070038_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H LAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS

01
0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS070038
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort Region:
Date of Vlsit: 04/12/2017 EntryTime: 11:30 am Exit Time: 12:15 pm
Farm Name: Pungo Farm
Owner: J L M Pungo Farms LLC
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Mailing Address: PO Box 10009 Goldsboro NO 27532
Physical Address: 4271 NO 99 N Pantego NO 27860
Facility Status: ECompliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods LLC
❑ Denied Access
Washington
j im.ly nch@goldsborom i I I
919-778-3130
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35` 38' 24" Longitude: 76' 38' 21"
3 miles north of Pantego on NO 99.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Thomas Kevin Crumpler Operator Certification Number: 999821
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Jim Lynch Phone: [phone]
On -site representative George Pettus Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: 2 3 4
4-10-17 = .07 .05 .06 .06
No irrigation events since farm was purchased. GHF is in the process of closing out lagoons & combining two farms into one
Facility (07-38) and building new houses.
No animals on site at this time.
page: 1

I
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Punga Farms LL- Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 04/12/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,495 0
Total Design Capacity: 2,495
Total SSLW: 1,080,335
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
1
40M
Lagoon
2
50.00
Lagoon
3
42.00
Lagoon
4
38,00
Lagoon
FINAL
Lagoon
HOLDING POND
Lagoon
PRIM
page: 2

I
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: J L M Pungo Farms LL Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 04/12/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M E]
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWD)
❑
[]
[]
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.eJ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
. ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
[] ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?]
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

40"
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Pungo Farms LL- Facility Number:
070038
Inspection Date: 04/12/17 tnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Com, Wheat,
Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
M ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
163 Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
N ❑
❑
18. is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na He
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
11
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

r,
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Pungo Farms LL• Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 04/12/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment {PLAT} certification?
❑
❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
M ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon/Storage Pond
[]
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerhnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

4,
f Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS070038
Denied Access
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County:
Beaufort Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 0512712016 Entry Time: 10:00 am Exit Time: 10:45 am Incident#
Farm Name: J.L.M. Pungo Farms, LLC
Owner Email:
jim.lynch@goldsboromill
Owner: J L M Pungo Farms LLC
Phone:
919-778-3130
Mailing Address: PO Box 10009
Goldsboro NC 27532
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N
Pantego NC 27860
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Maxwell Foods LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude:
35" 38' 24" Longitude:
76' 38' 21"
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Operator Certification Number:
18864
Secondary OIC(s)
On -Site Representativejsj: Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name James Wagaman
Phone
On -site representative James Wagaman
Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspectorjs]:
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis: soil tested: 2014
1-14-16 = .46
9-8-15 = .30
6-24-15 = .07
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed. crop yield; freeboard/rainfall; calibration; a copy of the sludge survey needs to be in records
page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Pungo Farms LLB Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 05/27/16 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Gilts 2,065 0
T Total Design Capacity: 2,065
Total SSLW: 309,750
Waste Structures
Disignated ❑bseryed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.00
Lagoon
HOLDING POND
18.50
Lagoon
PRIM
19,00
43,00
page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: J L M Pungo Farms LLB Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 05/27/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storatre & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ApRlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
Hydraulic Overload?
Frozen Ground?
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Yes No Na Ne
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
Ye$ No Na Ne
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
Yes Ng Na Ne
❑ ■❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Pungo Farms LL, Facility Number:
070038
Inspection Date: 05/27/16 Iripsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
Na Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 E]
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑
Records and documents
Yee
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 [] ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WI.1P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
[j
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : J L M Pungo Farms LL1 Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 05/27/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yea
No Na N�
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
0
❑
23. 1f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Me
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
U ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. ❑o subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. aid the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss rev i ewh n spe cti o n with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑
❑
page: 5

I
® Division of Water Resources
❑Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
070038
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AW5070038
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County:
Beaufort Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
06/04/2015 Entry Time:
12:15 pm Exit Time: 1:30
pm Iricident #
Farm Name:
James Allen Hog Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
James E Allen
Phone:
252-935-5169
Mailing Address:
4271 NC 99 N
Pantego NC 278609774
Physical Address:
4271 NC 99 N
Pantego NC 27860
Facility Status:
❑ Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35' 38' 24" Longitude:
76' 38' 21"
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99
Question Areas:
El Dischrgo & stream Impacts ® Waste Col. 5tor, Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents ® Other Issues
Certified Oporator: James E. Wagaman Operator Certification Number: 18864
Secondary OlC(s):
On -Site Representatives): Name Title Phone
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone -
Inspector Signalure: Date:
Secondary Inspectors):
Inspection Surnmary:
Wasto analysis soil tested: 10-2014
6-24-14 = 1.16
4-21-15 = 1.05
IRR records for 2014 were complete & balanced out w PAN remaining.
Reviewed. New COC. rainfall/freeboard, calibration is due in 2015
page: 1

J:
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : James E Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date 06/04/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
® Swine -Gilts 2.065 450
Total Design Capacity: 2,065
Total SSLW: 309.750
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
29.00
Lagoon
HOLDING POND
24.00
Lagoon
PRIM
19,00
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : James E Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 06/04/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Dischar_r es& Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
®❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
®❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (it yes, notify DWQ)
❑
®❑
]
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
®❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.1 large
❑
®❑
❑
trees, severe erosion. seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
®❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
©❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [Not applicable
❑
®❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ®❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ®❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manureisludge into bare soil?
❑
outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
pages 3

0
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : James E Allen Facility Number:
070038
Inspection Date. 06/04/15 Inpsection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste_ Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soyteans
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
®❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
®❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
e ❑
[]
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
®❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
[]
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility : James E Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 06/04/15 inpsection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
e ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
a ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
25. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
®❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
©❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
■ ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
2.9. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
� ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
®❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
®❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
®❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
®❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
®❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: Q70038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWSQ70038_ _ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort Region: Washington
Date of Visit: Q310612014 Entry Time: 12:00 PM Exit Time: 12:45 PM
Farm Name: James Allen Hgg Farm
Owner: ,lames E Allen
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N Panteqo NC 27860 _
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: 'Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Latitude: &38'24" Longitude: 7$'38'21"
Question Areas:
❑ischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, R Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents © Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name James Wagaman
On -site representative .lames Wagaman
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18864
Title
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
Date:
Phone
Page: 1

t
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number : 070038
Inspection date: 03/06/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 912013
1-18-13 = 1.83
5-11-13 = .77
12-17-13 = 1.40
IRR records are complete S balanced out. Reviewed rainfall, freeboard, stocking records & crop yield.
Sludge survey: 212013 Iso#3 I-TZ = 7"
" #2 11= 10"
Need 5o get DSWC Cad Dunn to check the Nutrea Holes in lagoon for stability of lagoon.
Please remove the woody vegetation.
Page: 2

