uTUR-E ,
12128104

Division of Water".Quality
FFadflty Number M 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
__ 2 Other Agency `V
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
'VF Routine O Complaint
A Follow up O Referral O Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: t Departure Time: County: N Region:
Farm Name: N A4ZN1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: L.Lo4N -7�E V_� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: (f—ae — aeV_E_
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ e ❑ - ❑ Longitude: ❑ Q ❑ ' ❑
Design Current. Design Current Design y.-Current,
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle CapacityP,,opulation
❑ La er
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
'
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No El NA El NE
❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Fricility-Number: S, —5ba
Date of Inspection L11L1 �L�
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: NE b., nulb 3
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 ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 5
❑NA El NE
El NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes NNo ❑ 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 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 V 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 X NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
ElYes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
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?
El
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
XI 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):'
A��c� No71��1,v� Q�-��s�T�r1�� a� 5(�oT c� NE�D.E ail I ► �i �-� •
(Y UF-b`T RCU4 W . .v U. 1p W71�7_ 1 ETj � II11log i MRT NF w (_A600N "A S AT
rl/"eCrAIA( CpA&C,-1 VeOLkGH (3UE4N14T. A to 1- .G La- OcjN0tk7l- cF cok� UA�
EiAlal �xpF C i � TD►r6�. 6NCE TEA UN Mau s 7d►Ct fi I� PaAx w,u Q
Phone:eviewer/InspectorName I :mm 6owa Keoldu
Reviewer/Inspector
Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Reauired 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 appropriate box.
❑ WUP [I Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps [I 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
❑ 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
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
19NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
0 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
X 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
[INE
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:
LA6oaN flES)CN5 )1i b(A� Flc.�-- 5"7A�- nLN> C_A6)aaA/1FUeq>C QD l0li
6E sAIb J /VGGtsGD TVE ggwr . LAGaOX L�ESIG�S
1-iE S A I c,,aouA�- QG i -7 Hos6- 70 ME '6 7lfE C7Vb a G' T-I E
EASeb a7V ouQ CON UEQ-SPTIOA/ *Th9 LAGWY (0 - i HG (3LV�' .AGoo Al
1 Flo S� �r Q.�EguS
i S ia' 7 H 7U G c .A Ga F6LEC- i3 15 '9y '.
.ACCOW -1 rroq- i H C /FRI-L + `erregoWt�N 1N SHE oQ �G�ivfl�- DE�1C�/
rA 7V67ICE aIF V10C.R-n oN wi U-- 6G SCAT FpQ- d NA'ZDE E Fee F_goA(D Ix C
T E LA6bCWS w- 1 F RA( G 1-1 rAI 5 74UC7OAL- K&660WIS C1l XA+�ATHE Uk0C-lca�S'`� t� w)LL ALSO 06 FLEU'G"LV4 AMP1 xtp00S
t (Y1A� SEND AM ENPoeC_CMCNf IAITGNI
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit o, Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit "10 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Jr o Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: I Al Region:
Farm Name: L L-lNx/ 1 r w F—+a2 M Owner Email:
Owner Name:. lY_.._1 uNE --' �w Phone: eqlO 5 d-9310 (w
Mailing Address: � . � OX ! � �� m l �� C'
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: —C 12E C---riZ- MC IDL Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = Q = L = Longitude: = ° [= ` 0 "
Design Current
Design Current
Design
Current
Swine
Capacity Pop lotion
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity
Population
❑
Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑Nan -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑
Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
El
Farrow to Finish
El Layers
El Beef Stocker
El
Gilts
❑Non -La ers
❑Beef Feeder
❑
Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Turkey Pouets
Number of Structures:
❑ Other I
JE1 Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
kNo
❑ NA
❑ 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 DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
�kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

i
r
Facility Number:
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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): • S
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 it No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
El NA ❑NE
El NA El NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 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 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? 1
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes] No [INA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 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)'��p�
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes
No
A
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
N Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
�kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
)6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Goon 1�LD� ACC.GMIA16 ICS V990 MM 5Oc"c'b
o� I I - �v �tZ Gd�1��' r0 c ,001c /� , d j w D Au tr �c-XL,J r +t E
M9' pry -�6 mam--- 5"
Reviewer/Inspector Name
, � ,1'1 Phone: 9 }d"19 6, ''1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 2 of 3
Date: -D/ot 1 /Uy
12128104 Continued

i
/Y
Facility Number: 3 } —s Date of Inspection
Required 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. 0 WUP 0 Checklists El Design 0 Maps El Other
❑ Yes k No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need im rovement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
El Yes
16 No
El NA
❑ NE
El Waste Application Weekly Freeboard [] Waste Analysis 0 SoilAnalysis �
aste Transfers ❑ nnual Certification
0 Rainfall 0 Stocking ❑ Crop Yield 0 120 Minute Inspections •Monthly and V Rain Inspections 0
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
V 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?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ 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
XNA
❑ 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
A 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
X,
❑ 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:
n
J1
�.a
1(o CL;MA?_r tR 1VE &VS TO V3�
L�caKPEDA7 -mR g� Tina how N6
g'F_C�� OF =sogata> z,E ie-ERb
b�FAh C3o7c c-IT-) Alt-OYS F►x1M6
h
_
f l��l .10 Sdl
C' A
1"1��5 D �b HAUL
, WC-_Fp cfF bE ?'�N
N G� 'Tb G& i w ��DS I�c�c�� �G�orv` 1 AtS 1
b1j�6 44a
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r.:
Facility Numbera
Division of Water Quality
,Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit X Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 Arrival Time: / Ud Departure Time: County: hLyQd Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
\ �y
Certified Operator: _J pr- M g i�c4rC
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
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Latitude: =
0
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: &(0555
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wd Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
0 Non -La
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
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?
u = O = ` ❑
Longitude:
Design ! Current I
Cattle Capacity, , Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Da Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocket
❑
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection t�1J! ZLV� J
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes X No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: I _# � d `*T
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): S' S 15. -S 157. 5
Observed Freeboard (in): 19.5 31 S1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
,� No ElNA El NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
;4 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
9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
,VNo ❑ NA [I 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
5TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes
�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 Drifl ❑ 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
FNo
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
1rNo
[INA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
I No
ElNA
ElNE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes_No
ElNA
ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElYes
,f \�\ 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):
or,kWE2 K6e?tA1c; A MAIN776NANCO LOG, 70
aEccs�.t� �n�tPRouC►M�ay; S
6c vvvc, 7o FOX WAINAQE
I ur=S W uxb HousIZS
t�.x�L►� tivC c) N MQW T F I E Ln AROUND
Reviewer/inspector Name
Phone;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 3�% wo
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: S I —_')W I Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ftNo ❑ 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 ❑ 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 ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
M No
El NA
El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
VrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
O 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
O '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
�kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
;'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Q Division of Water Quality
Facility Number: 5ZZ Q.Division.of Soil and Water Conservation'
- - - - .0 Other Agency
Type of Visit PrCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit xRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3/ O Arrival Time: /0 Departure Time: �� l County: Region:
/ 7 /
Farm Name: / W If Z L4 _ _ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: /Q4 2 ����" Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
I❑ Wean to Finish
i❑ Wean to Feeder
rrTm
ILA Farrow to Wean I I I!
LI Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 c ❑ 1 = Longitude: = 0 0 & = Ig
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non-Layet
Dry Poultry -
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
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)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Numberof Structures:
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 gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
RrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: =
Date of Inspection q8ZA
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?
❑ Yes
Z"No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: & fJLa #z �
Spillway?: A)O �a
Designed Freeboard (in): qq
Observed Freeboard (in):
El NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No El NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 ZNo ❑ 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 ElNA ❑ 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 D 'ft ❑ Applicati n Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
/pl/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Oyes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
;�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes01No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
;2/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):
T �5�.9�r %"tr�j,o �yo • Sao �u�P, %wo D� �f� G���s-
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:fdq
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: L Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 1XYes ❑ No ❑ NA AE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Y(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 ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ 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 ONo
El NA ❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Ld 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
ZfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA [:I NE
Other Issues«
29.
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
XNo
❑ 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
gNo
❑ 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
J;d'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
7
r
� � C - �✓o Y��4c�' �yr� �l �o�P�S,
12128104

