710027_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua!

(Type of Visit: 0 Co pliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Coutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0�Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �E Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Maiiing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: bj/ ,6-=T_ j,�
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capac[ty Pop.
I ILayer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Daig Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
D , P.oultr. Ga acl I;o
Layers
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
I Other
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 C] NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ 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 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 [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ir�VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facilit Number: I jDate of Inspection: 6
Waste Collection: & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? s ❑ 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: LA670_y/
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No[:] ❑ 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 CJ 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 E(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes E/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?
D Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E:rNo
❑ 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
O/NNo
❑ 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
[- J E
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
D No
❑ NA
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 I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
ElONE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
niE
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: t0j/
24. Died the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes ❑ No ❑ NA I_JZE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
,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 0 No ❑ NA rNE
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 [✓ <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes 2 fo ❑ 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 �' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ✓ 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 LJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes �.hf'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes &<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question#) Explain any.aYEB answers and/or any additional recomrnendations.or,any other comments.,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional-pages:as necessary).' "
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 j 2/#/2415

r
4
Type of Visit G(7Routine
pliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: !)S I Arrival Time: 3 Departure Time: County: r A %L Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Dame:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: WMM Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = c = 1 Longitude: = ° = 1
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
0cac> ?.(,o b IONon-La ei
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?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 71 — a Date of Inspection
• Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
r
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structu�re i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �i��S001I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): /Z.O
Observed Freeboard (in): 3.7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thr at, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑Yes ❑ NA ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VNog ❑ 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 Ek o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes 040 ❑ 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) Nd
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
El NA
[I NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
,[�'No
N ❑ 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
El NA
ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Yes
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
�A rt.M
c,vL_0_ ,tL0p P�� RAC co�'�c•TCD
Reviewer/Inspector Name,
t` o j p, t l .
Phone: /
S
ReviewertInspector Signature:
Date:
} b
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: I- a % 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. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes LJ 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? ElU Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ["NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
EJNA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
L7 No
El NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
04
❑ 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
<o
❑ 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?
ElYes
❑l o
❑ 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
El Yes
L? 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
EK
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

0 Division of Soil and'Water Conservation Operation Review "a' t E
K r x
13
vision of Soil and Water Co'nservution - �ompLaineeZn$pection' rrt " ,F t
,iVi5lon of Water. QUahty "Cnmph;a.nce`Inspect.ioq
t1OpCr80�RVACWQ`�t1eCAgenCy
�9
[M Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up of DW inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other �
Facility Number Z Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection I���— 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted Certified © Conditionally Certified C3 Registered 113 Not Opera Date Last Operated: ..........................
j� /(' Count P f�e �,, W`
Farm Name:.........h..Y►.F'!............L'.........'.I{..frY.a4r./............. .......... y� .................
j
OwnerName: .�e.�i.h. .l. �L' CZY.............................................................. Phone No:..................................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:..............................................
MailingAddress: ....................................................................
Onsite Representative: J ! m My .......
Niv................................................... Integrator:......... �'.1... .........,................. .......................................
Certified Operator : ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:.........................
Location of Farm:
A
............................................................................. .. .. .... ...........................I..
Latitude 0 " Longitude ° 46
Design Current Design 'Current' Design Current
Swine Capacity Population f Poultry ' Capacity Po ulatton , ` Cattle Ca acity Ro elation
Wean to Feeder Z ( p 0 ❑ Layer JE1 Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish °` ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean ;
'
❑❑ Other
to Feeder �,�.�� .. '
❑ Farrow t0 Finish TotALDesign,;Capadty
❑ Gilts
❑ soars
Total SSL-W
�Nu[nber,of Lagoons ,3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area ][I Spray Field Area ;
;Bolding€Ponds /; Solid Traps „ „ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-niadc?
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systern? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 3 i
Freeboard(inches): ...................................-........ ......................... .......... ............... ........... ... . .......... ..................... ...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)'
3/23/99
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes W�Io
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes WWNo
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes �No
Structure 6
..........................,Q .......
❑ Yes pNo
Continued on back