�1
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 03/0612014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number, 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Gilts 2,065 1,407
Total Design Capacity: 2,065
Total SSLW: 309,750
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
goon
FINAL
36,00
agoon
HOLDING POND
19.00
goon
PRIM
19.00
25.00
Page: 3

a
permit: AWS07DO38 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 03/06/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vlslt: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ M ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ D 0
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe Cl ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management n ■ ❑ Cl
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
8. Do any of the structures tack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
Hydrauiic overload?
Frozen Ground?
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
01111111100
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
n■❑❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number :
070038
Inspection pate: 0310612014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason far Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%v/1 d lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
i]
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Cora. Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil "type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
IN
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
0
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Alien
Inspection Date: 03/0612014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
Cl
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 03/06/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Facility Number : 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately,
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWD of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
i
00,
Page: 7

a
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWSQ7QO38 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ _ County: Beaufort Region: Agshiogton
Date of Visit: 02/2¢120 j 3 Entry Time: 1 5 PM Exit Time: 01:30 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: ,lames Allen Hoa Farm Owner Email:
Owner: James E Allen Phone: [phone]_
Mailing Address: 4271 NC 99 N Pantego NC ZZ8609774
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N _ Panjggo NC27864
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: 76°38'21"
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Operator Certification Number: 18864
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name James Wagaman
Phone:
On -site representative James Wagaman
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date. -
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 02/20/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
9-25-12 = 1.08
4-30-12 = 5.081sludge - IRR on corn are complete & balanced out.
(VOTE: 9 pulls on Canola have not been balanced out because it is not in the WUP, - Mr. Mitchell will be adding it to the WUP, ASAP.
No animals on this site from Nov. 2011 until Oct. 2012 so no sludge survey was done in 2012. However a sludge survey was
conducted on Feb. 24, 2013 & faxed to the regional office on Feb. 25, 2013. both lagoons have sufficient LTTs.
Rainfall & freeboard are recorded.
Caliberation of equipment is due in 2013.
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 02/20/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Gilts 2.065 2,000
Total Design Capacity: 2,065
Total SSLW: 309,750
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
22,00
agoon
HOLDING POND
19,00
agoon
PRIM!
19.00
26,00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 02/20/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
1100
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
Cl
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
Cl
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.1 large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management 11000
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 02120 2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 1011/6110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ 0
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit re adiiy available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 0
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection slate: 02120/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Cl
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
■
❑ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
■
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS070038 Owner • Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 02/20/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
n►a..� Isee�
Facility Number. 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? if yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
In
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

Division of Water Duality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS07QQad CQ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Cate:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort Region: Washington
Date of Visit: Q2115/2012 Entry Time: 01730 PM Exit Time: 02:40 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hoa Farm Owner Email:
Owner: James E Allen Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 4271 NC 99 N _ Pantego NC 278609774
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N _ „ Panteoo NC 27860
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: L H Allen & Son Inc
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Latitude: Longitude: 76°38'21 "
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name James Allen
On -site representative James Wagaman
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested:
2-48-11 = .14 James will bring to me on 2-21-12
5-6-11 = A 1
8-02-11 = .09
Operator Certification Number: 18864
Title
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
Date:
iRR recorder are complete & balanced out. Freeboard & rainfall are recorded. SS done 11-11 & calib.
NOTE: Last hogs left in Nov. 2011 - Mr. Allen wants to remain active for now.
Phone
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner • Facility: James E Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 02/15/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VisIt: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swl ne
0 Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,145 0
Total Design Capacity: 1,145
Total SSLW: 495,785
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
-age-on
FINAL
22.00
agoon
HOLDING POND
12,00
IL agoon
PRIM
19.00
19.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility. James E Allen Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date. 02115/2012 Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other Cl
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Oid discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 1101111
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
T Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 02/15/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.?
�
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
■
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
1113
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
Cl
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the Facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number; 070038
Inspection Date: 02/15/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other'? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? 00011
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑
❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 02/15/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Otherlssues Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ 11
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? Cl ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
In
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

fi
Division of Water quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS070038 ❑ Denied Access
inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 0311I12011 Entry Time:01755 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hog Farm Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 4271 NC 99 N _Pantego NC 278609774
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N Pantego N
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: L H• Allga jj Son Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35'38'2_4" Longitude:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman Operator Certification Number: 18864
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative[s]: Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
2-20-11 =.14
9-13-10 = .28
7-20-10 = .10
Soil tested Sept. 2010
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Looks good. SS completed Sept. 2010 Need to do calibration in 2011
COC finally in records.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner • Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date: 03117/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,145 928
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Total Design Capacity: 1,145
Total SSLW: 495,785
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
agoon
HOLDING POND
19.00
agoon
PRIM
19.00
38.00
Page 2

J
z
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date: 03/17/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) DMOU
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
5. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
Cl
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
Cl
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
Cl
improvement?
Was�pllcation
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
In
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date: 03/17/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yea No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN n 10°/6/10 lbs.?
Total P205?
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16 Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
11
11
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑
Page: 4

'l
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Rate: 0311712011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Resign?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
Cl
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. 1f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fait to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Yn
Un
NA
NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ Cl ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection date: 03/1712011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Rev iewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
34. Are subsurface drains present on this farm?
It yes, check the appropriate box below.
Spray Field
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
Other
Facility Number : 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
IN
Page: 6

10
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency Facility Number. 070038 _ Facility Status: Activg,,Permit: &WS070030 denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Ins ction _ _ _. Inactive or Closed date:
Reason for Visit: RoUtine __ County: Peaufo Region: Washington
Date of Visit: Q3110/2010 Entry Timer] :55 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Jam" Allen Ugo Farm Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 427LNC
Physical Address: 4271 NC 99 N Pan;eoo NC 278§0
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: L H Allen & &n Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°38'24" Longitude: 7 °
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
© Records and documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18864
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
10-5-09 = .17
7-02-09 = .10
soil test 2009 1 rrigation on pre -plant corn - waiting on waste analysis.
Calibration 2009 SS 9-2009
NOTE: please address the erosion on the sidestend of lagoons.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 0311012010 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,145 L 985
Total Design Capacity: 1,145
Total SSLW: 495,785
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
Lagoon
HOLDING POND
agoon
PRIM
19.00
19.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 03110/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Mischa es &Stream Im acts
Yes No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Cl
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑ ■
Cl
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
Q ■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ ■
❑
❑
Z. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other
than from a ❑ ■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc. )?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenanoe or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Ap lid cation
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
Cl M
0
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding? Q
Hydraulic Overload? 0
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Inspection Date: 03/10/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 1T°16110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
110
❑
Cl
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑ ■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
20. Dees the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

f
Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen
Facility Number: 070038
inspection Date: 0311012010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
❑they?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual sail analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22, Did the facility fail to'nstall and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? Cl
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
Cl
❑
25. Did the facility fall to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James E Allen Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 03/1012010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? 0 ■ ❑ ❑
32- Did Rev iewerllnspector fail to discuss re viewh n s pecti o n with on -site representative? ❑ ■ Cl ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

I
4
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS07D038 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: C m lian In i n Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Boutine County: Beaufort ^— Region: Washioatgn
Date of Visit: 03102/2009 Entry Time: 01715 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hog Farm Owner Email:
Owner: James Allen Phone: [phone] ._
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 311 Panteoo NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Integrator:
Latitude: 35`38'24" Longitude: 76 38'21"
Question Areas:
Discharges & stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E. Wagaman
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18864
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-28-08 = 1.3
2-13-09 = 12.0 sludge 61 third stage
looks good
Page: 1

Permit: AVVS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 0310212009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start. Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
25.00
agoon
HOLDING POND
31.00
agoon
PRIM
19.00
19.00
Page: 2

0
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date: 03/02/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visft: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
Cl
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
S. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks andlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

0
Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Number. 07oo3a
Inspection Date: 03/0212009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN n 10%110 lbs.? ❑
Total P2O5? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?'
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
Cl
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Facility Number:
07DO38
Inspection Date: 03/02/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after a 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fait to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
Cl
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PEAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Yon
Nn
N4
NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 Owner • Facility: James Allen
Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 0310212009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33, Does facility require a follow-up Visit by same agency?
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