March 7, 2007
Blake Moore
M&RFarm
P.O. Box 338
Harrells, NC 28444
s
Michael F. Easley, Governor
1
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
MAR 2 7 2007
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS310522
M&RFarm
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
-Storage and Application System
Duplin County
Dear Blake Moore:
In accordance with your Notification of Change of Ownership received on January 18, 2007, we are
hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Blake Moore, authorizing the
operation of the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in
accordance with General Permit AWG100000.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the M & R Farm, located in Duplin County, with an animal capacity of no greater
than an annual average of 2400 Feeder to Finish swine and the application to land as specified in the
facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If this is a Farrow to Wean or Farrow to
Feeder operation, .there may also be one boar for each 15 sows. Where boars are unneccessary, they may
be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be replaced by gilts at a rate of 4
gilts for every 3 sows
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2009, and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage Number AWS310522 dated October 1, 2004. Pursuant to this COC, you are
authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as
specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting
and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for this
facility. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number
of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and
this COC and must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals. �.
Please carefully read this COC and the enclosed State General Permit. Since this is a revised State
General Permit, it contains new requirements in addition to most,of the conditions contained in the
previous State General Permit: Enclosed for your convenience is a package containing the new and
revised forms used for record keeping and reporting. Please pay careful attention to the record keeping
and monitoring conditions in this permit.
If your Waste Utilization Plan has been developed based on site specific information, careful evaluation
of future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current Waste Utilization Plan is
inaccurate you will need to have a new Waste Utilization Plan developed.
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Internet: www.ncwatercivality.org location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal Opportu6410rmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper
tW&
Carolina
A71111
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

00
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Upon abandonment or. depopulation for a period of four years or more, the Permittee must submit
documentation to the Division demonstrating that all current NRCS standards are met prior to restocking
of the facility.
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0225(c) a compliance boundary is provided for the facility and no new water supply
wells shall be constructed within the compliance boundary. Per NRCS standards a 100 foot separation
shall be maintained between water supply wells and any lagoon, storage pond, or any wetted area of a
spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the
General Permit, then an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual permit by contacting the staff member listed below for information on this
process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Wilmington Regional Office. The Regional Office
Aquifer Protection Staff may be reached at (910) 796-721.5. If you need additional information
concerning this COC or the General Permit, please contact Thomas Slusser at [phone].
Sincerely, _..
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures (General Permit AWG100000)
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all ccs)
Wilmington -Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Duplin County Health Department
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
APS Central Files (Permit No. AWS310522)
AFO Files

09/06/2006 WED 16:10 FAX [phone] WRLNMI DWQ Wilmington I�J001/010
W-
MurpLjy Brown LLC
PO Box. 856
2822 Hwy 24 WCSL
Warsaw, NC 28398
Phone (M) 293-3434
Fax [phone] I39
Fax Transmittal Sheet
Pages:,
Phone: - _ Date: --
CC: -
❑ Urgent ❑ For Review © Please Comment l] Please Reply Q Please Recycle

09/06/2006 WED 16:10 FAX [phone] WRLNMI ��4 DWQ Wilmington
IM 002/010
PLAN OF ACTiON(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number: 31-522 County: Dupiin
Facility Name: Ivey & Eunice Knowles Farms
Certified Operator Name: Ivey Knowles Operator Number:
18762
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 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
Lagoon Name/ID: P S 3
Spiliway(Y or N): N N N
Level(inches): 22 • 12 12
2. Check all applicable items
X 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
within acceptable ranges.
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: • 9/7/2006
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.
lvgLKnowles _ Phone:
r Facility Owner/Manager (print)
�(�...�., Date:
Facility Owner/Manage signature)
919-990-6400
9/6/2006

09/06/2006 WED 16:12 FAX [phone] WRLNXJ DWQ Wilmington 0 010/010
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
FIVE (5) DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL VOLUME TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure NameiIdentifier (ID): Lagoon 3
2. Current liquid volume in structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 11.701 inches
b. designed structural freeboard zone 12.0 inches
(Normally 12 inches or greater)
c. fine b - line a (inches within structural freeboard) = 1.0 inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural'freeboard elevation) 40040 ftz
e. line c112 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3 24958 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 # r 11961 certified herd #1 1196
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 39430 ft'
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design 01ft3
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design 233571 ft3
k. (lines h + i + j) x 7.48 x 5 days/line f = 13046 gallons
4. Total volume of waste to be land applied during 5 day draw down
I. total volume to be land applied line e + line k = 38004 gallons
REPEAT SECTION 1 FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE WITH A LIQUID LEVEL WITHIN
THE STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD ELEVATIONS. (Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
PoA (5 Day) 2/21 /00

09/06/2006 WED 16:12 FAX [phone] WRLNK1 a . DWQ Wilmington 1@009/010
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
FIVE (5) DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
.f
1. TOTAL VOLUME TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/identifier (ID): Seconds
2, Current liquid volume in structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 11.b inches
b. designed structural freeboard zone 12.0 inches
(Normally 12 inches or greater)
c. line b - line a (inches within structural freeboard) = 1.0 inches.
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural. freeboard elevation) 34890 ft'
e. line c112 x line d x 7.48 galionslft' 21748 gallons
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design 180days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 39561 ft3
h. current herd # 1 1200 certified herd #1 1200
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 39561 ft'
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design C01ft,
J. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design 352132 ft3
k. (lines h + i + j) x 7.48 x 5 days/line f = 15551 gallons
4. Total volume of waste to be land applied during 5 day draw down
1. total volume to be land applied line e + line k = 37299 gallons
REPEAT SECTION 1 FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE WITH A LIQUID LEVEL WITHIN
THE STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD ELEVATIONS. (Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
PoA (5 Day) 2/21100

09/06/2006 WED 16:12 FAX [phone] WRLNM1 ­* DWQ Wilmington
i
00081010
11. TOTAL VOLUME OF WASTE STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD ELEVATIONS
FOR ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1. structure ID: Secondary fine 1 = 37299 gallons
2. structure ID: Lagoon 3 line 1 = 38004 gallons
3. structure 1D: line I = gallons
4. structure ID: line I = gallons
5. structure ID:
6. structure ID:
n. lines 1 +2+3+4+5+6=
o. line n 127154 - 4
line I = gallons
line I = gallons
75303 gallons
2.77 acre -inches
Ill. TOTAL ACRES AVAILABLE TO RECEIVE WASTE DURING 5 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD"2
'While this section deals with hydraulic loading capacities, applications cannot exceed
agronomic rate for receiving crop according to its certified waste plan.
Fields with no remaining PAN balance, no receiving crop, andlor completely saturated are
not considered available to receive waste.
..
IRR-2 PAN:..
balance
applicalion
x. total acres available during 5 day draw down (sum of column t) = 16.69 acres
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL HYDRAULIC LOAD TO BE LAND APPLIED PER ACRE
PoA V. Day) 2/ li21 = 0.17 inches per acre to be applied within 5 days

09/06/2006 WED 16:12 FAX [phone] WRLNMI 444 DWQ Wilmington Q007/010
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): La oon 3
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr.124 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current Iiquld level according to marker 12.0 inches
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard 19.0 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = 7.0 inches
d, top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) 40040 ft2
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/fts 174708 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 3943Q ft3
h. current herd # 7 1-9-61 certified herd #1 1196
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 39430 ft'
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design t— vJ ft3
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design 23357 ft3
k. (lines h t i + j) x 7.48 x 30 days/line f=
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
i. current waste analysis dated I 617/2006
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
78274 gallons
3.90 Ibs/1000 gal.
986.6 lbs. PAN

09/06/2006 WED 16:12 FAX [phone] WRLNM1 4-4 DWQ Wilmington
00061010
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): Isecondary
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr.124 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 12:0 inches
b. designed 25 yr.124 hr. storm & structural freeboard 19.0 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = 1 7.0 inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) 34990 ft2
e. line c112 x line d x 7.48 gallonslfts 152237 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 395fi1 fe
h. current herd # 1200 certified herd # 1200
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 39561 W ,
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design W
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design 35282 ft3
k. (lines In + i + j) x 7.48 x 30 days/line f= 93304 gallons
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I. current waste analysis dated 6/712006 2.80 lbs11000 gal.
m. ((lines e + k)l1000) x line l = 687.5 lbs. PAN
REPEAT SECTION I FORZACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tali shown below)
PoA (30 Day) 2/21100

