960013_INSPECTIONS_20171231

2 N
MIMMMMMM�
'Am
NUHTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS
0
INSPECTIONS

y 9 Division of Water Resources
Facility Number I ► U I - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 01) Departure Time: : t7 County:
Farm Name: 6V M 'Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: gf A I, i/i�I 1
Certified Operator: V -9 � LW.k_S llorr-�s
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
Other
Latitude:
Region:„
Phone:
Integrator: Cr 4J
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
I Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

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

Facili Number: 9b - j Date of Ins ection:
y
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? []Yes Ef No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check []Yes [7f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes u No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[j4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
l.y� Lo
�
C,1A
1�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:0g54_ C V 3 ' 3 ').
Date: 6' a 1' mrl
21412015

r
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS960013
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County:
Wayne Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 08/24/2016 Entry Time: 01:40 pm Exit Time: 2:30
pm Incident #
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner: J Bryant Worley
Phone:
919-735-4239
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd
Princeton INC 275696915
Physical Address: 720 Oakland Church Rd
Princeton NC 27569
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Maxwell Foods LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude:
350 24' 50" Longitude:
78° 07' 40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234).
Farm path is on the right side of the
road, before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Kelvin Curtis Norris Operator Certification Number: 985141
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Justin K Davis Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/24/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Report N
1
6-3-16 1.44
2-2-16 1.24
10-2-15 0.76
Soil Report 11/24/2015
Due 2018
Zn<416
Cu<152
Calibration 2015. Due 2017.
Lagoon Sludge Survey 11-12-2015
1
LTZ= 3.0
Thickness= 3.2
Pump Intake= 3.0
%= 49
Add topsoil and reseed backside of lagoon.
Maintain vegetation around lagoon.
page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/24/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,935
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 30.00
page: 3

V
Permit: AWS960013 Owner -Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/24/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No No Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the.estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No No 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 (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner -Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/24/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No No
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
❑
M ❑
❑
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 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No No No
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?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?.
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner -Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/24/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yea
No No No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No No 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,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
01111
(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 ❑ M ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ M ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
page: 6

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS960013
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County:
Wayne Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 05/17/2015 Entry Time: 07:00 am Exit Time: 8:25
am Incident #
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner: J Bryant Worley
Phone:
919-735-4239
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd
Princeton NC 275696915
Physical Address: 720 Oakland Church Rd
Princeton NC 27569
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude:
35' 24' 50" Longitude:
78' 07' 40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234).
Farm path is on the right side of the
road, before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
® Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley Operator Certification Number: 20058
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Reprosontative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone : [phone]
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspoctor(s):
Inspection Summary:
Justin K Davis
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 05/17/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Report
N
5-28-15
1.19
2-4-15
1.50
10-16-14
0.83
6-13-14
2.98
Soil Report 11-24-14
Zn<270
Cu<190
Lagoon Sludge Survey 5-4-14
LTZ-5.0
Thickness-3.9
Pump Intake-3.9
40%
Calibration 10-3-2013
page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 1 960013
Inspection Date: 05/17/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine - Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,362
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 32.00
page: 3

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 05/17/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
MEI
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
®❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
®❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
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.e./ large
❑
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6, Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
®❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
®❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
i ❑
❑
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 No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ®❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner- Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 05/17/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yos No Na No
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
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
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?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yos No No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
N ❑ ❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
e ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
®❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Dale: 05/17/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yos
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a'rain gauge?
❑
N ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
e ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0011
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,
❑
N ❑
❑
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 Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
❑
❑
page: 6

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Permit: AWS960013
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region:
Date of Visit: 04/15/2014 Entry Time: 08:10 am Exit Time: 8:45 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Bryant Worley Farm
Owner:
J Bryant Worley
Mailing Address:
261 Talton Rd
Physical Address:
720 Oakland Church Rd
Owner Email:
Phone:
Princeton NC 275696915
Princeton NC 27569
❑ Denied Access
Washington
[e-mail]
919-735-4239
Facility Status: NCompliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 24' 50" Longitude: 78° 07' 40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234). Farm path is on the right side of the
road; before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Dischige & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley Operator Certification Number: 20058
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kelvin Curtis Norris Phone:
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Ronnie T Smith
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/15/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
CoC in records
WuP 4/16/13
Waste Analysis N
2/4/14 = 1.44
7/31/13 = 1.18
4/29/13 = 1.87
1/17113 = 2.52
Soil Test 9/27/13
Cu & Zn levels Win range
L=AT
"'due again in 2016"'
Irrigation calibration 12/5/13
"'due again in 2015"'
Sludge Survey 10/31/13
"'due again 2014"'
thickness = 3.8
LTZ = 3.5
pump intake = 3.3
48%
12/5/13 center pivot = due again 2015"'
crop records reviewed
mortality reviewed
irrigation records correspond to rainfall & lagoon records
page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/15/.14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine • Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,699
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 29.00
page: 3