V Dhision of Water. Quality
Facility. Nuif>rber Q 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation'
D Other Agency
Type of Visit M Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit • Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up Q Referral D Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: (�,'� Departure Time: County: Region: zr/(Q
Farm Name:
Owner Email:
O'
Owner Name Phone: 9�e9 ~9_T5_~g!5�j!2
Mailing Address: �� I : �Q
Physical Address: C
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: _d
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: __ Operator Certification Number:���
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = , = « Longitude: = o = 1 =
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Fceder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ ❑ Laver
1 1 ❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ 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 Heifei
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocket
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: El
b, laid 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)
1 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 01N,, ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes
El No
El NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
/
El NA
El NE
ElYes
�Noo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12129104 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 tructure 3 Structure 4
i r
Identifier:
Spillway?;
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): e7 10
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 2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes E3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Lb 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 ,l�� [ o ❑ NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes !3 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 21�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application _,/
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ 2 Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
It. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes LI 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) dam'
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
2'NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ON o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'?❑ Yes
E JINo
[:1 NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Lldly
I --]NA
ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElYes
LiJ 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):
ReviewerAnspector Name er r C
e r Phone:
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
Date:
'OF 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 0-3 Date of Inspection �-
Re aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 9<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the approprrate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps
p ❑ Other ,,��,,//
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ 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
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NNE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
O'N"o
ElNA
U NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑:1 Yes
EJ No
ElNA
[INE
G)Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
2 Y es
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E�&o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
/
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
G '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
M 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
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
M'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
AL
12128104

Appendix 1. Lagoon Sludge Survey Form
A. Farm Permit or DWQ Identification Number - zp
B. Lagoon Identification ' e 1%C
C. Person(g) Taking Measurements w ( A&A+Q•►V I
D. bate of Measurements � �e t[. .f of %
E. Methods/Devices Used for Measurement of:
a. Distance from the lagoon liquid surface to the top of the sludge layer:
b. 01stance from the lapWn I�Auid surface to the bottom (soil) of the lagoon:
c. Thickness of the sludge layer if making a direct measurement with "core
F. Lagoon Surface Area (using dimensions at inside top of bank): 1 f 7- [ (acres)
(Draw a sketch of the lagoon on a separate sheet, list dimensions, and calculate surface area.)
G. Estimate number of sampling points:
a. Less than 1,33 acres: Use S aims p
b.1f more than 1,33 acres, rE acres x 6 z . p , with maximum of 24.
(Using sketch and dimensions, develop a uniform grid that has the same number of intersections es the
eslimatod number of sampling points needed. Number the intersection points on the lagoon grid so that data
recorded at each can be easily matched.)
H. Conduct sludge survey and record data on "Sludge Survey Data Sheet' (Appendix 2).
1. At the time of the Sludge survey, also measure the distance from the Maximum Liquid Level ,y
to the Present Liquid Level (measure at the lagoon gauge pole): „(
J. Determine the distance from the Maximum Liquid Level to the Minimum Liquid Level 13 Ite i
(use lagoon management plan or other lagoon remrds):
K. Calculate the distaanec from the present liquid surface level to the Minimum Liquid Level
(Item J minus Item 1, agsuming the present liquid level is below the Maximum Liquid Level):
L. Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level C�
to the lagoon bottom (average for all the measurement points): 1
M. Record from the Sludge Survey Dare Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level
to the top of the sludge layer (average for all the measurement points): �C
N_ Reoord from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the average thickness of the sludge layer: 6
0- Calculate the thickness of the existing Liquid Treatment Zone (Item J4 minus Item K):
(Nate' if ltem O i3 less than 4 ftaet, a sludge removal and utrlization Plan may be required by
N-C. DWQ. See your specific vrsmit or contnet DWQ for more information.)
P. Proceed to the Sludge Volume Worksheet if you desire to calculate sludge volume for a rectangular -
shaped lagoon with uniform side slopes.
Completed by: —O Date:
Print dame Signature
14
Le/56 3DGd
dddli
Z6b5-5C6-Z5Z L5:61 809Z/7T/58

Appendix 2. Sludge Survey Data Sbeet*
Lagoon Identification:
Sludge Survey Data Shoot V /
Completed by: -3R+N rs jJfPGe ►4 Date: IA- 7
Print Name ignature
(A)
Grid
Point
No.
(Bf
Distance from liquid surface
to top of sludge
(C)
Distance from liquid surface
to lagoon bottom soil
(C) minus (B)
Thickness of sludge
la er
Ft. & in.
Ft. tenths
Ft. & in.
Ft. tenths
Ft_ & in,
Ft. tenths
4
5
3
3
r
6
g
7
$
3
!
8
- 7
.�
s
10
11
12
13
14
15
1$
17
16
19
20
21
22
23
24
Average
-
*AH Grid Pnfntr aad corrgoondingiLuQ�gO Laj er rhtckne=s mask ra shown on a sketch attached rhrs
,Lrulgg SUMMI Mara Sheer.
See Rppendiz 4 far conversion from in&has to tenths of a foot.
15
L0150 3EYttd -�daH Z6b5-5E6-Z5Z L5:6T 809ZOWSO

Appendix 3. Sludge Volume Worksheet_
The average thickness of the sludge layer is determined from information on the Lagoon Sludge
Survey Form. In this example, the average sludge layer thickness is 2.5 feet. The dimensions of
the lagoon and the side slope are needed for calculations. If the lagoon is a standard geometric
shape, the volume of sludge in the lagoon can then be estimated by using standard eQuations, For
rectangular lagoons and constant side slope, calculate length and width at the midpoint of the
sludge layer, and multiply by sludge layer thickness to calculate sludge layer volume, as shown in
the example. For irregular shapes, convert the total surface area to a square shape.
A. Average Sludge Layer Thickness (T)
B. Depth of lagoon from top of bank
to bottom soil surface (D)
C. Slope = horizontal/vertical side slope (S)
❑, Length at top inside bank (L)
R, Width at top inside bank (W)
F. Length at midpoint of sludge layer
L. = L — 2 S (D- (T12))
G" Width at midpoint of sludge layer
Wm = W — 2 S (D — (Tf2))
H. Volume of sludge (V)
V = L,,, W� T
1. Volunte in gallons
Vg =V * 7.5 gal./W.
Example Your lagoon j
2.5 ft.jrtAL"
11 ft.
3
457 ft.
d ti
229 ft.
398.5 ft. 1. a
170-5 ft. 171- I I
162,860 ft' -116C
I.273,950 gal. 3 3 .56
16
Le1La 3Sed
-::HNH
Z6h5-5E6-Z5Z L5:6T 80OZ/VT/50

Appendix 1. Lagoon Sludge Survey Form
A_ Fame Permit or DWQ Identification Number_ _7
B. Lagoon Identification W 'O
C. Person(s) Taking Measurements -- } � f`? 't ,+'?"9 "0
D. Date of Measurements AZ6 L—A—M 6f'A � a 0o 1
F. Methods/DevIces Used for Measurement of:
a. Distance from the lagoon liquid surface to the top of the sludge layer:
b. Distance from the lagoon liquid surface to the bottom (soil) of the lagoon:
c_ Thickness ofthe sludge layer if making a direct measurement with "core sampler":
F. Lagoon Surface Area (using dimensions at inside top of bank) I , V to (acres)
(Draw a sketch of the lagoon on a separate sheet, list dimensions, and calculate surface area.)
Cl- Estimate number of sampling points:
a. Less than 1.33 acres: Use 8 points
b. If more than 1.33 acres, /' y 4 acres x 6 = with maximum of 24.
(Using sketch and dimensions, develop a uniform grid that hag the same number ofintermcrions as the
estimated number of sampling points needed. Number the intersection points on the lagoon grid so that data
reeordtd at each can be easily matched)
H. Conduct sludge survey and record data on "Sludge Survey Data Sheet" (Appendix 2).
1. At the time of the sludge survey, also measure the distance from the Maximum Liquid Level
to the Present Liquid Level (measure at the lagoon gauge pole):
1 Determine the distance from the Maximum Liquid Level to the Minimum Liquid bevel
(use lagoon management plan or other lagoon records)-
K. Calculate the distance from the present liquid surface level to the Minimum Liquid Level
(Item J minus Item I, assuming The present liquid level is below the Maximum Liquid Level):
L_ Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level c�
to the lagoon bottom (average for all the measurement points): r
M. Record from the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the distance from the present liquid surface level
to the top of the sludge layer (a► crage for all the measurement points): y
N. Reoord fioom the Sludge Survey Data Sheet the average thickness of the sludge layer' r�
❑- Calculate the thickness of the existing Liquid Treatment Zone (Item M minus Item K)! iF
{Note: If Item o is less than 4 feet, a sludge removal and utiLuation plan may be required by
N.C- DWQ. Ste your speciilic permit or contact DWQ for mare informarion,)
P_ Pruceed to the Sludge Volume Worksheet if you desire to calculate sludge volume for a rectangular -
shaped lagoon with uniform side slopes. f
Completed by: 7P1Mss 6.*� c.-.s... , �- t'--�"..".- Date:
Print NameSignal=
14
L0/Z0 39ad dddS Z6b5-5E6--Z5z LS:6T 800Z/bZ/50