09/06/2006 WED 16:11 FAX [phone] WRLNMI -44 DWQ Wilmington
00051010
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): Prlmar
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr./24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker inches
b. designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard Inches
c. line b - line a (inches in. red zone) = inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) Oft2
e. line c112 x line d x 7.48 gallons/fts gallons
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design ]days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design Jft3
h. current herd # certified herd #��
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g
certified herd #
1. volume of wash water according to structural design
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k. (lines h + 1 + 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
m. ((lines a + k)11000) 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
ft'
ft3
�ft3
gallons
I - -. --IIbs/1000 gal.
0 lbs. PAN
0

09/06/2006 WED 16:11 FAX [phone] WRLNK1 DWQ Wilmington
Z003/010
N. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 25 YR.124
HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL. WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1. Structure ID: Primary
2. Structure ID: Seconds
3. Structure ID: Lagoon 3
4. Structure ID:
5. Structure ID:
6. Structure ID:
line m = lb PAN
line m = 687.5 lb PAN
line m = 986.6 lb PAN
line m = lb PAN
line m = lb PAN
line m = lb PAN
n. lines + 2 + 3 + 4 + 5 + 6 = 1674.1 Ib PAN
III. 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 (lbs.)
column r x s
u, application window'
T1048
1
Bermuda G
1.11
85.00i
94.4
March -Sept
2
Bermuda G
0.49
102.00
50.0
March -Sept
3
Bermuda G
1.09
87.00
94.8
March -Sept
4
Bermuda G
1.83
126.00
230.6
March -Sept
5
Bermuda G
0.87
112.00
97.4
March -Sept
6
Bermuda G
1.63
94.00
153.2
March -Sept
7
Bermuda G
2.26
96.00
217.0
March -Sept
8
Bermuda G
1.62
111.00
179.8
March -Se t
9
Bermuda G
0.67
94.00
63.0
March -Sept
10
Bermuda G
1.87
107.00
200.1
March -Sept
11
Bermuda G
1.12
128.00
143.4
March -Sept
12
Bermuda G
0.78
119.00
92.8
March -Sept
any
small grain
5.00
50.00
250.0
Sept -April
'State current crop ending application date or next crop application beginning date for available
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 1866.4 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from section II) =
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00
1674.1 lb. PAN
0

09/06/2006 WED 16:11 FAX [phone] WRLNMI — DWQ Wilmington
@ 004/010
x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from section Ill) = 1866.4 lb. PAN
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) _ -192 lb. PAN
Line y must show as a deficit. Ifline 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
NAKRATIVt
Irrigation onto existing spray fields will continue as weather and field conditions permit. Additional land is
available for pumping if needed.
PoA (30 Day) 2/21100

O Dvision of Water Quality
rF,,X�t, Number ,5 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Q'Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit �outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: LAJAQ�P)
Farm Named' Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: 6li?O_sr ���� P
w
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other --
Latitude: = o ❑ 4 Longitude: 0 o = , =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry , Capacity Population
M❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
_ ..
.
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?
Design Current.
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: Z_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 17
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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ 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 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):,
JL
Ila ca�l�vQ,
' le% re
Reviewer/Inspector Name I - - - _ Phone: J4��
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: -i? Date:
Page 2 of 12/2 %04 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required 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 appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I 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 ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
2$. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report 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?
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
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewedlnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:•
w �4 nJ
a_(2
o, 65-
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit QfCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: q Arrival Time: /Oi3�Departure Time: County: � Region:Farm Name:�' 6n�kGs �3 f ° �� * Owner Email:
Owner Name: —
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _ pit Ni U. IL\_J� Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Sack -up Certification Number:
Latitude: e = ' = Longitude: = ° = ` = "
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish D (I
El Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ G i its
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockei
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
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 D<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[3 tvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Bwoo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Nhmber:- Date of Inspection CI
-s
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 3No ❑ 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: Z Z—
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ,% � _ > Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? []Yes [2No ❑ 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 -.ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures 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 ❑< ❑ 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?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes J14o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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
_,F�e'%10
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
VrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
56No
❑ 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
`i.i ,s
Comments (refer to question #) Explam�any YES a aswers,and/or�any rec'ommendationsrorl any=other,commentsy, n
Else drawings of facility to better explatn�situahons (usc addttional;pages as nie isary) A A r '' �� x t` t �� qZJ
y
Reviewer/]nspector Name /ry��7 1'CG�fIO,�� I Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: ' Date:
12128104 Continued

F
Facility Number: — , j Date of Inspection
• , oz�3
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists / ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,12NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ 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 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,0-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
i-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
JD -Nu
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0-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
ONo
❑ 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
011 o
❑ 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
Q-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit CYRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of, Visit:
�ermitted ❑ Cerdfied 13 Conditionally Certified
[3 Registered
Farm Name:
/ O ?rune: �
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Abov Threshold:
County: .. �'_! _..........w......................,
OwnerName: »»...» »...............» ........_......_ .._-------- _- _ ......... ' Phone No: _.........»._...._.. ..._.....»....._......... ......»..
MailingAddress:..__ ._ ..._...................... ..._._... .- ... .. »»»..........
Facility Contact: ..___•__ ._ ...._..... W»Tide:.. _. ._........ W .......».» Phone No: ...... ........... __ ......
Onsite Representative: ....................... Integrator: � � __.................... _..... ..
Certified Operator: .. _ ,. „ »............ .... Operator Certification
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 0" Longitude • 4 «
+� ^Destgn � , k Car['ea1
Swine Ca' nPo 'z 'tic
Wean to Feeder
F
eder to Finish
rrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Guts
Boars
' Nutatber, of Lagoons �,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
❑ Layer
�u
I JE3 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer
Non -Dairy
Other
Design
4 L'' Tot
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ja<o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Of4o
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to The Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑.Yes T U-No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 12-Wo
Stru�&ure 1 Structyre Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: ..». 1 / G �� ...U� _..... _.... ........... . ___._. .. _ .._ ......_...........
Freeboard (inches): 3�
12112103 Continued

Facilify Number: 3 — Date of Inspection
5. Art there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN Hydraulic Overload
❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
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?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
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
Air Quality representative 'immediately.
❑ Yes 13'No
❑ Yes Z?1Qo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes ca-No
❑ Yes 0-90
❑ Yes , BVo
❑ Yes G f4o
❑ Yes 'E *O
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J31fes ❑ No
❑ Yes .P No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes ,'NO
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ONO
Tse dra mgs-ofaFaciirty to better explain sit ttoaig.�(use addttionat1P x3') ` Q Field Copy ❑ Final Notes t`t
rry -x j riles a ;;{ ur se f.r
�
Cure J
�r�/fu a;',�
f
i SJrae/s
AV���le, �n�
e foel
Reviewer/Iospector Name z °
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
79/1'1AM)

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Reatiired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WiFP, checklists, design, neaps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ 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?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes .E!rNo
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ Yes
'GTNO
❑ Yes
R No
❑ Yes
014o
❑ Yes ,0'No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes TWO
❑ Yes PNa
❑ Yes Of4o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
12112103

Li:
FIE
Mail I
O
p
Certified Fee
I p
Return Redept Fee
(Endorsement Required)
C
Restricted []elHery Fee
C3(Endorsement
Requkredj
'lbtal Postage & Fees
j 0
or PQ Box Na
■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also cdmplete
item 4 if Restricted Delivety"is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if �ispace permits.
%1. Article Addressedt
V
A. Received by (Please Print Clearly) 13. bate of Delive
� -IS-C3� �
C. Sign ure I
x 4 ff ❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
D. Is delivefv address different from Item 17 ❑ Yes
If YES, enter delivery address below: ❑ No
3. ervr ype
Certified Mail ❑ Express Mail
VVVV ❑ Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merch:
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.Q.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Ye
2. Article Number (Cnnv fmm sArvirn.lahell
,7003 0500"0000 8804`3631 d
PS Form 3811, July 1999 Domestic Return Receipt 10259 F

O� W A 7 Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
y North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
-r Division of Water Quality
August 11, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL # 7003 0500 0000 8804 3631
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ivey Knowles, Jr. and Eunice Knowles
539 Fussell Road
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Subject: Inadequate Freeboard
No Further Action
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
Facility # 31-522
Duplin County
Dear Ivey Knowles, Jr. and Eunice Knowles:
Thank you for your recent submittal of the information requested in our letter dated April 15,
2003. The Wilmington Regional Office has determined that no further enforcement actions will
be taken by the Division for the inadequate freeboard.
However, upon review and consideration of the information submitted, the Wilmington Regional
Office has determined that an NOV is appropriate due to unsatisfactory operation and
maintenance of the waste treatment system.
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.
Q
IM N
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 / Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper
http://h20.enr. state. nc. us