A
Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/15/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
Yes No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/15/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Cotton
Crop Type 2
Winter Annual
Crop Type 3
Soybeans
Crop Type 4
Sorghum, Sudex (Pasture)
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
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
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?
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility : J Bryant Worley Facility Number:
960013
Inspection Date: 04/15/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If 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?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No No 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,
❑
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?
❑
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, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

n
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number; 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/07/2013 Entry Time: 11 Q0 AM Exit Time: 11130 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm Owner Email: debwodevD-nc.rr.com
Owner: J Bryant Worley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261Talton Rd Princeton NC 275696915
Physical Address: 720 Oakland Church Rd Princeton NC 27569
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35024'50" Longitude: 78°07'40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234). Farm path is on the right side of the road,
before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley Operator Certification Number: 20058
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Ronnie T Smith Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Please remove Polk Berry Bushes form lagoon banks
CoC in records
Wup 4/16/13
Waste Analysis N
1/17/13 = 2.52
4/29/13 = 1.87
Waste Analysis just sent to Raleigh on Monday
Soil Test 10/19/12
"due again 2013"
Cu & Zn Levels w/in range
L = O.OT
irrigation records correspond to rainfall and lagoon records
Sludge Survey 4/28/12
thinkness = 3.5
LTZ = 3.8
pump intake = 3.1
44%
'"due again in 2013"
irrigation calibration 9/30111
"due again 2013"
crop yield records reviewed
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,700
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
TVDe Identifier Closed Date Start Data Freeboard Freeboard
agoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 33.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
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)
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
O ■ ❑ ❑
■ ■ ■
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 (ked large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑ ■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner.- Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Application
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
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
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
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.
Yes No NA NE
Winter Annual
Small Grain Overseed
Cotton
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Soybeans
We ram loamy sand, 0
to 6 /o slopes
Goldsboro loamy sand
Rains
Norfolk loamy sand, 0
to 2% slopes
Goldsboro
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
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?
❑
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:
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 08/07/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? 001111
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (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? 11000
Page: 7

0 Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/05/2013 Entry Time: 10:15 AM Exit Time: 10:55 AM
Farm Name: Triple S Swine Farm
Owner: Triple S Swine Farm LLC
Mailing Address: 240 Oakdale Dr
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 246 Oakdale Dr La Grange NC 28551
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
West Snow Hill on Hwy 13 (See map)
Latitude: 35°26'11" Longitude: 77048'55"
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kenneth W Smith Operator Certification Number: 18644
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Ken Smith Phone:
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 12/15/2011: pulled 12/12
12-17-12 = 2.285
9-10-12 = 1.27
7-2-12 = 2.01
3-12-12 =3.0
Irr records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard & crop yield were reviewed
Calibaration of equipment due in 2013. Sludge survey due in 2014
Looks Good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400013 Owner • Facility: Triple S Swine Farm LLC
Inspection Date: 02/05/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 5,900 4,904
Total Design Capacity: 5,900
Total SSLW: 796,500
Waste Structures
Deal nod Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon 1 29.00
Page: 2

I
Permit: AWS400013 Owner - Facility: Triple S Swine Farm LLC Facility Number : 400013
Inspection Date: 02/05/2013 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)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage $ Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
0011
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
1100
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