Appendix 2. Sludge Survey Data Sheet*
Lagoon Identification,
Sludge Survey Data Sheet e4 C4-
Completed by: Yd 4, ,P 1-64 w Date:
tint Name ignature
(A)d
Gri
Po"
No.
{B]
Distance from liquid surface
to to of 51ud a
{G}
Distance from liquid surface
to lagoon bottom 1Soil
(D) minus (B)
Thickness of sludge
la or
Ft. & in.
Ft. tenths
FL & in.
Ft. tenths
Ft. & in.
Ft. tenths
1
-3
1.
d
2
3
4-
V
3
O
4
2
5
i
r�
7
8
9
.
Q
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1s
19
20
21
22
23
24
�Average
*.422 rid i o o ndin shed r thicknesses must be r1 an o skeach attache a r is
51� �e Survey 17ard Stet.
See Appendix 4 for conversion from inches to tenths of a fool_
1S
LBIEO 39bd 3das Z679-9E6-Z9Z 1-9:61 809Z/tT/58

Appendix 3. Sludge Volume Worksheet,
The average thickness of the sludge layer is determined from information on the Lagoon Sludge
Survey Form. In this example, the average sludge layer thickness is 2.5 Feet. The dimensions of
the lagoon and the side slope are needed for calculations. if the lagoon is a standard geometric
shape, the volume of sludge in the lagoon can then be estimated by using standard equations. For
rectangular lagoons and constant side slope, calculate length and width at the midpoint of the
sludge layer, and multiply by sludge layer thickness to calculate sludge layer volume, as shown in
tht example. For irregular shapes, convert the total surface area to a square shape.
A. Average Sludge Layer Thickness (T)
B. Depth of lagoon from top of bank
to bottom soil surface (D)
C. Slope = horixontallvenical side slope (S)
D- length at top inside bank (L)
E. Width at top inside bank (W)
F. Length at midpoint of sludge layer
L. =1L - 2 S (D- (` /2))
G. Width at midpoint of sludge layer
W,WW-2S(D-(T12))
H. Volume of sludge (V)
V = L"' W, T
1. Volume in gallons
VO =V * 7.5 gal.lft'.
Example Your lagoon
2. ftft- 6 fAGa
11 ft.
3e
457 ft-
229 ft.
398.5 #t. a1 6= 1
lX5 ft. iz2r, E
169,860 fP 37W 9 Y
1 z. a L95o al. d7 7,'� o,
16
LBft,B 39dd 3ddg
Z6h9-9C5-Z5Z 19:6T 89BZ1V119B

Division of Water Duality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWS070038 0 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort I Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/02/2007 Entry Time:10:30 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hon Farm
Owner: James AIIea _
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 311 Panteag NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Anthony T North
Secondary OiC(s):
Phone: [phone]
Latitude:35°38'2A" Longitude:76°38'21"
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other issues
Operator Certification Number: 18848
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Todd North Phone:
On -site representative Todd North Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste anlyses:
2-27-07 = .21
10-31-06 = .24
6-23-06 = .14
2-24-06 = .49
soil test 2-07
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Inspection Date: 05/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,145 1,145
Total Design Capacity: 1,145
Total SSLW: 495,785
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
36.00
agoon
HOLDING POND
agoon
PRINT
19.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Humber . 070038
Inspection Date: 05/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
0
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
Q
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
£. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance aItem atives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
Q
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Inspection Date: 05102/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crap window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com,
Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crap and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 05/02/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after n 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Farm (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment [NPDES only]?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: 0510212007 Inspection Type: Gompliance Inspection Reason for Vlsit: Routine
Otherlssues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewtinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 070038 Facility Status: Actove Permit: AVVS070038 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insogetion Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Beaufort Region. Washington
Date of Visit: 06/19/2006. Entry Time:10:00 AM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hog Farm Owner Email:
Owner: James Allen
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 311 _ Pantego NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude. 35°38'24" Longitude: 76.38'21"
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99,
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E Allen
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representati►re(s): Name
On -site representative Todd North
24 hour contact name Todd North
Operator Certification Number: 17339
Title Phone
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspectors):
Inspection Summary:
#5 Address the rodent holes in the sides of lagoon.
Don't forget to do the sludge survey and equipment caliberation! Send the results to Raleigh by October 1
Don't forget to balance PAN for corn in 2006.
Waste analysis:
One sent June 13, 2006
2-24-06 = 0.49 Soil test 11-4-05
9-17-06 = 0.55
3-15-05 = 0.66 /sludge 4.66
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Facility Number: 070038
Inspection hate: 06/19/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,145 1,144
Total Design Capacity: 1,145
Total SSLW: 495,785
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed hate Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
39,00
agoon
HOLDING POND
20.00
agoon
PRIM
19.00
2U0
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 061191200E Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1- is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
■
❑
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
fi_ Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management
U
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Nat applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
[i
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Facility Number : 070038
Inspection Date: OW1912006 Inspection Type; Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
Cl
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn,
Wheat,
Soybeans
Crap Type 2
Other
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crap and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
In
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
Cl
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5070038 owner • Facility: James Allen
Inspection Date: 06/19/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Facility Number: 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA N E
11
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after n 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Farm {NPDES only}?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
ROD
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
■
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
■
❑
2& Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
... . _
V..
U-
W A
UP
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit. AWs070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen
Inspection Date: 0611912006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did ReAewe rflnspector fail to discuss rev lewfins pectio n with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a fallow -up visit by same agency?
Facility Number. 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 070038 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWaQ70 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Beaufort Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/30/2005 Entry Time: 11 20 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: James Allen Hog Farm Owner Email:
Owner: James AllenPhone: 400-935-5288
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 311 _ _ Pantego NC 27860
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°38'24" Longitude: 76°38'21"
3 mlles north of Pantego on NC 99
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Q Records and Documents ® Other Issues
Certified Operator: James E Allen Operator Certification Number: 17339
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative James Wagaman Phone:
24 hour contact name James Wagaman Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
3-15-05 L=.66 HW=4.6
7-704 = .81
3-8-04 =.56
Soil sample pulled in Nov 04 and dated 2-7-2005
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Locate your new COC
Clean up trash around the lagoon
Please try to eradicate the muskrats at the lagoon
Page: 1

Permit: AWS070038 Owner -Facility. James Allen Facility Number. 070038
Inspection Date: 03130/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon PRIM 19.00 22.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility: James Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
DischaWes & Stream Impacts Yes No NA LLE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWG/)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑
NI
yte Collection_ Storage & Treatment
C Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
bIA
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.a./ large trees, severe erosion, ❑ ❑ ❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or me nag ad through a waste management or
❑
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
1101111
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance 0r
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Ao_nliratian
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
Yes No NA NF
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crap Type 4
Crap Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWS070038 Owner - Facility; James Allen Facility Number: 070038
Inspection hate: 0313012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste App[icatian Yes No NA NE
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Sail Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Sail Type 5
Sail Type 6
14_ Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)?
❑
E ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
N ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[IN
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
00
Yes,
❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW MP readily available?
00
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stacking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment {NPDES only}?
❑
❑
0
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
0
❑
25. 0id the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
0
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E
❑
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5070038 Owner - Facility: ,lames Allen
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 070038
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document and report those mortality
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concem? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the Facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewhinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 5