Inadequate Freeboard
Ivey Knowles, Jr. and.Eunice Knowles
August 11, 2003
Page 2{
Thank you again for your cooperation. if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact the staff of our 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
W' �n � n } es 31-Sx22
on- ischarge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Central Files

April 16, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Ivey Knowles Jr & Eunice Knowles
539 Fussell Road
Rose Hill NC 28458
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Request for Information
Inadequate Freeboard
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
#31-522
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 April 10, 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 March 12, 1999. 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]
1-877-623-6748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01-01
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper
h ttp: //h2o. e n r, s to te. n c. us
Location:
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

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,
lan W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Central Files

_O��F W ATicROG
March 12, 2002
Ivey Knowles Jr and Eunice Knowles
539 Fussell Road
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Subject: Inspection Form
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
Facility Number: 31-522
Duplin County
Dear Mr. and Ms. Knowles:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
On February 19, 2002, I performed an inspection of your animal operation and the animal waste
management system serving this operation. Please find enclosed a copy of the inspection report for the
referenced inspection. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact
me at 910-395-3900 ext. 203.
Sincerely,
VAt!
Stonewall Mathis
Environmental Engineer I
enclosure
cc: DWQ Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Wilt— lfflm es 31-S-'-
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension Phone: [phone]
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845 Fax: [phone]

•
� Di+i tsion of Water., Quality
� {
.�
O.Diiisidii" f 5011 and .Water Conservation ' r �;,., . },
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 3l 522 Date of Visit-. 2l19/20l}2 Time: 1Ga5
O Not O perational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _ .. __ .. _... _.
Farm Name: l:yey.Kuar:les.dr..F.arm.......................................................... County: i?uDjia.................................... Y. j&Q--•--•
Owner Name:v�yLKunice]Sn�,1�LJlt4>YPhone No: 4AQ�89=�QS:_-----------------------------
MailingAddress:.Flu;RKe,�. ,Q; d.................................................................................. KQS iII.. IK........................................................ Z 4Sl}..............
Facility Contact: ...........................................................Title: ................... Phone No .
Onsite Representative: IYe3r.KD.QwJcs.Jr_._._.-----------------------------. Integrator:IY11I[D11Y.�Am11Y���1tLs.___.--------------•
Certified Operator:lva..R.................................... KlaQ.Y1tI.Q$........................... ................ Operator Certification Number: 1R7.6Z.............................
Location of Farm:
West of Wallace. On SR 1133, approx. 2 miles west of intersection with SR 1101.
- r
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle
❑ Horse Latitude 34 '
46 6 24 +g Longitude 78 . ' OS 48 u
_Design
. , Current r , . -_ :
Design Current : - _
Design -' Current'
:Swine Cal aci
--Po ulation.:..'Poultry
Ca acit 'Po ulation Cattle
Ca acit Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
;:';, ❑Layer
❑Dairy
® Feeder to Finish 2400
' ❑ Non -Layer I
JE]Non-Dairyj
❑ Farrow to Wean
.10Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder
. ❑Farrow to Finish
.._
Total Design Capacity
_
2,400
El Gilts
❑Boars
-
''Total SSLW .
324,000
Number of Lagoons.. ._; I� r.,!. _ ❑Subsurface Drains PresenEID Lagoon Area JE3 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps, ; ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
s. .�.. S
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at:' ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. 1f discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
Y. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ® Yes ❑ No
Structure I _. Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ....... 1st.Stapge....... ...... 2nd-Stage ...... ....... Eunice.. .... ...........................
Freeboard (inches): 24 26 23.5

Facility Number: 31-522 Date of Inspection 259/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(I[ any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
t rrrtrlrrrreu
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22, Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ,
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review!•mspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
,25. Were any additional problems noted -which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to ueFtion
,— r t _!a n . ny� S sn etsand or a ecommenda io�ra� oynl�her c�omm"ents t«�r�
face bed Tonal z��
Use drawn s ty ter�ex lain,sttu�ns use s ss ary�.
of fo � pagess�s"�nece �3�?�`
tnaI N
opy ❑ F otes
a ��:";�� "1�� xr ���.
4. The 2nd stage lagoon level is in violation; this lagoon has a 28.8 inch freeboard requirement.
9. I could not view the marker in the 2nd stage lagoon, therefore cannot tell if start pump is correctly marked.
15. The receiving crop needs improvement. Mr. Knowles plans to sprig the entire farm this year. Need to apply lime according to soil
test recommendations.
18. Need lagoon design information for the Ist and 2nd stage lagoons. This needs to be available for inspection.
19. Need to keep freeboard records for the 1st stage lagoon.
. No notification of the noncompliant lagoon level was provided. Mr. Knowles said he thought the requirement was 19 inches.
Note: Mr. Knowles inquired about his permit bill. I contacted Ralei h office and this should be sent in April.
r
p �r r�r�:�.I.LII.z-zr -r�r� - f.- m nrn,.� i. �1,r-. 1 u t ? r -_
Reviewer/Ins ector Name Stonewall Maths
; 1 ., ;, x ._L ;f �s s , t :. a r. Y
Reviewer inspector Signature: Date: 2 Z r' Z

(15103101 Continuer!
Facility Number: 31-522 Date of Inspection 2/19/2002
Odor Issues
25. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ®No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during Iand application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporwy cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
'644itionaI ommej1M,, or FaVVIIIgS' y � �� y°rt F W "f # . � a a {Ills! eGlya n Eu�'*s ,N'I e �"I CIK;1
n
:ca...• .....�:w•, .. ,��.i.;..nx :3 m ,.'9�„w�x a n:$64k3.. k:fi I !• n!'i�l1I•Pwk;-

bj
j I� �� a, � n �- i
r­"11bWAW""
Division of Water ' ualit - �j E�HIp j j i �
• i Qa., y� I�. 3=,.r: r wJ i � s F a¢ v s. e 8 a nt I a�
f� #i', ti E4�EPP,�3€ i �f3€{ I;1 11 nSerVHtiDn '`f siI F�"ei 1HUMU
Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 522 Date of Visit: r 2/19/2002 7'hne: 16:15
0 Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified C] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _ __
Farm Name: Ixey.Kuogles.Jr..Earm.......................................................... County: A -Win .................................... N'113Q......
Owner Name: Lv-eyJ.Kunim_.-._._.-._ I�.�LQ1JxLlStlRlYl+�T------------ Phone No: 9�.Q�$9s32S5------------------------------
Mailing Address: 5.39..ElAsRell.RQllA................................................................................. Rini.H11AM........................................................ %8.45A ..............
FacilityContact: .......................................................... Title: ............................................... Phone No:......................................
Onsite Representative: jYCy.KDsl�aes.Jr_____._._.----.-_--._-------__ .__-- integrator:UUrpjl.XjEa1pii,Yx'ji1J11S._._._--.---.___._.,
Certified Operator: lva...Si,r.................................... Knowles ........................................... Operator Certification Number: Ja7jG .............................
Location of Farm:
West of Wallace. On SR 1133, approx. 2 miles west of intersection with SR 1101.
O Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle [--]Horse Latitude 1 34 • Longitude 78 •F 05 48 «
Discharges & Stream lmnacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ® Yes ❑ No
Structure I - Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ....... 1st.Stage....... ...... ?..ad_Stage...... ........ Euttice....... ............ ..-............
Freeboard (inches): 24 26 23.5

vaivaiu� c.ununueu
s
Facility Number: 31 5522 Date of Inspection 2/19/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted -which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
"�°�d�4iiq{91s&;�dk3 �1%``>�$"'SG�B '.F.. ii��"P -;�,:� �,w,::-"3R�.lE 'Y11� i'e4i!?�klR�N11H}A1tlI��pN7'i'F1�5�4��h�e 1��6�Yhi1 {,i Ili -.jk•
oEo< 80bE
C,o�mments(seferitEa.questian#) E�l�ain, any YS answersandlar any recommendations or any otheommen Yrya�li,,.,
Usedrawingsof facrlity to better situations (use ages,a5 neessary);Y 6.
explain aoditionai:, s ; Fie
Y. A, 1 � � � .0
4. The 2nd stage lagoon level is in violation; this lagoon has a 28.8 inch freeboard requirement.
A.
9. 1 could not view the marker in the 2nd stage lagoon, therefore cannot tell if start pump is correctly marked.
15. The receiving crop needs improvement. Mr. Knowles plans to sprig the entire farm this year. Need to apply lime according to soil
est recommendations.
18. Need lagoon design information for the 1st and 2nd stage lagoons. This needs to be available for inspection.
19. Need to keep freeboard records for the 1 st stage lagoon.
2. No notification of the noncompliant lagoon level was provided. Mr. Knowles said he thought the requirement was 19 inches.
ote: Mr. Knowles inquired about his bill. I contacted Raleigh office and this should be sent in April.
Re�r.mit
� �I!F�"�_,,li �11 ll'i,��I bf EE l,•'µ E�
Reviewer/Ins ector Name "'
p Stonewall,Mathis,h 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