0
Permit: AWS400013 Owner - Facility: Triple S Swine Farm LLC
Inspection Date: 02/05/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number; 400013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Soybean, Wheat
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

n
Permit: AWS400013 Owner - Facility: Triple S Swine Farm LLC Facility Number: 400013
Inspection Date: 02/05/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
01111
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
Cl
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400013 Owner - Facility: Triple S Swine Farm LLC
Facility Number: 400013
Inspection Date: 02/05/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous toss assessment (PLAT) certification? Cl ■ ❑ ❑
Otherlssues 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 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ®- Lbw O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: c/z Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: A')
Farm Name: �T ' Owner Email:
Owner Name: � • Kn 4YOL Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
t
L I
Certified Operator:
e'(ft i^
1({! •
l`r� S
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
to Finish
to Feeder
rto Finish
v to Wean
v to Feedei
v to Finish
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: (;
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
nry Pnultry Canarity Pnn_
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Region: IN A100—
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes
[fl No
[:]NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes rNN ❑ NA O NE
YesNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes E50No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in): n�
Observed Freeboard (in): L�J
o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes r;rfIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
EfrNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
C?rNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑, o ❑ 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
Rio ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
V No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 5'
/
13. Soil Type(s): o I dC d f0
r %
_ e�f• a c�SbTrza
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Pe<c ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�Io ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E2<0,❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Io ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
rff No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Ko ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�'1VO ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
L_I No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili -Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes &o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yeso
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
<
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additiona pages as necessary).
( of 4Nte-, orl lop", 0"e( 't z5
W. S - C?c, 4 'S' l v
! '////2 /' %
ISDtI '�54 10/04 /l I
%:0 7
2h leoe ('r w�n rovtg-c,
In Zo�2
CTZ- ( Y
i rn6►-� Il eve d
GoR}�Spdn '%
I0po" i fOL tin f ( r.e coyz cls
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Ali _5 ^ I Phone: 2Sa - -! `((7G}(
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 12, 71�- `I �yv_ Date:
Page 3 of 3 2A612011

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/25/2011 Entry Time:10715 AM Exit Time: 10:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm Owner Email: debworley(g)nc.rr.com
Owner: J Bryant Worley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton NC 27569
Physical Address:
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35024'50" Longitude: 78'07'40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234). Farm path is on the right side of the road,
before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226),
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kelvin Curtis Norris
Secondary OIC(s►:
Operator Certification Number: 985141
James B Worley Certification: 20058 Phone: [phone]
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Ronnie T Smith Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Sludge Survey 10/13/10
WUP 11/7/96
"Due again in 2011"
irrgation calibration 6/3/09; "due again in 2011"
thickness = 3,2
irrigation records correspond to rainfall &
LTZ = 4.4
lagoon records.
pump intake = 4.2
39%
crop yield records reviewed
New COC in records
Soil Test 12/8/10
"due again in 2011"
L= OT
Cu & Zn levels w/in range
'"dike walls try to revegetate
don't cut less than 6 inches"'
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
Swine -Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,004
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Desianed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 34.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
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)
Facility Number : 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 (Led large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
110
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: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro loamy sand
Soil Type 2
Wagram loamy sand, 0
to 6% slopes
Soil Type 3
Rains
Soil Type 4
Norfolk loamy sand, 0
to 2% slopes
Soil Type 5
Lynchburg
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
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?
❑
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:
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Otherissues 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 ❑ IN ❑ ❑
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 reviewfinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Operations Review Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 09/30/2010 Entry Time:09750 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: meant Worley Farm
161717 7iSiL4�Tl
Incident #:
Owner Email: debworlev(@nc.rr.com
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton NC 27569
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35024'50" Longitude: 78°07'40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234). Farm path is on the right side of the road,
before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kelvin Curtis Norris
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 985141
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis: 8/31/10 = 1.2 Soil Tested: 10/2009
3/03/10 = 2.1
Records are complete and balnaced out.
Freeboard range: 2/17/10 = 21" - 9/26/10 = 40"
looks good.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 09/30/2010 Inspection Type: Operations Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
❑ Swine -Feeder to Finish 5,760
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 26.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 09/3012010 Inspection Type: Operations Review 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) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