IType of Visit ® Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Tech. Assistance Q Confirmation for Ren
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 7 38 Date of Visit: 9R9I2t104 Time: 3:Do
d Not t7 erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.........................
Farm Name: JA1mca.A11fill.Ho&JFA.1.M....................... .......... _.......................................... County: HgAlawl ........................................... WARD........
OwnerName: JAMes......................................Allm ............................................................ Phone No: ............---........................._.............
Mailing Address: 412J..Dig11WA,y..99.AQr1bL..............•.................................................. ramje&a..'iC.......................................................... 27.8.6.0 .............
FacilityContact: ........................................................... ................Title:.......................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: J.a mg5..WUjam lj...................................................................... Integrator: ia�. .A[lE ..SR70.,.�R�C.....................................
Certified Operator:J.AImtiZ................................. A.Ucia............................----.................. Operator Certification Num be r. 173,32 .............................
Location of Farm:
miles north of Pantego on NC 99. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude = • 3$ ' 24.36 " Longitude 7t; • 38 ' Z1.Z1 u
Design Current
Swine Canaciry Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1145
1020
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Nan -Layer IONon-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,145
Total SSLW 495,785
Number of Lagoons 4
Discharaes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........Prima4......... .........Recycle.........--......S= dary...................Final............. ...............
Freeboard ( inches): 19 19 19 47
r, , In 2 Continued

Facility Number: 7-38
Date of Inspection 9R41zliQa
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? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ HydrauIic Overload ❑ Froxen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc > 30(
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
13. Do the receiving craps differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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 N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments.(refer to. gjuestipn #):, 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):,,; :[]Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Facility being leased by LH Allen & Dempsey Ange effective 1/10/04.
Waste 7/7104 w/ 0.81 lbsN/1000ga1.
3/8/04 w/ 0.56 in final and 2.7 in secondary lagoon.
Soil anlaysis by Impact Agronomics dated 3/15/04 w/ Phos., Cu & Zn index numbers w/ pH values. Please have Impact give you a
)py of actual soil analysis with a liming recommendation.
A new WUP by Jack Long dated 912/04. WUP will be updated every 6 months to correspond with cropping rotation per Mr. Alien.
' Mr. Wagaman dropped off a copy of WUP at WaRO on 10/14/04.
Reviewerlinspector Name Scott
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 7:38 Date of Inspection 9I291201}4
`r
Reauired_ Rem & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
% No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oc/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
34. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
®No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ Na
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification D other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit, O/29/2003 Time: lb:t5
r O Not Operational O Below Threshold
®.Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...... _._
Farm Name: ,Istxt .,P�1bep g F�x7ul�........»..............._................------...........---....._... County: ) au�su>rk...........- ......_...... .......... alai?..
OwnerName: dames ........... -- ._...» ARM ....................... ....................... ......_. Phone No: 75 :� 1 ...._....._........ ........... - ... .._........
Mailing Address: .4271.HjxkwAy.99..Narth..... ...... _._......... _ Pa ega. i�...... ........... _ 7.� � .....�..
Facility Contact : ........... .......... ....._............ ........................... ......... Title: ..................................... »........... .... �...... Phone No: ........ ..»..... ..........................
...._
Onsite Representath e: James ...............--•---........._................................................ integrator: Indqwdett...... ............ ..................... ...............
Certified Operator: J.E..................................&m............................................., Operator Certification Number: .ID32............... ..............
Location of Farm:
3 miles north of Pantego on NC 99. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 38 Z44 .� Longitude 76 • ®` 2i.21 K
:.:.:::. ........ ........
-::::::::�esi ...
t;n.................
............................ .............. ----- .. .-- -- -- ------I....................
Curiserit: ::: :::::. .. :.:::: Des..... '.i Crt .... nt :::::: ..... ':
.. ...... ............. P.:::..........rre...-..-......
.... ;............I......I.......:::
:I)e . Current::::;
:. C.....ac' :Pa
........................ ..... „ ...........................
:::::...................,...,-.....,-......:.:::.......,,,
dldtion:`: o. "::':.'Ca iPv iilatiori- e;:;Ca
aei :'Po u3a#ioa':;
❑Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
10 DAY
❑ Feeder to Finish
... ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
-
:::
to Wean
Farrow1145
950
::::::..::::::::::::::...:•..........
:.: .. .
::::::::::.:::::::.,,
Farm w to Feeder
Dther
Ferro w to Finish
:::::::::::. ......:::::.:::: ::...::..:::::
.:::::...........:.:.::::::.:::::.:::::::
::::: Total=Design rapacity;:;
1,145
Gilts
.
0 soars
Nurii I:;a' seas';:;;<>' `�_
g,
;::;_:
n s Lis oo Are S a Fuld Subsurface Drains Area
4 Present ❑
r,..
as soi 's Holdiu `P d:T
No Liquid W rite Management stem ❑ana emen S
i;
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ® Yes ❑ No
Diwharge 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. notil}, DWQ) ❑ Yes N No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal./min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, noth• DWQ) ❑ Yes N No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than fi-om a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Stnicture 4 Structure 5 Sincture 6
Identifier:..........P.rinuo.......... .......... Rjxyrk.......... wAmdary...
Freeboard(inches): ............... 72............... ............... ZZ............... ............... 20......................... .... 3.1...............

Facility Plumber: 7 —38 Date of Inspection I 08I2912003 i'
5. - Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie! trees, severe erosion,
[ Yes
N No
seepage, etc.)
-
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑Yes
®No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/Improvement? .
❑ Yes
® No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimptovement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctares lack adequate, ganged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ® Yes ❑ No
13. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W17P, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
19. Does record keeping treed improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes N No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes N 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 ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Waste 3/19/03 with 0.65 lbsN11000gal & 9/12/02 with T1=0.19 and PT=1.4lbsN. Need to take another sample asap.
Soils - November 2002 with up to 0.9 T/ac lime suggested. (Samples in Walt Allen's name.)
Irrigation records balanced with no over application noted.
7) Mr. Allen said he sent in application and WL P. Check with Permitting Unit to see if new permit has been issued.
Checked files and found copy of COC dated May 1, 2003 and expires on October 1, 2004. I will send a copy of COC
and permit to Mr. Allen along with a copy of this inspection form-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Insoector Signatum

OS103/0I Continued
Facility Number. Date of inspection 08I29l2[f03
gdar Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
1 1) A discharge pipe was damaged during recent mowing around houses and there was approximately 200 gallons of waste spilled
houses and primary lagoon that did not leave the site and was contained. Pipe was fixed the following day.