06103101 Continued
.� Facility Number: 31-522 Date of Inspection 2/19/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes [-]No
,liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
AdditionalRomments an ,
sF M.fta.
Ak
i
7

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
IVEY / EUNICE KNOWLES JR / KNOWLES
539 FUSSELL ROAD
RosE HILL NC 28458
Dear Ivey / Eunice Knowles Jr / Knowles:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
June 19, 2000
Subject: Notice of Violation and Revocation for Nonpayment
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
Permit Number: AWS310522
Duplin County
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.10G, all animal operations who receive an animal
waste management system permit will be charged in each year of the term an annual permit fee. Annual permit fees are
billed following the issuance of the permit and then annually thereafter on the anniversary of that date. Your animal waste
management system permit was issued on 3/12/99.
Your annual permit fee for the period of 3/12/2000 - 3/11/2001 is $150.00. Your payment was due 5/6/2000.
Because this fee was not fully paid within 30 days after being billed, this letter initiates action to revoke the subject permit,
pursuant to 15 NCAC 2H .0205 (c) (4). and G.S. 143-215.1 (b) (3).
Effective 60 days from receipt of this notice, the subject permit is hereby revoked unless the required Annual
Animal Waste Management System Permit fee for your animal operation is received within that time. Operation of an
animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and is
subject to the assessment of a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day. Your payment should be sent to:
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality —
Budget Office
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If you have any questions, please contact Fran McPherson at [phone] ext. 210.
Sincerely,
i
u ,may
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Non -Discharge Branch Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Health Department
Permit 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

j
on of Water Quality r ra r ti�I l iPl�„i,1�§ilr�ti
Divistlsx�
'Htvision onservation
of Sail and Water C
s - Q..Other'A ency,;sr��tl
I S
�'.I l j. , - °i- ° ■ In _.. Ss -IT
x, n -�. A,: .:., �F .�•. .. , ... �. R ... ...... '..i w h r1r'.!.•� 11 ;Y'.: ... .. rna-.J.jk.l '� I:I J
Type of Visit Wompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason far Visit P Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
[)ate of Visit:qE0
tNotO
bne: Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number J.
erational Q Below Ofermitted E3 Certified [3 Co itionally Certified Registered Date Last Operate. Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ...�((_................. (!YVG...S LJr.:....�irn-� County' ...... L.�........................ ...........
OwnerName:................................................................................ Phone No:.......................................................................................
..................................
Facility Contact: — ...!.. 4...........ku'4v ................ Title: .........Q7�tJ!`1 ............... Phone No: .......... .......... I ......... .......... I..........
MailingAddress: ......................................................................................................... ..........................
4
Onsite Representative:..... . ...................... ....�.... [ntegrator:... ....
Certified Operator: ................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Nu tber:...........................................
Location of Farm:
['Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Morse Latitude a ° 4; Longitude a �� �it
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Q
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑Non Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lag -win Area ❑ 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
�No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade?
❑ Yes
❑ No
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'' (If yes, notify DWQ)
[] yes
❑ No
c. 11'discharge is observed. what is the estiln<itcd flow in galhnin?
--
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
El Ye
El No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ^
❑ Yes
o
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yeso
kN
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
ONo
Suve;wre I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
rl.� 2.0..`.` 2 3' Identifier : .............. ... ................................................................................................ ....................................... ..................................
..
Freeboard (inches):
t v`�
5100 J
Continued
on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Q� Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures obse ved lie/ 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
closureplan? ❑ 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 NNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes �No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes o
11. Is there evidence of oXr applicaw ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes (�\N\ o
12. Crop type 1 n s��z
13. Do the receiving co s differ with those in the Certified Animal
_.
g p ❑�a Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
yiglat�Qns;o� ileCeiencies were itbt;eii iiuriftig thls;visit:•;Y;o wiii•feeeiye ]iti fufti�rrr ;
corresD6TideFICe. AOUt. thB Visit.. ' : ' : ' : : :
❑ Yes 6No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes Cho
ZYes ❑ No.
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes 5No
❑ Yes
$4�No
❑ Yes
�LNo
❑ Yes
K No
❑ Yes
�No
❑ Yes
kfNo
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
,<No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any.other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use a tional pages as necessary):
Aw
4aw4-�� 4/� 44'�_I-
n
_r
Revtewer/lnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date:

Fagility Number: — Date of inspection M Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor 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 Xlo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Wo
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 P'No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes XNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? XYes ❑ No
5100

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
Ivey / Eunice Knowles Jr / Knowles
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
539 Fussell Road
Rose Hill NC 28458
Dear Ivey / Eunice Knowles Jr / Knowles:
AY?W;W'A
•
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 31-522
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,
SLDI, 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.
Sincerel
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

O Division of Soil and WaterriConservatton-,Operadon�RivWw' {'' 'a .€
);: "� €''•`
' D�`+ision of Soil and. Water Conservation Compliance
Inspect1{on ' r
l
Division of Water ;Compliance Inspection
L r
tQual�ty
rE3QtherAgency : Ope;anon Rev ew;
§'^
Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-ug of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection kP
Timeof Inspection :Q[i 24 hr. (hh:mm)
ermitted Certified Conditionally Certified Q Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ,
Farm Name: ........ ll.l(. ....bf.+....0k11P... ?.1!?l!�....................... County:...... 1.?............
........... .........................
la
Owner Name :.....i.................................4111..W.......................................... Phone No:...��%.0..��'.........................
Facility Contact: ..... .......................1 f 1?.Y11� .�......., Title.• 0.t M. ,.V.. Phone No:................................ ...........
Mailing Address: ..S
........./.......o .... ,k
Onsite Representative: ..... 1K...............���1�............................................ Integrator:............................,................................
� �
Certified Operator:........ Y...'................................� Yl lk>!d .......................... Operator Certification Number: ....... /S............
Location of Farm:
r......................................................................... .. ............
Latitude Longitude • �` ���
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry',,
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
7-1rpb
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Current `. Design , Current
y Po liulati,,on .E Cattle Capacity Population ,);a,,
E� n
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other E
� t
Tdtaj'besl g t�
gn Capacity
,
_, r IE!iEl 3 ;,� , : '.,'Total'SSLW
„ ? Number, of:Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holdin I — €� g n€ds.. Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im�yacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P�No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 5�No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (I1'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [(No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? /Y
d. Dices dischar gc bypass a lagoon sstem? if es, notify DW ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 5� No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes o
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 SLrticture 5 Structure 6
Identifier: J�Vt (i9#t0wI tS rAf.^% CtA 3 I V-aM f-e S •
1 a.�o..� � l pub
Freeboard(inches): .....a . .........................................L...................A'.`...............................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidenceAl&z
f over applica319'
'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type /
13.Do the receiving crops dif9r with thole desi hated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre'determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, Freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection 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?
.. �'. . yi. . tioris'or de�ci hdLxs •Were poteo• O(Wing • bis;visit: - Y:oir WHI-feet i*e do futtht f ;
Correa' deuce. about. this .visit.-
❑ Yes (_No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes 4] No
❑ Yes &No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes 1No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes J2(No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes j(No
❑ Yes 0,No
❑ Yes f 91 No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes F"10
❑ Yes �tNo
mments {r` r to uesbon� ' ' :.` q #} kiplain' any )tS 9answers and]nr''any," reconiittendatio'n`s `ora , ny otEier co°mri�ents
Coefe
Use:drawings affaciltty to- better, iiplain'situations i(use-additiohal pages as -'necessary)
-
�70wev' wrf f h( Orly✓-StraO' Kew ire i9 C' ����-ei-
.S a,�',�•ud r��/-f-ii�te �� � ,�e�� a�O�/ic�� 1�s ti�-v7C�- a?,o�a�al cex
J,`cah',7,tJPAN,
f,4es Wit oily ow"Ve-d. 4- Fes.,,- W� -s�.�G t�ovr. 44 Z w;tt �dowl' i-� affl.
Reviewer/Inspector Name At
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
23/99