5
Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 0913012010 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste AeAlicatlon
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Coastal
Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Corn, Wheat,
Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Cotton
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
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: AWS960013
Inspection Date: 09/30/2010
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Type: Operations Review
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Facility Number : 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
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. 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 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: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 09/30/2010 Inspection Type: Operations Review 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 Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

r
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit:
AWS960013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne
Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 11/13/2009 Entry Time:12700 PM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm
Owner Email: debwodey(g)nc.rr.com
Owner: J Bryant Worley
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton
NC 27569
Physical Address: 720 Oakland Church Rd Princeton
NC 27569
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell
Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35024'50" Longitude: 78°07'40"
On SR 1227 (Oakland Church Rd), approx 1.4 mi west of Ebenezer Church Rd (SR 1234).
Farm path is on the right side of the road,
before the intersection with Princeton Rd (SR 1226).
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley Operator Certification Number: 20058
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representativele): Name Title
Phone
24 hour contact name Kelvin Curtis Norris
Phone:
On -site representative Brent Mitchell
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
9-11-09 2.1
6-17-09 2.0
2-26-09 2.6
soil test current sludge survey 4/2009 caliberation 2009
Looks Great
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number; 960013
Inspection Date: 11/13/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 51760 5,760
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon #1 701/28/94 19.00 35.00
Page: 2

r
Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 11/13/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960013
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 ❑ ■ Cl ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (l.e./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ M ❑ Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? Cl
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu. Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 11/13/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Grain)
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?
Soybeans
Winter Annual
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 11/13/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
Cl
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?
❑
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 fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page:5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 11/13/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

d
E Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ___-------- _------- -------------
Facility Number: 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 06/18/2008 Entry Time:02:25 PM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm Owner Email:
Owner: J Bryant Worley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton NC 27569
Physical Address: 720 Oakland Church Rd Princeton NC 27569
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Goldsboro Hog Farms Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35024'50" Longitude: 78007'40"
On east side of SR 1226, approx. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kelvin Curtis Norris Operator Certification Number: 985141
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Eric Newsome Phone:
Inspector Signature: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 06/18/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Saw CoC and Permit.
WUP dated 11/7/1996. Land listed as Tract 926 (1712-14); T6822 (F1A); T935 (F1A, 2A-7A); T7146 (F1A, 2A).
WARs (lbsN/1000gall): 6/16/08-2.2, 2/7/08-2.0, 8/1/07-0.92
12/20/2007 Soil test results (Report #16385 verified and printed): 1.2 tons/acre lime required (sample 5D); Znl-503, Cul-87 (sample
9F). Lime bought/applied. Need to perform 2008 soil tests.
20081RR1/2 (WA)T9379: Pulls 1A,113,1C.
2007 IRR1/2 (CBH)T935: Pulls 2A,3A,6A.
PAN rates met and balanced. The farm uses a center pivot (-276gpm), a solid set system (-71.5gpm as gun), and a reel and gun
system with a typical pumping rate of 290 gpm. Pumping volumes of irrigation events were consistent with changes in freeboard
levels. Rainfall records were adequate.
2007 sludge survey results (12/13/07): LTZ= 5.39', Thick= 2.08'
2007 calibration results (12/13/07): CP (50psi @tower, 276gpm expected, and 277.5gpm measured); SS (45psi, 148gpm expected,
and 143gpm measured); Reel (1.26" ring, 70 psi @gun. 295gpm expected, 290gpm measured).
Crop yields seen (2007= 50 bales BH, 5460 bu of corn; 2008= 42 bales of BH)
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 06/18/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine -Feeder to Finish 5,760 4,945
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 38.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960013 Owner- Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 06/1812008 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)
❑
■
❑
Cl
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
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 06/18/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Application
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
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
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
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.
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Cotton
Goldsboro loamy sand
Lynchburg
Wagram loamy sand,
10 to 15% slopes
Rains
Norfolk loamy sand, 0
to 2% slopes
Troup
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No NA NE
00011
❑■❑❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 06/18/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
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?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
Cl
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
D
❑
■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
n
❑
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?
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 06/18/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherlssues
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
Quality representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑ ■
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Page: 7

n
S
Michael F. Easley, Governor
��//William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
j /� Jf, Y Division of Water Quality North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
O rr�w� ��rr�� c Cj Division of Soil and Water Conservation Cowes H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
❑ Other Agency ___----------
Facility Number : 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA296013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/13/2007 Entry Time:12:00 PM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm Owner Email:
Owner: J Bryant Worley
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton NC 27569
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Phone: [phone]
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°24'50" Longitude: 78°07'40"
On east side of SR 1226, approx. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Kelvin Norris
24 hour contact name Kelvin Norris
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Megan Hartwell
Secondary Inspector(s):
North Carolina Division of Water Quality Internet: w%"v.ncwatO ality.g
943 Washington Square Mall Phone [phone]
Washington, NC 27889 Fax [phone]
Operator Certification Number: 20058
Title
Phone
Phone:
Phone:
Phone:
Date:
One
NorthCarolina
Naturallrgage: 1
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycled/10% Post Consumer Paper