WarF9
e Q
To: Producer
From: Scott Vinson
]Environmental Engineer
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year-20ft of a -
Michael F. Easley
Govemor
WiilGam G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Envirwment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water ❑uafsty
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections,
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the firm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2110217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properlyunder the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following mmments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
q) The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagomslstorage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard
(p An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) ofthe date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
cp The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsoil analysis and land irrigation
records. 'These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land Mpplication rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during anv Avert awlication.
q) All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization shvcturc, or other suitable outlets.
(P It is suggested. not a requirern to keep crop yield information for finure use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, eve January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: WaRO
SAV Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

(Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit g Routine p Complaint ❑ Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 21I5lZOL12 Time: 12:U0
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted a Certified 13 Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ••.........
Farm Name: James Allen Hog Farm
Owner Name: James • Allen
County: Btau ort................. ....... .............. ...... .W.aR.Q........
Phone No: 252-935-5169
Mailing Address:.4.2.T.I.High►vay..99..Nor.tb........................... ....................................... Par<tego-AC...... ........ ......... ............................... - 2286P..........
FacilityContact- ---- ............ ..................................... ......................... Title: ..... ___ ............................................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: James.Allen..................... ..............................-........................... Integrator: lndepa:ndent.................. ...... ......... .........................
Certified Operator. Jawes.F. ............................... AUea...... ....__............... - ....... ........ .... Operator Certification Number:17339 .............. ...............
Location of Farm:
miles nortb of Pantego on NC 99.
N Swine [3 Poultry ❑ Cattle 13 Horse Latitude ©� ®° �" Longitude ®* ®� ���
w:...r
,.Swine:<,.;;-:m�.w
p can to ee er
p teedeT to HnisTi
® arrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
13 Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
p Boars
;:. .. =i]eslgn . Current= {
urren- ' uq8 a'-_�..
:t..- ::� -:-
.Poultry ; .-a= "`Ca act 'Cattle:= Ca ac' Po-'n[atioa Po uiatxon::-g
s' p Oyer ❑ airy
e�
❑ Non -Layer Im ; p on- airy
pOther w
Total Desiewcapacity 1,145
TofJE;SSLW 495,785
=^
., ' . p goon rea p pray e rea u t NumeroLago
_pj
Holdin `-Ponds 1 Solid Tra s F _ .- ❑ No Liquid Waste Management system
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? El 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 p No
?. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [3 Yes ®N❑
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: Primazy................. y. ary.... --............. Final ............
Freeboard (incites):................ L&...................

Facility Number: 7_38 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
G. 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 strictures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste A lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
p Yes
p No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
ci Yes
all No
p Yes
® No
l7 Yes
® No
p Yes
N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes ®N❑
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16, Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, reaps, 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 is 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?
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ®No
Yes ®No
DYes ®No
Yes ®No
Yes m No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®N❑
p Yes ®No
pYes ®No
p Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? p Yes N No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted duPing this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
[3 Field Copy p
Mr. Alien nas Slartea peeping weexly lagoon leveis to Vctoi]er 1iw t . LOOKS gone.
Mr. Allen has only applied since the last visits) in 1 113-7/01 on wheat. Also on 2/12, ] 4/02 on fields 1-A and
-B.
Waste analysis dated 11/30/01 with 0.29 lbs N11000 gals.
Sol] analysis dated 417/01 with minimal to no ]acne required.
Reviewer/Inspector Nam -' �`- e Seot#: Vinson ::.;.::.-�;-:: �_ _�,� ,entered�by Ann }'ndall -:•�.' �-.�';�'a - - - - - �..
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: f•7t/ ice, Y Date_

05103101
lb act ity Number: 7_3871 hate of Inspection
Odor Issues
Continued
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
Yes
p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
p Yes
®N❑
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p Yes
®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
p Yes
®No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
p Yes
. jS No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
p Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes p No
±.ar .� -,�.:.�i:.^ ;�w•• yy a¢.;��yq, `-x�rf" ,qr '�a'sa�,i�'�;, •` !.'FXti5-µ_,-„-•
..:-' 3N3+_N•' a..L `a'�a�.`- �� i f <x SEr •..JLZ•H �_ ;^ s-.ii'e� y.�ti�: T. •i... ,�_-
-,,','-i - .:7d^•,t_ ]T.i'�"_ycjn:�•..';14.^'�yi �" .�' 3^-r :3,r::: Y Y"sf 'L"•r.ri. ��aaQQ��'y'-- f�-'9"•.�.'q'i^-'.Tl-i.i?�.,��x; {�YZ.'+i'.4Y.ri.v n:L��•.-`may_
,
�v' 4
L
! l �'p- .;�-T• Y _ yyy Y ]"='Lws'r.. __ }:. �,��'' . Y ti±:'F.i .. _ ; ' 1', :..
1`.X'"P,.++ 'er`��w -:� .,� ".'•! ' Y� .i.�.; `.• %['n 1^�_ :��ir.E'', ... �Cp� �� �.1
; ..tin; •-,.-y ••- �•: '�'T' �',� � i'r' - ,
_ ,:,,=' _
y "
• - a - J:
• - '• ..�..-C"-: _ - .. r-5-. _.-..: =_.r:- - -icon -
71
_ ��'" .;:�: •_•Sy_ _Y.: .i_ rr-`�`'7'..a; :'� _S�. '; .`!'�....a_-;v�•--".-�•-. �" �y�.e.. zE�'•.s :•,«: `�'."'i :_y�i•�i:: a_ _
• 9yy=•�-i-�:'.�-:C`'yy'5"''•.-:_:r: ,r.,�7:- -•-:. `": y-r
r�a;ye'ya9 v,•' '• `a.`�s y. ya r..� x� . . '4 Via' •k -:P, _'`� --- --
-
ss �p�. ..=.i-�C?c'� - �Z����7;... �' ��'�� Win. .h' i�•�'t -�• ..a� L.���`�? .ie
�+'"`"i'„•. n.:•, ��r �,'ir3L.y�.`"�7:�,•�"r� _ �.::_r:jg M1.. ._��.: r� �•- ,n _ Y`"" - ���=.',°� -
i'tiy•�+.•"1 �+?3�•: }`..� "]-w' ..l.ilr V- •fc`�',^:� - �}�i.: �r
CY�';�'•-e- r, �:�. �.�,. .;ai-�syT.K���. �%.:_L.•a-:-:.�
't"
r _ ^.=L ,fir_-µ`S �'r�..�n}•�_•�'4 .• : - -...-
.. ..
L ~
�.,rr ••�:p-is� - - r.itii�s«1 'F may'..' -.-4 :�.�i!.-'. .�.• �� �rii . •."h_ - __
�Y.'km.r•F''.clzS�L'`.'-_...s•`:Jr:`ri'•faj.:;s.'.-":'i:..+:YY',� - a-� � ��'.+,•:-„.,v is:r�`�� i�Y' `'ri-f _i r_ �....�Y..y',.�•
Ifri�^ n"��--5: '.4,�',.;! a. SSw'!•.h�'=y�� �E=:ix'r.trr'a. __ .--•.`FIw L� i-•- _ - •. -
`r^.•'-
"':.-.-"". .. '"i^..YSs_ - - _-'��: g�-";�-.�'.,;..� _ S.s•: `w`'' - - - r.::...'�".rss - - - - -
_•-
Sri • f. �'� c"r+"' •_ - - - - �:F _ _ ..
�

Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection a Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit © Routine Q Complaint Q Fallow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ denied Access
Facility Number 7 38 Date of Visit: G1131— Time: 8:QQ AM Printed on: 6/19/2000
Q Not —Operational ❑ Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................ ........
Farm Name: ,lAMCNAlleA.k 09YAr.Ant....---•.................... ..... County: BraUjQA.............. .-----...---•._ !'FARO........
OwnerName:JAMCS......................................AUCTL ............................................................ Phone No: S -Q S-S159........................ ....... ............................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:............................---................................. Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 427J.HjgjjwAty.9�..N.QrAb................................................................... PhlitegQ...N.C.........................................---•............. 2.7.8i.0.............
Onsite Representative: ,j,pMvA.Alle.n ................... Integrator: Puri>aa.lyl�ills,...
Certified Operator:,iums—L................................ Allan ...................................... ............ Operator Certification Number:1.7�39 .................... ....
Location of Farm:
...............................................................................•-•----...------••----......................................................................................----•..------------•---•-----•-....• •..........................
m11�s.gQrtb�.AT �a>ak ,............................................................. •-----...---•----..........................................................................................................
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 313 24.36 Longitude 76 38 21.21 u
Design Current
Swine Canackv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
N Farrow to Wean
1145
950
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current`;
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle. Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,145
Total SSLW 495,785
Number of Lagoons 4 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 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-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El 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 N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONO
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: .......... B treat: y.......... .......... Pximary.......... ....... Secondwy ....... ....... ,Serandaxy....... ........... ................
Freeboard (inches): 19 19 19 29