Facility Number: ?J. 2 fate of Inspection
Odor Issues A �`--�Y-
_,2tl'uoes the discharge pipe from'the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Yes -Ej-N'b
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours`? ❑ Yes kNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes XNo
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 JNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes �No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes .UrVo
the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
A44itional Comments -an or Drawings77
3/23/99

AUG 0 6 1998
MURPHY
F A M I L Y F A R M S
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
Ivey Knowles Jr. F & Eunice Knowles Farm
Facility No.:31-522 31-731
Duplin Couniy
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 Fora'
Me:L;� type or print all informutien chat aces not require a si__n. ur_1
G-eneral informntion: 3 r - Srz
Name or Farm:_ 1v6Y KNpwcjs:.i¢. �- Fuwiie£ KKow,as^ Facility `o: 3/ 731.
Owne7ks) Name:1vF., AlWo&,,cs _ -- ---
Mailin= Address:_S;I F�sEI�_ �oA4 Phone NoAm) ZP9-1
Fafo Neu. Ale zSvst;• Councv: Duaw.+
Qneration Description (remaining animals only):
Z1 Plese check this box if there will be no animals on this rarm after lagoon closure. Ec there will still to animals on tha Sim
after lagoon closure. please provide tha following inform, xtiun ou the animals that �viill remain.
oeradon Descriotion:
TA.pe of Swine No. of.Aninrals
M Wean to r_eder
2'faeder to Finish ZY40
_t Farm« cc %Vean
Farrcw-to F=der
M F=%v to Finish
Type of Poultry Yo. ofArrbnals Tice of Carle MO. of Animals
Laver M Dairy
J Pullets
0rher True of L:resroc.*: Vamberof animals:
Will th-e farm maintain a number of animals create: than the 2H .0217 threshold? Yes R- No r!
Will cche.- lagoons be in operacioa at this farm after this one closes? Yes a- No Cl
How -:Lane lagoons are left in use on this faun?:___
(Ivan, e; of the Water Quality Section's staff in the Division
of —
` -%--.: Qualitv's Regional OFEc_ (see map on back)
was cc,nrM,=ed on (care) for notir;cation of the pending closure of this pond or lagoon.
This -otif:cation was at leas:'_= hours prior to the start of closure which began orl I (dare).
I v erf-1 that the above information is correct and complete. I have followed a closure plan which meets
ally-cCS saecifications and c:i:eria. I realize that I will be subject to enforcement action per Article 21
of the North Carolina General Statutes if I fail to properly close out the lagoon.
The ia- iicv has followed a closure plan which meets all requirements set forth in the MRCS Technical
Guide Standard 998. The followin; items were comoleted�bv the owner and verified by me: all waste
Iiquids and sludges have been removed and land applied at a , onorruc rate. all input pines have been
removed. all slopes have been stabilized as necessary, and ve_etation established on ali disturbed areas.
Name of Technical Specialist (Please Print): M. feev,N Kfri,+
Aft:iiation: MH tr .v..rK4 �.�,•-�
?iCld:ess (Agency): fo. A., 7,lr9 ofE 11,4, Z,rYne —Phone No..410re9-01f erKlez
—Date:
Return wltrlln 15 days cowowln, Comp etlon of animal water storage pond or Ingoon closure to:
:N. C. Division Of Water Quality- Water Quality Section
Compliance Group
P.O. Box 29=35
Raleigh, NC 2 626-0-3-
PLC - l Nlay 1. 1996

Name of Farm: Ivey /KN26J46SJam. d- Lxa.,,-ss Facility No. 3l
O%vner(s) Name:
Mailing Address/Location: sag Fwssg a �o.va Phone No.:,'qld zr, - J4s1
ire ,//,«_ ,ycYsY County: Du�c.K
This plan describes the closing pocedures for the above referenced farm. The following
closure procedures will be followed in accordance with the current NRCS 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 Iand applied
to crops at agronomic rates based on realistic yield expectations for nitrogen. The effluent
and sludge 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 less of sludge
remaining in the Iagoon 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 Ionger impound Iiquid
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. AlI disturbed areas shall be fertilized, seeded and mulched before the lagoon
closure can be certified.
Estimated amount of effluentisludge: 7 ?Zeno 2.1 Effluent/sludge analysis: . 3
Total amount of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAIN): io3o /br. /V
The following acreage may be used for land application based on the crop to be grown:
Tract/Field #
Crop
lbs. N/ac.
Acres
lbs. N utilized
T s
C OJ se .-0,
oa
fa
T �/ 9
Co,zN I ldri!lwr�
boo
�O
Zoaa

I ne roiiowing acrGagc may OC uses for ianu apPiik;aLivri oases on me crop to oe grown:
Tract/Field # I Crop I lbs. N/ac. Acres F lbs. N utilized
Name of Owner: ✓'r~
Signature:
Name of Technical specialist:
Affiliation: &Nxewr F M.er
Address (Agency): ?o. 3.r 7f`9
'611" . /Vc trilrY
Signature: _ /� /14.-� 4LZZ _

N
)m le Info.
Laboratory Results arts er million uuless,otl)crwise"iloted
implelD: K^IOwL4-5
N
P
K Ca Al
S Be AM 7n
Cre
11
AM Cl
C
105 tcw 3
'IWO/
16.4 Al
5.83
34.2 72.0 22.4
12.7 3.06 0.05 0.28
0.23
0.00
IN -N
VL
W, L 1.
L At Vl. L
Al
VL
aste Code.
-IV114
Na
rYi ell Pb
Al Se l i pu
SS
CN
DAl% CCr%
Al f(K al)
I..S
IV03
31.9
9.31
ascription:
OR-N
•rabic Liquid - Swine
Urea
VL
tL'0llll)lCII(Iations:
Nutrients t�Yal]al)]e f6C 11CJ1 `�C0�1 :'
'' ` ,IbS/��QO sllI�OIIS , .. , '
Qtl er I?lciucnts
`lGs/IOOU
kallolts
,plicrslion,ilelhor! - .
Iffl�'11ion
Soil lacorn
N Y20i
1.1' 0 08
1.3 ` °" . t).Q9
A'b
�7
0.21 : '.
Ca
0 42
0.4R''
Alg ` S. I' ,iln
4.13 Q 07. a fQ 0� 7 `
,
: Q.17 ` '0:08", Q.02 . r TV-
Lrt (rr 1j tSfo (1
T ` ag Z�Q.00 YF� .x ' n
Na
0 27
Ni Crl
Pb _ Al
s
Se Li

14-1
4601po or r

'. .r
►•;' �:/I
.�S
}

31-5ZZ
m
m
CD
tl7
N
G
r
0
i
1. f' rr�J Jf f
V �
FoR6 hm-2 {{!!f Lagoon Irrigaffm Melds Record
One Form for Each'Fleld per Cwp Cycle
Tr+ad #
{ ;= A)
Farn► €k�er
Caa�er's Address
ow,wes Pi Dm ;x
FacMy Number I I -
#rr�8tio�1 Qper;sior
irtf�allors Opera+ai's
Address
Operatoes Plxme #
EXHIBIT £-•2
Ftmm Waste LPJUzatbn Plan
Rcwmmnw pm
w.... =
n, m fn M fia5 J7'L M rm tifri (till
L"i •ki
y=
-
r.�.
Ors Shpatm
wed Opm tar (P-,M�
mop CyaW ToWs
Qper,-dor s shinaiure
Ope aWs CerfificaWn No.
F
D NCnA Wasm Ar2ykris or Equw erg w MRCS Est. Technk;d Guide Seen M
2 Esser Shevahie recehied by 5VMMdln% =husai (io) t= (0). Condme subtracting cokann (10) tram mk=n (11) kftwbg each Irrigakm everit.

❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency< •t
Division of Water Quality
. pmm+s^ .. *•mr^y^�_µ�•. e. �, . ^�..,.. • � ,,.. � *rnlr'= :fin"9"'" ..�sr.�:x« +$a.3 `
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
rDatef InspectionFacility Numberf Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered 0 Certified E3Applied for Permit 13 Permitted 113Not Operational I Date Last Operated: .........................•
Farm Name: ............... ).y.tj ..... E.....uaicC<..........��xmtl(u........k n .................... County:.........t�ur� l............................................................
Owner Name: ........................ :LC4ntLk ....... 4"4&s....................................... Phone No:..L.1.t4%.28`i-..J.9S 5:...............................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:
MailingAddress: ......... S.J�L...... 1%"S.t.n... &A............................................................... .......... ?4.x..... ................................... ... ziy,S.x......
Onsite Representative:..............lm! .......16vk..... ljaaoWZ.5....................................... Integrator: ......... MV.V'11..................................................
I......
CertifiedOperator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
Design Current,
'SwineCapacity
- Design Current Design Current
Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
%Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Poultry] .,
110 Layer
10 Non -Layer
Capacity Population Cattle ,=' „ Capacity Population
10 Dairy
10 Non -Dairy
❑Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
.,
�m
❑ Farrow toFinisn
Total�Design Capacity`
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
" Total SSLW 5 i
Number of Lagoons pray F�eid Area >s
/ Holding Ponds 3� ❑Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area ❑S
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
EA 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
11 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/rnin?
N�
h
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
O No�
3. Is there evidence of pact discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
( No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
Yes
NNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
IP No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
W No
7/25/97

Facility Number: — 2Z
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,llolding fonds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:-... Z,
Freeboard ft 6 s' 'Z
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)
Structure 5
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............:f:...........1 .............. ks4Ug...................................... .............................................................
1.6. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes]
No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
(9 No
❑ Yes
I4 No
0 No.vialations-oi deficiencies, e_re-noted-during this. visit.' :You.will receivemi &flirtlier :
:. cyrres006dehce d out this: visit:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
TM Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes q No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
fir. �-,ow is i ,
tm es, e V r viS t
wcl s (
1 le, �
t'¢... �LEeT
h Lt a Gve9 ri7'f 'nrf i`ohS d uC CJ
ac",C,y ts+
r iw frr;ga-� Go,
yp4cir-.
r-{�i�o.hon
��t�, 4-WJO
II
•ginoul� ba- ir15fA11.tJ
h j ILI,1�1. t f 1
, Z, 1j wti.t pn c(�-s ova� t11o�a�cxi�, a t 1L_ W o.l l of * 3 }- ko �tp 6 rt vty }s�tcc� .
lk,- h�ro�wb. _ +.�•Y�C�x' CVfO.% 54�.ww. �4 i tV e-�-4�, lrr:�Q��i+ 5,fs� fS iAsktud.
pAAJt or aci-co�� t1 ,� b� fafoP�d ar. S�S,ru,� crcc S- -a�ao� �c�bjris $1.
7/25/97
e'�^ C
Reviewer/Inspector. " < L^ NY'�
Name ���"A h4M.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
1
U _
Date:

_ 08 Form 3800, March 1993
to
Q3
0 ail
CA
AN
m N
�
9
lE
ns
-
4A
v
rLJ
f O sie YE+7-
1
32
0
' . complete items 1. andlor 2 for additional serAces.
■ Complete iteind'3; 4e, and 4b,
Print
I also wish to receive the
following services (for an
I
I
0
a`
_ ■ your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this
card to you.
extra fee):
l
m
Attach this form to the frord of the mallpiece. or on the back if apace does not
permit.
1. ❑ Addressee's Address
l
.21
d
■ Write "Return Receipt Requested' on the mailplece below the article number.
■The Return Receipt will show to whom the amide was delivered and the date
2. ❑ Restricted Delivery
{9j
I o
delivered,
consult postmaster for fee.I
3. Article Addressed to:
4a. A le Number
-77 310�qO
I
-LVa- v (.. � .2.p J Q, FO-' -�•_.
4b. Service Type
M
a
`l 1`!`
❑ Registered qGeTtiffed
X '
w
W
(r
�0� l V f i i Q a [ ��8
❑ Express Mail ❑ Insured
❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise ❑ COD
S
'
i
� � .�� ���
7. Date of Delivery
g- 3 .��
.°
j :3
I`
5. Received By: (FWnt Name-
8. Addressee's Address (Only if requested
0,
{
ev
M
and fee is paid)
re
5
B. Sfgnature1&dresseePrAgdnf-
-
[
i a4.
X
I
PS Form 3811, D ce ber 1984
71 /*.Domestic Return Receipt
I

� 5fATE n`,
State of North Carolina,
Department of Environment, Health, and Natural. Resources
Wilmington Regional office
James B. Hunt, Jr. Division of Water Quality Wayne McDevitt
Governor
August 21, 1997
Ivey Knowles, Jr.
Ivey Knowles Jr. Farm
539 Fussell Road
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Dear Mr. Knowles:
Secretary
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Ivey Knowles Jr. Farm
Facility Number: 31-522
Duplin County
On August 19, 1997, staff from the Wilmington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
inspected your animal operation and the lagoons serving this operation. It was observed that erosion on the
wall of lagoon #1 (old lagoon) could eventually threaten the integrity of the structure. In addition, erosion
was observed on the outer toe of lagoon #2 (new lagoon) adjacent to field ditch. These erosion problems
should be corrected, and all bare areas on the lagoon walls should be revegetated. Finally, it was observed
that you have an insufficient crop cover in your spray fields. A suitable cover crop should be established
immediately.
To remain a deemed permitted facility, you must notify this office in writing within fourteen (14) days
of the receipt of this notice, what actions will be taken to correct these deficiencies. Failure to do so may result
in the facility losing its deemed permitted status and being required to obtain an individual non discharge
permit.
Please be aware it is a violation of North Carolina General Statutes to discharge wastewater to the
surface waters of the State without a permit. The Division of Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil
penalty of not more than $10,000 per day per violation.
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, N.C. 28405-3945 + Telephony 910-395-3900 0 Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Ivey Knowles, Jr.
August 21, 1997
Page 2
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call Andy Helminger, David Holsinger, or
Brian Wrenn at 910-395-3900.
Sincerely,
Andrew G. Helminger
Environmental Specialist
cc: Harold Jones, Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation
Sandra Weitzel, NC Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Garth Boyd, Murphy Family Farms
Operations Branch
&Wilmingtan�Files-
S:1WQ,S4! MYA131-522.DEF

H
iJ,;P'Ptl�r s'
ar2-1/114U7S�l
_47-nvfssh�j �cs
W4>� Ids f ?j1u""-Iy � �� ' w°aJ
ma 7
1 FL66t q 4 d3s
-7c-IT

.•f. .A w:. .. <.e.:'. :o;� .,, ---,-: &:,.,v .,,,. �'- , , A --:c, 1'ff: 3 x a6;. a..
_.
❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
❑ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
�,
14:
77
0 Routine 0 Cont laint 0 Follow-u p of Doi' ins ection 0 Follow-u of DSwC review 0 Other
Date of inspection 8
Facility Number 2
Time of inspections 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Tirne fin fraction of hours
Farm Status: URegistered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex.1.25 for l ltr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or inspection (includes travel and processing)
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ................................................................................
Farm Name: ��..Z.,
.... N.�......1�Y... .,. c^�.................. Cotrnty:....��}.�1.�i,r1...................................�.L.
Owner Name: . ti1'h e►a ..�......''r................ Phone No; .....6.. .,...2£ `�' 3�........ .
.................
FacilityContact:...............................,.,......................,...,,..................l'itle:............................. Phone
,No: u
Mailing :Iddress:.....,�7..> ...`...... u..S.S. .�..�..,... ..ti.................................. ..... . A.�, 1, ..!`�FL.�., .� ..,l�.l.. ..,................ .. ...J,�.
Onsite Representative:.... ,Srti o �x .1. .,...... K.2.1 ... ..}'� ,�t..r�►n..................... Integrator:... ..w..�r.� ' ``� ...................
Certified Operator: .................................................. ............................................................. Operator Certification Number: ....... A .7.0Z.
Location of farm:
fay,.....S.R.t.�.. ..3.. ct`.. ,r.a..>t
..,.... ......... ...... . . ....... ....................
Latitude E410 �` 4f Longitude
.®�®«
Design C
Type of Operation_ Design Current Design Current
urrent
Swine. Capacity; Poli lation . ,Poultry Capacity 'Population Cattle Capacity .Population`=
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Ztia
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
I Dairy I I ��4
I Non-Dairy 1
Number of Lagoons IHotdmt: Portd , F ID Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c, If disch:u'ge i observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
4/30/97
Spray Field Area::
❑ Yes ffNo
❑ Yes ED No
❑ Yes
CKNo
❑ Yes
1l No
❑ Yes
91 No
❑ Yes
E� No
❑ Yes
CRT No
[--]Yes
No
Continued on back