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit 2007
Waste Analysis 2-16-07 1.6
10-26-06 1.2
7-21-06 1.0
PLAT 9-13-04 - one field high - do not pump on field anymore
Soil test 11-21-06 with highest lime 0 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
Irrigation records complete
Calibrations 12-4-06
Crop yield complete
Freeboard and rainfall complete
Sludge survey excempt till 2007
Page: 2

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 04/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine -Feeder to Finish 5,760 3,000
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 26.00
Page: 3

0
Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number : 960013
Inspection Date: 04113/2007 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 Cl
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
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA296013 Owner- Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 04/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 4
Soybeans
Crop Type 5
Winter Annual
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro
Soil Type 2
Rains
Soil Type 3
Norfolk
Soil Type 4
Wagram
Soil Type 5
Lynchburg
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 04/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
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?
❑
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 fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
Page: 6

r
Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Data: 04/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherissues Yes No NA NE
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Quality representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ------- ----
Number : 960013 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA296013 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/25/2006 Entry Time:10:30 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Bryant Worley Farm Owner Email:
Owner: J Bryant Worley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 261 Talton Rd Princeton NC 27569
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°24'50" Longitude: 78007'40"
On east side of SR 1226, approx. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James B Worley
Operator Certification Number: 20058
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
On -site representative George Pettus
Phone:
24 hour contact name George Pettus
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Joseph Gyamfi
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
" CoC & Permit available on site
" New WUP dated 4/18/2005, copy in WaRO file
" Annual certification form available on site. Received in WaRO on 4/17/06. Mr. Kelvin did not know of the NOV sent for late
submission,and did not have one in his file. Certified mail received and signed by one Mr. Jeff Ingram. Copy to given him at time
inspection.
" Waste Analysis:
7/12/06 1.0
4/27/06 1.9
1 /05/06 1.5
" Soil test report dated 12/15/05, Cu, Zn & P levels getting high on some fields. Sample 9A for example has P-1 = 594, Cu-1 = 1531
and Zn-I = 969. Need to monitor. Fields used to be turkey fields, Field 9A has not received waste in about 4-5 years. Lime applied on
fields as recommended.
" PLAT completed 9/13/04, Field T-929 4A received high P-rating.
" Reviewed waste application records, Weather codes and inspection initials completed. Complete and balanced.
" Lagoon levels and Rainfall recorded with initials. About 5" drop in level has been noted by SWCD due to flush pit filling using lagoon
water.
" Sludge survey exempt until 2007.
" Need to complete irrigation calibration for 2006.
Page: 2

Permit: NCA296013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
W Swine - Feeder,to Finish 5,760 5,760
Total Design Capacity: 5,760
Total SSLW: 777,600
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon #1 01/28/94 19.00 33.00
Page: 3

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960013
Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
Cl
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
-..._ g
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 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: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
- ...........
Yes No NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 4
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
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.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA296013 Owner • Facility: J Bryant Worley Facility Number: 960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
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?
❑
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 fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
Page: 6

Permit: NCA296013 Owner - Facility: J Bryant Worley
Facility Number:
960013
Inspection Date: 07/25/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine .
Other Issues
_. _. _..... _... .
Yes No
NA
NE
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■
❑
❑
Quality representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑ 0
❑
❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