Continued on hack
(Facility Number: 7-38 Date of Inspection 61131Z000 Printed on: 6/19/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
5. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N 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 N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ VVUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Pen -nit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ 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
®No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 1� a,tions.ar'def 'dencies•were-noted''dutliisring•visit: ' Y' of will-receirre no, furtlieir'
eorres vndeitce about this•visit.::. .. .. .:.: .: .. .: . . .. . .
9. Need to keep freeboard records.
'PS was done on two large above ground secondary lagoons; file = L061312A
z
Reviewer/inspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ Date: !
Facility Number: 7-38 Date of Inspection 1 6/13/2000 Printed on: 6/19/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
®No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biade(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

"` ..... Division of Soil and Waterytronservatii n -..Operation'-Review ' s -
..,
I © Division of Soil'aisd:Water Conservation CompIiaece Ixtspectio i .- � F-` : :
vision of Water "it Cam Lance'Ins 'coon' _
©Other Agency -;O eratton'Re►�ew ~r
- P. - -
., Pe
JQD Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q _Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number `] Date of Inspection ,®
,,. -- •- - - Time of inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Ift Permitted IM Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified © Registered 0 Not O erationai Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: p, �sf i... Al 16A..- 1�°�. Fps», County: 15�, . .,•
........................
OwnerName:.......................� e, `.e5 .........- ... A lit, Phone No: ............... .............. _.__.._...---.......................-._....---.......__...__....---...--..--.--- ................................................
Facility Contact: ..........
Flailing Address.
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:,,,,,,
Location of Farm:
G
Title:
Phone No:
....................................................................................................................................... ..........................
41 lei. Integrator:........ !^ f' "",.t j`.'11)Is
...........................................................................................................................
.................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Latitude `FW ci.36 " Longitude 76 • ®1 2i.2j «
Design Current Design Current Design Current .
Swine. Capacity Population Poultry •.'• Capacity Population.. .. Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
t I Lj
Gj t7
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons -[[]Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10sprayfleid Area
Molding -Ponds 1 Solid Trap s ❑ 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-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'?
ti- 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 bjNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0,No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Fr,^-`1 P'"❑❑`"`~I )CUA ll fee•-t''r
Freeboard (inches): .......... r�................. ........ { :l........... ...... ......... ................-- .......................... ........ .....-- ...........................
.......................
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, [] Yes C4 No
seepage, etc.)
3/23199 Continued on back

Facility Number: —7 -- Date of Inspection
5. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure Plan`' ❑ Yes jJ 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 A No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes E6.No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 9No
Waste okpplication
10- Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 14No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes A No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes C"o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes Q5-Na
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
P' q No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E9 No
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?
(ie/ W UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
DI No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
C4Yes
❑ No
X
1s facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
E9 No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
9No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit!
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
9No
24.
Does facility require a Follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
E4 No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
•yialati�ris:a defic�enc;es •vv�re �gfecl• dix°irig isit: ;S':oir will-t; eceiye iio further • : - .
coric p6 idence. about this .visit. ..........
Gomxtients (i efer. toques on #): =Ex am any:YES answers and/or any recommendations.or any other continents:::; e :_ - �:: ="f,
ri
Use drawings of facility to.F etter explain siituations: (nee additional -pages asmecessary)
Nee�_ 4-o 4�ee ho«.a ret,.45.
GPS 8.,t, 4%, Ic�c a 5,. yec7 ,L1 ? FA L0 3 12 r L
Reviewer/Inspector Name
_ w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
3/23199

Facility Number: IMIC of Iaspectinn RT J3-v.]
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
P4No
2&
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
X N❑
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, rrussing or
or broken fan blades), inoperable shutters, etc-)
❑ Yes
R%No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
91 No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additional.............. omments and/or.Drawings:
Ai
3/23/99

❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation [] Other Agency
M Division of Water Quality
to Routine Q Complaint Q Fallow -up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other I
Facility Number 7 3
© Registered ® Certified Id Applied for Permit ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection �? 24 hr. (hh:mm)
113 Not Operational Date Last Operated. ... ...........
FarmName: .......y '`'........A.i..e.................I......^.r.......`............................................. County:.....................................................1.0...................
Owner Name: ..................... 3u.0'`....................... l e,,.............. ......I—— ... Phone No: .................................... ...............................................
....
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:..............................,................................. Phone No: ........................... ........ ....... .......
;Mailing Address:......................................................................................
Onsite Representative:.......,.r'
A 1 I`."`......................t�.......................
Certified Operator-,, ............. :In-y................A (it
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 • �
tgn :. ' ui
Swine. 'Capacity Popu
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
It 115'
jvzS
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Integrator:....,
Operator Certification Number; .........................................
Longitude • 0 ° 46
M..sjgrt L.urrent . 4;.::: uesigu.... L argent..
;..,, Niimbernf;Lagoons:l HoldingPonds. Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
El No Liquid Waste Management System
»..
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes El No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N 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 H No
maintenance/improvement?
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
7125/97 Continued on back

Facility Number: -7 —
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
RfNo
Structures (Lagoons,11olding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
5d Yes
❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(fr): ...........r.5.............................`�..I--..................... t....5...........................:5........... .... ........ .......................... ......................................
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'?
❑ Yes
No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
bLNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Yes
❑ No
Waste Applicad
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
b( No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..........�?"".. Lj 1
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)'?
❑ Yes
CK No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
19 No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
Cl Yes
9 No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspectioh with on -site representative`'
❑ Yes
No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
Na
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste'. Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No.vi4I 'tio' ' o - defciertcie-s were ho' te'd-during- this.�isit.:You.wili receive no further
correspondence ahout -this' visiL-
w .., ...........
Gnmments.(re fer to.ge�estruri #) Explain aiy<YES..answers andlor at>r v recntriutteni3ations'ar any, vtlrer.,:ei3aatneutsi
Use iirawmgs of facility to better explain srtuattons..[use additional pages as necessary); =..., - -:;; :; u ;;- �m
�r N�.a •i-a �N �p .�e..ike- ��...1�1��.�.
13. V*4 4a IA54AI t kvpV -s
u�t 4j r�%lr w454 s.r,-r►�
7/25/9?
H,
» .? .....4 .. .. ..:.::
�.:.
Reviewer/Inspector Name '::' .::�:. .:.:...: <'::a...-+--�1. �. ,..p.�+1'!
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date;

W � {Zo
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
September 22, 1997
Mr. James Allen
4271 Hwy 99 N
Pantego, NC 27860
Subject: Annual Compliance Inspection
Facility Number 7-38
Beaufort County
Dear Mr. Allen:
On September 3, 1997, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of
Water Quality conducted an inspection of your intensive livestock operation. This inspection is one of
two annual inspections as required by Senate Bill 1217. The Division of Soil and Water Conservation
will also conduct an inspection of your intensive livestock operation during the 1997 calender year.
The following comments are in regard to the inspection of facility 7-38.
The freeboard was observed to be approximately 1.25, 3.0, 1.6, and 4.0 feet for your lagoons.
You are advised that you must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in each Iagoon plus a
storage volume sufficient to accomodate the rainfall and any subsequent runoff from a 25 year
24 hour storm event to remain in compliance.
* You are reminded that you will need to have a liquid level marker in any lagoon that
does not gravity feed through a free flowing transfer pipe to a subsequent structure.
Please ensure that all crops to receive waste appear in the certified waste management plan.
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have any questions in regard to this
letter I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208.
Sincerely,
Carl Dunn
Environmental Engineer
cc: x�RO Files
DSWC - WaRO
Beaufort County NRCS
Compliance/Enforcement Group
Central Files
943 Washington Square Mall. Washington. North Carolina 27859 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Eeual Opportunity Affirmative .Action Employer