Facility Number: ,3 —
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes BNo
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ®No
Structures (Lagoons ands ro Holdigg Pondsl
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than, adequate? ❑ Yes RNo
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
3....2,� ...... S ..... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes ®.No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
ayes
❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
RYes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid Ievel markers?
❑ Yes
Ej No
Waste Mlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
0,No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ^.r......,............................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
B,No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ff No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19•Yes
❑ No
I9. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®-No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0 Yes
❑ No
2I. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
UNo
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
HLYes
❑ No
Comments;(refer ko questian' ,Explain any YES:answers'andlor any recommendations or any other coriiments Y
"
Use drawings; of facilityto better,,explain situations. (use additional;:pages;as necessary)
t I. y. S a �^^yl b o�-�-t o� v�N-S * W-t v`e . p..�S l o •� W 0.. L,, `of L'L f Z-q no --► C# t 4
TI. L ego .0 i o ,.� S k.o v Ia .Q c o �,.� c (Lo[ y,,�l b r4 r a �t a S S a v L b e
t vL 6-4-4-; 'f-t 0 vi fro S 1 o %n .n) 0­4 o JL -P�vti`-�o� a-t` 4 o- d o 2
ddJ cr e.j..,... t EV �; t-4L aL 1-4-1, . T-L- i V v * -m S i-o v Let a LS o � L I' I ,
v�
e v
t A s V; t a Le C-o V -ear �o .s' k-o v k-CL. 14-e e s f-v,L 1 "f � (-O� fix-L OLr f
L W a S k• ( V✓ drJ� C V o C-0 w t f S it o f v,a L-v vt kLA..r r r-e• c i -e-x .
l Cs-e F w v` r4-, f t o Uk.'tA.) o- d S- { k_a-" • A
y..� p N j C v Y 3 p� V-� c o
I,n 1 t i r o, t V a v b� a o a dl.lrc-c� ! a ,,1,--o- c.a t- f -tt, 4-�v�rc._.R.- f a{ fro r- o I aq r s v► 541
U N {o L iw.r-� s c c d , vi+e� } r., : r : ,n , ; 7s e S 4P6 Tv i-p vim'- V
v" to v-/.1 .1,
Revie er/Inspector Name
I f l F riel
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility
Date:
it Unit
4/30/97

'lop/
,9
REGISTRATION FORM FOR ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATI VS,
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Re _ulcer, —
Division of Environmental Management Cr
Water Quality Section
If the animal waste management system for your feedlot opei�
is designed to serve more than or equal to 100 head of cattle, 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: Ivey R. (Tom) Knowles
Route 1 Box 318
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Duplin County 919-289-2740
Owner(s) Name:
Manager(s) Nam
Lessee Name:
Farm Location (Be as specific as Possible: road names
+
direction, milepost, etc.) : 1'44AL_ RAMO �sAL?• /h3
Latitude/Longitude if known: QBSP # 23-035-20-11
Design capacity of animal waste mana ement system (Number and
type f confined animal (s) : /24O Ale40 /So.4-r_
Average animal population on the farm (Number and ty a of
animal(s) raised):
Z9
Year Production Began: ASCS Tract No.: d QA
T JOVg'
Type of Waste Management System Used: ICE
.r/4FRG y,Q
--V2&W 'P�w--
Acres'Available for Lan
Owner(s).Signature(s):
d Application of Waste: 17:�_
R Date:
Date: •93
(Bob Bilbrey, Serviceman)

PPL-1ri
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources Ar*
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary F 1
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
November 17, 1993
Ivey Knowles
Rt. 1, Box 318
Rose Hill NC 28458
Dear Ms. 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 size 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, Ralelgh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

- . " r
w
REGISTRATION FORM FOR ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERA'`ON8 l &°3 w
Department of Environment, Health and Natural I�sources, c�
Division of Environmental Management - ,"grE�2QIJA
Water Qualit Section r, .�aor)ir, :_ I '
If the animal waste management system for your feedlo C�`aperat.io'n
is designed to serve more than or equal to 100 head of c' r 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: Ivey R. Knowles, Jr.
Route 1 Box 318
Rose Hill, NC 28458
Duplin County
Owner(s) Name:
Manager(s) Name:
Lessee Name:
919-289-3955/289-3191
Farm Location (Be as specific as possib e: road names,
direction, milepost, etc.) : ibi FU�SC�_L 1�Cd,LZ_Q 6015T S1461
&3
Latitude/Longitude if known: QBSP # 23-035-20-01
Design capacity of animal waste management system (Number and
-type gf confined animal (s) : �, ./2�QD /A�Q Welk f
Average animal population on the farm (Number and type of
animal (s) raised) : /QOO '1An 7-bX2 Z r-s
Year Production Began: M7 'ASCS�Tract No.:CP
7--- Jo11e
Type of Waste Management System Used: _ - !LL jn -667- L/i1lDW6149VA11V
Acres Available for Land Application of Waste:
Owner (s) Signature (s) : Date:4.
.�
3R-5aa
~' (Bob Bilbrey, Serviceman)

State of North Carolina ,
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 9, 1993
Ivey R. Knowles
Rt 1, Box 318
Rose Hill NC 28458
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 size 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, .
11-V�
Steve Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 "telephone [phone] FAX [phone]A96
An Equd Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer pope

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources ` •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary H
NR A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director FE
April 3, 1997
Ivey Knowles Jr
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
539 Fussell Rd
Rose Hill NC 28458
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Designation of Operator in Charge
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
Facility Number 31--522
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Knowles Jr:
You were notified by letter dated November 12, 1996, that you were required to designate a
certified animal waste management system operator as Operator in Charge for the subject facility by
January 1, 1997. Enclosed with that letter was an Operator in Charge Designation Form for your
facility. Our records indicate that this completed Form has not yet been returned to our office.
For your convenience we are sending you another Operator in Charge Designation Form for your
facility. Please return this completed Form to this office as soon as possible but in no case later
than April 25, 1997. This office maintains a list of certified operators in your area if you need
assistance in locating a certified operator.
Please note that failure to designate an Operator in Charge of your animal waste management
system, is a violation of N.C.G.S. 90A-47.2 and you will be assessed a civil penalty unless an
appropriately certified operator is designated. Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving you of the responsibility and liability for any past or future violations for your
failure to designate an appropriate Operator in Charge by January 1, 1997.
If you have questions concerning this matter, please contact our Technical Assistance and
Certification Group at [phone].
Sincerely,
for Steve W. Tedder, Chief
Water Quality Section
bb/awdesletl
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Facility File
Enclosure
P.O. Box 29535, 1W . FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Nvwe An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycles/ 104b post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Ivey Knowles Jr
Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
539 Fussell Rd
Rose Hill NC 28458
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Ivey Knowles Jr Farm
Facility ID#: 31-522
Duplin County
Dear Ms. Knowles Jr:
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 9191733-0026.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P,O. Box 27687, 11PP�
Raleigh, North Carolina 2761 1-7687 ��C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 - 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention: V-D
Facility No. —? d a
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
i DATE: .S- - , 1995
Time: —. a D (",
Farm Name/Owns
Mailing Address:
County: S�
Integrator. Phone`7i c--, — a OAT—d �
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location: r s, _ e.,�a_Q_ �, rZ 11 O y '1- Ilrl) 4�. S
! 7 y,-A c�
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: !'c.o Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: " Elevation: Fee
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) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: L -F Ft. Inches
. Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? Y� or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized: ! '�� �J
Does the facility meet SC minimum setback criteria?. 200 Feet from Dwellings? �e or No
100 Feet from Wells? Q 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 o0N 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:
n
C! }�, . • � D _A�fE � n S/ � r_e �..� �l •`�] �-QlLryl G�t!� � C�%Jt�i.�1- ' d7i� �✓1 0.� =1_� 1�1
• ��`l Otis ��i��
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

•
•
Site Requires Immediate Attention: T 5 Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT "7
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION REC '
DATE: nZI L 1995
Time: IaJi�_
Farm Name/Own(
Mailing Address:
County:
Integrator. -
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation: Swine
Poultry Cattle
Design .Capacity: ! L 9 u Number of Animals on Site:
Phone( F2210 — D b`7
Phonckn)9/(7)—�
DEM Certification Number: ACE
Latitude: Longitude:
DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
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) Yes or No Actual Freeboare Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? 6 or No Is the cover crop adequate? Gel or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS
setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? 6or No
100 Feet from Wells? es r 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 or 10 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: iQ: ,1 ,)+ (v
A /_1/- -. A r-
Inspector Name
Signature
11
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.

00--

+ � I