of Visit .p Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
(Reason for Visit O• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10-27-2004 Time: 822
Facility Number 96 13
roNot O erational o Below Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...............
FarmName: B rY.Riat.. w.1ky- FArm................................................................................. County: V.l'.aYne............................................... W.Oxif.2........
OwnerName: d,..Bryalat ............................... W.u.1a ........................................................ Phone No: 919-735 423.2...........................................................
MailingAddress: 26LT.a1Uta.Rd..:......................................................I...................:................................................................ .7.569..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:..................:............................................. Phone No ...................................................
Onsite Representative: ........................................... Integrator:'i.RldSkRAR.Hm8laxlms.......................................
Certified Operator:Jaws..1................................. Worloy ............................................. Operator Certification Number:100.58 .............................
Location of Farm: —
On east side of SR 1226, approx. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek.
5d Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ' 24, F__50­111 Longitude F 78 • 07 40
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity
Population Cattle
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
5760
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
5,760
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
777,600
I
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36"
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: 96-13 Date of Inspection 10-27-2004
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 Aanlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc? 30(
❑ Yes
® No ,
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes % No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Cotton Soybean, Winter annual
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no. agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. 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)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes. ® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments..(refer to question #), Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any othee. comments
Use drawings:of facility to better explain. situations. (use.additional pagesas necessary):.; . ❑Field Copy [I Final Notes
Records available
Waste Analysis: 9-30-04 = 1.7 lbs
7-26-04 = 2.5 lbs
4-2-04 = 2.8lbs
11-4-03 = 1.7 lbs
Soil analysis: 2004 samples are @ NCDA Lab., 12-15-03 & 11-18-02, 1-14-03 & 1-23-02
Lime applied on 4-30-04
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Sludge Survey completed on 2-13-04 - lagoon has 5.12' free of solids and 2.25' of solids
Irrigation calibration completed on 2-9-04: 2 guns (100 series) - 140 gpm & series 1397 - (1.26') - 282 gpm
Remember irrigation calibration is required annually.
Reviewer/Inspector Name LynB. Har ' on
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 96-13 Date of Inspection 10-27-2004
-Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc,)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss.review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same'agency?
-"'29. Wefe any additional -problems -noted -which cause- noncompliance of -the Certified-AWMP?-
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under aNPDES Permit? (Ifno, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall []Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No-
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
. ®No ..
% Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
dditioniil`Comments and/oT:Diawmgs::
uggest to docuemtn inpsection of lagoon integrity inspection after 1" of rainfall on the freeboard and rainfall form.
reeboard, rainfall, stocking/mortality, crop yields and weather code are recorded.
'you have any questions, contact your Technical Specialist or us @ 252-946-6841 or me directly 252-948-3842
12112103

Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number96 13 gDate orvisit: 4l24/2002 Thne: 1208
O Not Operational O Belo-w Threshold
Permitted F}.�d Certified rl' Conditionally Certified Registered Date Last Operated or Abort: Threshold:
F:arin Name: Bryant.lVwby-Farm.................................................................................. County:.,aylle................................................ .aRA........
Owner Name: & Bxyant............................... .W.D.ricy........................................................ Phone No: 919-.7.3,5 47..39..........................................................
Mailing Address: 2b1..Tajtou,Rd......................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:
Onsite Representative: RrYAntW.QrkyrGAQrgeP.ettus.............
Princeto.m.NC....................................................... 27.5.69 .............
Phone No:
............ integrator: Goldshot:Q.Hog.Fitaarta.......................................
Certified Operator: daJlties..B................................. W—Orley ............................................. Operator C'ertrfication Number: 2A.QSA......................
Location of Farm:
On east side of SR 1226 approx. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek. A
® Swine El Poultry ❑Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 35 m I 24 50 ll Longitude 40
Design Current
awme Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Fetish 5760 2880
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons i
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry_ Ca acity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laver ❑ Dahy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 5,760
Total SSLW 777,600
J❑ Subsurface Drains Present II❑ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area I
No Liquid Waste
{Ili'4.tlts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was die convc.vance utan-nta(ie'?
b. 11'diseh:uge is observed. slid it mach Water of the Slate? (IJ')as. notiij' C)1V'Q)
c. If diseharaQ is observed, what i,� the estimated flow in gal/win?
(1. Docs discharge bypau a lagoon "N'Slem? (If yes, nolilj' DWQ.)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes Fj No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
❑ 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
5,Var3ac! rLi ectiurx (?c " re;a3¢asrat_t
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus stonn storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No
Slruchu•e I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structurc 5 Su ucture 6
ldca I ii i er:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches) ...............D.111........... ....................... ......................................................................... ........... ....-------------- I'll ...................................