V
Facility Number:` — Z - hate of Ilispection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
`—/
closure plan?
❑Yes
No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
`<No
{
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
f
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
elevation markings?
)(No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
�K&o
11. Is there evidence off over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
�No
12. Crop type _ _L) r h �I n� `- S/ - - -
---- -
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
XNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
`KN0
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
( l No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑NNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes0
kl�
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
'IrNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
� No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
ll
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
FNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
KNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
ElYes
Wo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
FNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
j'No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
`gNo
25. Were any additional problems rioted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
)(No
El: Rio YiolafiQris:or di'fC�ertcit? v ire pgte� ii>rritig �his'visit:• Yoh willl•seOiye flo,further
corres oridence: about: thON isi
Comments (refer to questiop #) ,Explain i any YES answers and/or -any recomtnendatioras or fany other commenu ,{�, ,
Use drawings oflfacihty to -better ei p'latn,situatibns (use;addittanal es pages as necsary)
�.-44 A e�
p n f i77�re
Reviewer/Inspector Name $:S . �,'�j� r ,;q"' ;t`�..
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ Date:.
3/23/99

Facility Number: Z Dale of Inspection j— 1
Odor Issues '
'r
r. 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below XYes ❑ 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 >fNo
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i,e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ^YNo
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 XNO
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 00
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ YesxNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Yes ❑ No
Additional 011lf6nt5 and/or rawings: : > > �a ni :�6.i` 11 .,E.1
4: ��
Jlr'5"0n
3/23/99

Rj4 rz x W.4
" [J Division of Soil and Water Conservation [J Other Agency`< w
f
L# O[Division of Water Quality } `�
Routine 0 Com laint 0 Follow-up of DWQ ins cation 0 Follow-up orDSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection , -c
Facility Number
Time of Inspcction ZD 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certified ©Applied for Permit © Permitted ONO O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ........ I`L' n. .�r .... p v�•............................:.:..... County:.......... P'✓ ......................Lt./ 0....
2 �{ CPC. III D ' -z��--qq - 2 7 g
OwnerName: ................... .!?... ................. 'y................................................................. Phone No:............................."...../..................................................
1
Facility Contact: ................................................................... .Title:..................... ..... Phone No:
I
Mailing Address: .......L..�.. � .L,.A. ...� e.11 12'(........ ... ReJt .��.a.,c'!. C— Z Lis
/ ........ .....................................
Onsite Represeritative:..... .! ........� p................................................................. Integrator: ....l.',L...
.!' ..............................................
Certified Operator ...........CC.`.........��,�.�............................................................. Operator Certification Number..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 6 'i Longitude • 1 «
� Wv' e ; Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
2600
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'Design Current';
YPnultry" Capacity Population1 CatEle
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Laver I I JE1 Non -Dail
Other
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Total Design``Caj
{` 0 4
9
Total S
Subsurface Drains Present 111J Lagoon Area
No Liauid Waste Management Svstem
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is'observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
Spray Field Area
❑ Yes 6(No
❑ Yes �`No
❑ Yes )if No
❑ Yes AS/ io
Jv /�
❑ Yes 1?11
0
❑ Yes V110
❑ Yes No
El Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No

FaciH y Number:' —Z+
�. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
❑ Yes O(No
❑ Yes #"No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Freeboard(ft): ......... ...!.................... ...................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? El Yes JNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 'P�No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes '01No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes VNO
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type jC Y. ......................................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes VNo
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 Qnlv
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?
0-No.vitilationsurddideni de's.were,noted-duringthis:visit.-You:rvill recei've-ito-further,
correspkideiko about this:vWL - - -.
1 Z. KGye:)e,4.4 6,w e- Qe-Ca j P,, TYc Insco1.1 v4 1 1 �
C.q-t-nwe, fo &6-40;,D� GvYalGl�4 �.p1o��2Ye
❑ Yes t7l�<o
tYes ❑ No
❑ Yes �lo
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �fNo
❑WOO No
J
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: C%lj�(Xlir Date:

Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:.1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: ......»................................................................................................................................................
FarmName: ...... K 11�:`�1 .:........... ............................................................................. County: ......... 1PAVfI'.......... ......... _.......... ...... ......... _............
LandOwner Name: ..,.Ih-kklil,A. 1.Jir!4..................... _........................................... I Phone No:...l ... r.514................... ...................
Facility Conctaet:.......!`` !X!!:' '�, ....I. ........{ ........................ Title: .....041&Y..... .................... Phone No:...� ��.1. .` 1�� .................
MailingAddress: ....... 3.,12.t.....h...11:..-C..... .... ......... ......... .................... ....... ...F... ....................
Onsite Representative:..rr''....L!.fll�l .lT .....++�lAJl............................................................... Integrator: .......�.........................................................
..
CertifiedOperator:.......1�kd.....L............................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude I '�& •®4®64 Longitude • '®'
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [@ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes N No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes JA 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 q No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes allo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes YJ No
4/30/9 7 maintenance/improvement?
Continued on back

Facility Number:—_23....
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 No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures goons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
.......15............ ............ .......... .... ............................ » .................... ............................ ............................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 5JNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or`maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
® No
3'aste
Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify
15.
LDWQ)
Crop type ......... �u+................ .............................................. .1<1lk AT..........................................................................
16,
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
& No
18,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
la No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
JR No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Certified Facilities
❑ Yes
9No
For
22.
Only
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
O No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®' No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
Comments (refer to question'#),Explam any YES`a_nswers'andlor any recommendatrons.or any other comments ,
Use d swings of facility to better expiam siivatrons � s_ a additional pages as necessary}
12. �;vvA#A a.rtm s6Ad toe- -PU iJ maded. P&ry svA s6+ oO be yu j). t.,tgmtt. r 1k 4
shoal be WVL kd.
A. LAW ter) hid Avinhws �r- s�1� rcrojds
ReviewertInspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:Date: ._
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. `71- f-7 R,
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
tj/'- ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: , 1995
Time: 10 3S
Farm Name/Owner:_
Mailing Address:
County: Pt. ­J�
Integrator: /Kwfl 9 _ _. _ Phone: / Vo 7. a �� 5
On Site Representative:c 2 Aeft",_ Phone:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation: Swine L�- Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: .X4WV ""04 Number of Animals on Site:y
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ' 2 (o' 2 Longitude: l l S �' `�" Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: _ .Ft. Inches
Was any. seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? es r Now
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No "
Crop(s) being utilized: UtirNU""
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? Os or No
100 Feet from Wells?, �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 or I 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: .. jl� 1=L /, r
"AA t
- -
� S
Inspector Name Signatur
cc.: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.

0
Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. 7/- )�7
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: , 1995
Time:
Farm N
Mailing
County:
Integrat
On Site
Physica
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry CattleCu Sr+�
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:__,cJ
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3 1, ' 3 .2 Longitude: -77_° _' 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 Freeboard: 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? Yes or 1Vo Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized: tfJC�l_� 'f]t c�1PJZA,_Z_�nQ - - -
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings?, e; or No
100 Feet from Wells? Os or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or N
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes oe
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Y - or No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequ a waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated c-acrea a with co�Vnv\
op)? Yes or I y t
Additional Comments: b
inspcczarivame
cc: Facill,Assessment Unit 44 Af 7�,� �/Uj Use Attachments if Needed.
C!`�

87/19/1995 15:25 9102591291 FENDER. COOP E`CT SEP
PAGE 14
Site Requires Immediate Attention
Facility Number. �
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 18 _,.. 1995
Owner. Kenneth Peay .. Farm Name: �....,.,.. --
County: Pender
Agent Visiting Site: Bryant M. Spim Phone: [phone]
Operator Phoae: � 910) _252-?986
On Site Representative; Phone:
Physical Address; Little Kelly Road - 3.1 miles south of the intersection of SR 1411
and SR 1409. Farm road is on the right
Mailing Address: 4277 Little Ke11y Road
- Rocky Point, NC ' 28457 _
Type of Operation: "Swine -z- PouItry Castle
Design Capacity: „26,n0 vPan-fee&iwnber of Animals on Site: 2600 wean -feeder
• Latitude: Longitude: o '
Type of Inspection: Ground x _ Aerial
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) @e or No Actual Freeboard: 5 Feet - Inches
For facilities with more than, one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o o Was there erosion of the dam?: or No
Is adequate land available for land application? 9e or No Is the cover crop adequate? or No
Additional Comments: Erosion on dam is primarily on interior due to lack of
vegetation - does not appear to be dangerous. Some erosion also exists
,- on the exterior Qfdam-addittonal vegetation should be established. _
Fax to [phone] Signature of Agent