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
Jaynes B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan S. Howes, Secretary
Mr. James Allen
R 10 15
�EHNF�
Division- of Soil & WaterConservation
June 3, 1997 -- WASHINGTON'OFFICE
JUN O 4 1997
oute ox
Pantego, NC 27860 - -D. E. M.
SUBJECT: Operation Review Summary and Corrective Action Recommendation for:
James Allen Hog Farnn, Facility No. 07-38 - - -_
Beaufort County -
Dear Mr. Allen,
On May 28, an Operation Review was conducted of the James Allen Hog Farm, Facility
No. 07-38. This Review, undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OD, •is one of
two visits scheduled for all registered livestock operations'during the 1997 calendar
year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the
wafers of the -State -and the animal waste cvllectidri-treatment;-storage and disposalT-
systems were operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator. A copy of
the completed review form is enclosed for your information. The following observances,
questions, and management deficiencies were discovered and noted for corrective
action or response:
■ While not applying waste in the 25 foot buffers, operation is cropping to the
edge of blue line ditches and not allowing for the establishment of permanent
vegetation within the buffers. This issue is currently under review by the Senate
Bill 1217 Interagency Group. A determination will be made at a later date.
• Need to stabilize and vegetate disturbed area between lagoons 'i and 2.
Continue efforts to eradicate rodents and repair damage from tunneling as
needed around intake pipe to pump house between lagoons 1 and 3. None of
these problems pose an immediate threat to the structures.
■ Pumping markers need to be installed in lagoons 2 and -4. These markers
were not required at time of your certification but will be required as a permit
condition for your upcoming general permit. Please contact_ your technical
specialist for assistance in calibrating the markers.
• Your waste utilization plan needs to be amended,to accurately,re- ct your
current cropping pattern of corn -soybean -wheat. The current plan only lists corn
943 Washington Square Mall, WashingAnton, Forth Carolina 27889-3532 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer,

_------- -- - ----------
Mr. James Allen
June 3, 1997XTI
Page 2 - -
as a receiving crop. At the time you convert the farm to a farrow to wean
operation, your plan should also be revised to accommodate the change in
operation type as well as current cropping pattern. Also, to maintain the farm's _
status as existing, please ensure that the operation change does not exceed a
steady state live weight of 495,950 lbs. and 3,500 total number of animals.
• Please be sure to complete the odor, insect, and mortality checklists, however
these documents were not required at the time of the Review.
I listed Kenneth: Ray Powell as the back-up certified waste operator for your farm.
You are encouraged to contact your designated technical specialist for assistance as
needed. I talked to Rodney Woolard with NRCS, and he relayed that with his heavy
workload in certifying operations that he could not tackle waste utilization plan revisions
until early 1998. You may want to contact Gerda Rhodes or Gaylon Ambrose with
Extension, or Roger Sugg with NCDA since these people are also designated as
technical specialists in waste utilization plans.
Tr.
Please remember that in order for your facility to be in compliance with environmental
regulations, animal waste cannot be discharged into the waters of the State, and the
animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems must be properly
sized, maintained and operated unde'�the responsible charge of a certified operator.
The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this
Qperation Review. Please do not hesitate to call me or Scott Jones at 9191946-6481 if
you have any questions, concerns or need additional information.
ti
}: Sincerely,
Pat Hooper
Environmental Engineer
:s
cc; Beaufort Soil and Water Conservation District
s
Division of Water Quality - MRO�=
❑SWC Regional Files
K
r�
r-
•r

c.
I* xoutine 0 Complaint O Follow-up of UwQ inspection 0 i onow-up of uhwu review 0 utner , _ :
Facility Number
Farm Status: Certified
Date of Inspection _
Time of Inspectionw - r_7U9UU--1 24 hr. (hb:mm) ' ;
Farm Name: .Ianm A1I HogrEArnL......................... ..... _ _.County: Beaufort ...: .:. -w .WaRO
Owner Name: James .................... ... Allen ....... ..................................... ..... _._..:: Phone No: 9Ll-9,35..510............ ............ ............. ...........
_..... -
Mailing Address: Rt l..Boa.I5...................................... ................. ........ -............ ......:.+PaxifegQ.1Y�......:........... :................ . ..................��78(�U.. ..... -
Onsite Representative: dames t' len ,&..Kenneth P,aw.ell............... .......:............... ..... Integrator: Indepen dent...:: . .........
Certified Operator: Jamtes.E....... - ....................... Allen.................................................. ' Operator Certification Number:1..7334........... :.:......... ----..
Location of Farm-'-
.
!.. _............ .:..: . �!I: !�!:,.................................................................................................:.......::.....:..........................::........................................ �
Latitude ©r� ©u Longitude ®r
pNot perationa Date Last Operated: ..........................................................................................................•...-.................................
___ Type of ()p ration_and-Design Capacity_
General i
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
.. � ♦ .. y+r. . [. �.r:`.g: r . P.'ti � � � ,n . .. fit. tl- A� � ._. i-.
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a•lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
i
p Yes ®No
p Yes -® No .
13 Yes N No
p Yes:® No - -
-NIA
[3 Yes .® No .
p Yes ENO ;
p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require 13 Yes R No
maintenance/improvement?

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
N Yes
p No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after I/1/97)?
p Yes
® No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which. need to be properly closed?
p Yes
_ ®No V +
Structures a cons and/or Holding Ponds
r
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate? T
p Yes
®No
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 -Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
Lagoon 4
- - -... ............... 2.................. ............--2.5........------....... -........... I,..5... ...---.................
4..................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
. ®No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
®No
=r
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
H Yes
p No
(If any of questions 9-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)-
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify tart and stop pumping Ievels?
H Yes
p No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ;
p Yes
®No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type trsatn,.skteau,.�xlzeat............. �� ..............---.... ...- ...............................
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
_ H Yes
p No . s
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? p Yes ® No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement? p Yes N No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment? p Yes M No
-- For Certified Facilities Qnty
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? p Yes ®No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way? ® Yes p No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? p Yes ® No
a�.
i
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? A_ p Yes M No
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection.with owner or operator in charge? p Yes N No
Reviewer/inspector Name6111M SEEM
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �r���

/•
Operation Review comments for James Allen Hog Farm, #47-38, Beaufort County, for
May 28, 1997
No subsurface drain tile on site according to Mr. Allen but has plans to install drain tile in some
of the spray fields at a later date; back-up operator is Kenneth Ray Powell, #19905; L1 (existing
waste structure nearest buildings) gravity feeds to L2 (recycling pond) pumped to L3 (secondary)
and gravity feeds to L4 (final structure and irrigation source).
6. Cropping to edge of blue line ditch without allowing for permanent vegetation within buffer -
Permissibility pending a determination by Senate Bill 1217 Interagency Group as to whether the
blue line is a perennial stream or not.
12. Minor shaping and seeding needed between L 1 and L2; rodent problem around intake pipe
to pump house between L I and L3 - none of these problems pose an immediate threat to the -
structures.
13. Markers were not required at the time of certification - markers needed in L2 and L4
16. Waste Utilization Plan did not acknowledge soybeans and wheat - plan needs to reflect
cropping pattern. WUP will be revised when Mr. Allen converts operation to a Farrow to Wean;
he understands the operation change cannot exceed his current steady state live weight or number
of animals as dictated by the operation's certification.
21. See # 16 above