05103101
Facility Number: 96-13
Date of Inspection 4/24/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Continued
❑ Yes
54 No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
( No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Cotton, Soybeans Winter Annual
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
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?
Itl'Wjired Recorits & Docuir:cnt,
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit'?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ;c No
Ej Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Yes .. No
❑ Yes i No
❑ Yes N No
Yes 011 No
❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes fRj No
® No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to.question ft 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): El Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Records available for review.
Waste analysis - 2/4/02 = 2.1 lbs.; 8/24/01 = 1.2 lbs.; 6/7/O1 = 2.3 lbs.
Soil analysis up through 1/23/02 - available. Lime was put out.
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly as required.
It is suggested to remove the following to another book or folder for future reference - waste, soil, irrigation and
inspections from early 1999 back. (SEE PAGE 3)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison entered by Ann
Reviewer/Inspector Siznature: M J 6 ��,11b_4�
Date:

Q
0
05103101 �000
Continued
Facility Number: 96-13 Mite of Inspection 4/24/2002
(Mor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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?
)ntinue to practice weed control upon need on dike wall and sprayfields.
you have any questions, contact your Technical Specialist or us at 252-946-6481.
r-1 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Ex] No
❑ Yes ❑ No

ATF9
Michael F. Easley
6mr:q
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division or Water quality
To: Producers
From: Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Spebialist
Washington Regional Office
Date: June 29, 2001
Subject: Animal Compliance Routine Inspection
Year 2001
Enclosed please find a copy or copies of the Compliance Site Inspection(s) (as viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the
referenced facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and
keep 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 farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the general
permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p 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 lagoons/storage 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) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
(p Soil analysis is required annually.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/sod 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 application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given application
(p 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 structure, or other suitable outlets.
q) It is suggested not required to keep crop yield information for firture use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
qr The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance with the CAWMP and General Permit by properly
managing, supervising, and documenting daily operation and maintenance. The OIC also has the responsibility to certify
monitoring and reporting information. The failure of an OIC to perform his/her duties can result in a letter of reprimand,
suspension of certification, or revocation of certificates.
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, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact your Technical
Specialist or meat 252-946-6481, ect 318.
Cc: !ANaRO
LBH Files (inspection form only)
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946.6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
m for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 96 13 Date of visit: 6/5/2001 Time: 1250 Printed on: 6/20/2001
WNot erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified D Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: HrY.aA1,....Qr.ljy:.FArm................................................................................. County:WAY-IM ............................................... !'1'ARQ........
Owner Name: d..B and ............................... Warky ........................................................ Phone No: 9].9..7,35-4239...........................................................
Mailing Address: 261..TaAtany.Rd....................................................................................... P..rial�etan...N........................................................ 2.7.5.6.9 ..............
Facility Contact.
Title:
.... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Mr,..&.Mrs,..W.Qr1vy................................................................. Integrator:fiOldSkox.O.F�agkaxms......................................
Certified Operator:J..ajM.C$..0................................. W.QXICY ............................................. Operator Certification Number:ZQO5B
.............................
Location of Farm:
Dn east side of SR 1226, approx. 0.6 miles.north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek.
® Swine ❑ Poultry El Cattle [3 Horse Latitude 35 • 24 50 Longitude 78 • 07 40
Design Current
awme CRDSCity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish 5760 5200
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number -of Lagoons
Holding Ponds] Solid Traps
Design Current, Design. . Current
Poultry Capacity 'Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 5,760
Total SSLW 777,600
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste Mana
Area I❑ Spray Field Area
T
Discharges & Stream Imnacts
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) Q yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal7mino
n/a
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? Q Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 32
nsin.v° 1 Cnndnued

05103101
Facility Number: 96-13
Date of Inspection 6/5/2001
r
Continued ,
Printed on: 6/20/2001
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 Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Cotton, Soybeans Winter Annual
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑Yes ®No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ®No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit onother Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ 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
Records available for review.
Waste analysis: 4/26/01 = 2.4 Ibs; 2/6/01 = 2.6 Ibs; 9/29/0 = 1.8 Ibs
Soil analysis - is collected each year after soybean and cotton crops are harvested - meets requirements.
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly as requested.
Vegetation on dike wall is well established. SEE PAGE 3
IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. tWdison entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ✓n Z�l Date: e' O f

,pS/03/01
Facility Number: 96-13 Date of Inspection 6/5/2001
Continued
Printed on: 6/20/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ®No
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Sprayfields are in good shape.
Overall, the farm is well managed.
If you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
71

a
f,Yi G6' r a
•:DIR'I�Ion Of watCr Qttarlt,' '' ,w ti d
�~:LL, t4jK "ar. 'k
Dnvaon of Sod and Water Conser ation
VauerAb_li
Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
l Facility Number 96 13 I)atc of Visit:
7-25-201H1 Time: 950 Printed on: 2232001
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered
Date Last Operated (or Above. Threshold: .........................
FarmName: Brj.&n1M..orJcy.F.iurm........................................................._.......................
County: W..aync ............................................... Wi1.81a........
Owner Name: d.Bra:ant............................... .A.rley.........................................................
Phone No: 919-.7.35.-.42,39...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:....................
...............................
MailingAddress: 2fe1.TattnA.Rd....................................................................................... EtinceAQ.t1..NC....................................................... 27.5.62.............
Onsite Representative: Bnaat. Ylarley...G c![>;eP.ettus...........................................
Intel;rator: G-Oldsho.O.Hng.F.atmS.......................................
Certified Operator:,lamz.B................................. W Orley'..............................................
Operator Certification Number: .2po,8.............................
Location of farm:
IOn east side of SR 1226, approz. 0.6 miles north of SR 1227. Beaverdam Creek.
A
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 24
50 Longitude F 78 • 07 40
Design .:,Current Design
: Current Design .Current
Swine': Ca tacrtv Population: Poultr} Capacity. Population Cattle Caltiaciq. Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver
❑Dairy.
® Feeder to Finish 5760 5640 10 Non -Laver
I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
j❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other
t ❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design. Capacity. 5,760
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars i i_
Total SSLW . 777,600
Number.of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area
Holding Ponds / SoGd Traps.;�� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges S Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. 11' discharge is observed. was the com+evance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notifiDWQ)
c. ]f discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min9
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes. notifi- DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Sintcture 2 Structure I Structure 4 Structure 5
Idcutifier:............................................................................................................................................. .............................
Freeboard (inches):................?zQ................ ...
.....................................................................................................................................
Spray Field Area
❑ Yes XI No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
n/a
❑ Yes Zf No
❑ Yes IR No
❑ Yes g No
❑ Yes 9 No
Structure 6

Continued on back,
Facility Number. 96-13 Date of Inspection 7-25-2000 Printed on: 2i232001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion. ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Yes (>� No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Cotton Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Soybeans Winter Annual
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
(9 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® 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/ WUP, checklists, desiM maps. etc.)
❑ Yes
No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
Z 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:rioted'during this visit:: Yod will:receive 'no'further
correspondence about this visit.'.:-; :: ;-: - •:
Records available for review.
Waste samples are within permit requirements. Samples are collected quarterly.
Soil analysis up through 2000 available.
Irrigation records complete and balanced out.
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly.
Rainfall data is also recorded.
ont. Page 3
Reviewer/InspectorNgme l�k
r..L

I VZiewer/inspector Signature: Date: 5/00 1
Facility Number. 96-13 Date of Inspection 7-25-2000 Printed on: 2/232001
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 19 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 properiy)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32 - N/A Pit Houses
The vegetation on the dike wall is well established.
The cover crops are in good shape.
During the hurricane season (1999), the farm was well managed. The lagoon level was maintained between 17 - I
fiches for approx. 2 weeks at which time the level met permit requirements. DWQ wsa notified.
Overall the farm is well managed. Keep up the good work.
you have any questions, contact me @ 252-946-6481, ext. 318.

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. YA/2-- =
Ecs- /Y-91
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: �Zu, 1995
Time:
���� No. of Animals on Site:
�M Certification No.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: = 2_ 4_5p_ Longitude: 2g_,C22 .O Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient
eeboard of 1 Ft + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximatel 1 Ft + 7 in) or No
Actual Freeboard: _E Ft 6 Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or(o1
Was any erosion observed? Yes oro
Is adequate land available for spray? Ye 'or No /f
Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Zb
Crop(s) being utilized: gb.5--g aX_^�jp
Does the facility meet SCS inmum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? ior No 100 Ft from Wells? Yes or No
Is the AZ{�Lmal waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or&
1 Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or ©°
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state b man-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or jo
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of Manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific eage with co r crop)? or No
P'R� Y ►/
nspectorSignature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments A Sketch on Back of Sheet

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
Sketch:
U 0
D d
� d
D J
V d
d f
o O
Or✓
1,6
x
Z
'5'plz4/