960057_INSPECTIONS_20171231

N
NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS
INSPECTIONS
m
INSPECTIONS

0
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
960057
Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Wayne Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
08/30/2017 Entry Time: 03:40 pm Exit Time: 4:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
C&G Swine
Owner Email:
Owner:
Carl G Kirby
Phone:
919-735-7613
Mailing Address:
1775 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
1583 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status:
Compliant El
Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35° 29' 32" Longitude:
77' 53' 22"
Take Hwy 111 N from
Goldsboro, Make right on
SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Report N
7-24-17
1.91
5-12-17
1.77
3-13-17
3.47
12-1-16
1.97
10-11-16
1.16
8-30-16
1.48
Soil Report due 2019
Calibration due 2017
Lagoon Sludge Survey 11-27-16
LTZ 5.6
T 2.1
PI 4.5
page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner -Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,888
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 34.00
page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/17 Inpsection 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
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)
❑
❑
❑
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 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
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
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 Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑M ❑ ❑
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

r
Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number:
960057 '
Inspection Date: 08/30/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1",Rainfall Inspections.
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
EEI
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
E ❑
El
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tiie 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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
960057 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS960057
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Wayne Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
08/30/2016 Entry Time: 02:15 pm
Exit Time: 3:15 pm Incident 9
Farm Name:
C&G Swine
Owner Email:
Owner:
Carl G Kirby
Phone:
919-735-7613
Mailing Address:
1775 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
1583 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35° 29' 32" Longitude:
77° 53' 22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch
Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
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:
0
page: t

Permit: AWS960057 Owner- Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Report N
7-11-16 1.73
4-26-16 3.25
2-2-16 2.48
12-28-15 2.00
9-24-15 1.97
Soil Report 2016.
Zn<350
Cu<250
Calibration 12-4-2015
Lagoon Sludge Survey
LTZ 5.1
Thickness 2.6
Pump Intake 4.8
page: 2

Y
Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity
Current promotions
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,830
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard -
Lagoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 1 32.00
page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner -Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
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)
❑
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)
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10.*Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
M ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
M ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/30/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
yes
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?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Otherlssues _
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
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
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 6

M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number:
960057 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS960057
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Wayne Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
09/03/2015 Entry Time: 03:00 pm
Exit Time: 3:45 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
C&G Swine
Owner Email:
Owner:
Carl G Kirby
Phone:
919-735-7613
Mailing Address:
1775 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
1583 Antioch Rd
Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status:
Compliant El Not Compliant
Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35' 29' 32" Longitude:
77' 53' 22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
24 hour contact name
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Name
Brent Mitchell
Justin K Davis
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/03/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Report N
7-22-15
2.01
5-14-15
1.96
3-2-15
2.87
1-6-15
2.49
10-10-14
1.22
7-25-14
1.93
Soil Report 2-4-13
Due 2016.
Zn<275
Cu<215
Lagoon Sludge Survey 11-28-14
LTZ-5.3
Thickness-2.4
Pump Intake-5.0
Calibration 11-22-13
Due 2015.
Crop Yield, Rainfall, Freeboard, and Pumping Records coincide.
page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner -Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/03/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
® Swine -Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,649
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 31.00
page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/03/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
®❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
e ❑
❑
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 No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ e ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Pending?
❑
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility : Carl G Kirby I Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/03/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
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?
Yes No Na No
❑®❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■❑ ❑
Yes No Na No
❑ ®❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
Ion
page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner -Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/03/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall -Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
®❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
®❑
❑
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
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
N E]
❑
page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Pennit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/1612014 Entry Time: 11:45 AM Exit Time: 12:15 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77053'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/16/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
WuP 11/20/13
CoC in records
Waste Analysis N
3/14/14 = 3.08
1/14/14 = 3.07
1/7/14 = 2.62
8/29/13 = 1.43
Soil Test 2/4/13
Cu & Zn levels Win range
L=OT
irrigation records correspond to rainfall & lagoon records
irrigation calibration 11/22/13
"'due again 2015'
Sludge Survey 11/22/13
thickness = 2.8
LTZ = 4.9
pump intake = 5.0
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 04/16/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Feeder
3,200
2,489
Total Design Capacity:
3,200
Total SSLW:
96,000
Waste Structures
Designed
Observed
Type Identifier
Closed Date Start Date Freeboard
Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 - 19.00 31.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/16/2014 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? 0000
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
0000
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number; 960057
Inspection Date: 04/16/2014 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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Exum
Soil Type 2
Aycock
Soil Type 3
Norfolk
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
0000
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
000
❑
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: 5

Permit: AW5960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 04/16/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■ ❑
❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04116/2014 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents Yes
No
NA
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other issues 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: 7

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insoection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/06/2013 Entry Time: 11:05 AM Exit Time: 11:35 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77053'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
CoC in records
Waste Analysis N
5/28/13 = 2.20
3/25/13 = 3.70
1/18/13 = 2.18
12/24/12 = 2.15
Soil Test 2/04/13
L = 0.9T
Cu & Zn levels Win range
**due again 2014**
WuP 1/20/11
irrigation calibration 9/30/11
***due again 2013***
Sludge Survey 12/7/12
thickness = 2.5
LTZ = 5.2
pump intake = 5.8
**due again in 2013**
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 3,038
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 29.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 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 ❑ IN ❑ ❑
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 001111
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Exum
Soil Type 2
Aycock
Soil Type 3
Norfolk
Soil Type 4
Wagram
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?
000 ❑
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: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 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?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
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?
❑ ■ ❑
Cl
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 08/06/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No
NA
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Otherlssues Yes No
NA
NE
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report
000
❑
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: 7

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/23/2012 Entry Time: 11:05 AM Exit Time: 11:35 AM
Farm Name: C&G Swine
Owner: Carl G Kirby
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
IlF.111R.7_r:6R�iii�F�i1R �.7:t 11.'(�711Ca�[ei.T1:I:fr�
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27853
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77°53'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
WUP in records 1/20/11
CoC in records
Waste Analysis N
3/20/12 = 3.0
1/12112 = 2.1
10/18/11 = 1.7
9/2111 = 1.4
Soil Test 12/13/11
"due again in 2012"
L=.7T
Cu & Zn levels Min range.
Zn levels in field AJ6 & AH
keep eye on.
irrigation records correspond to rainfall & lagoon records
Irrigation calibration 9/30/11
"due again 2013"
Sludge Survey 9/27/11
thickness = 3.87
LTZ = 3.78
pump intake = 8.5
33%
"due again 2012"
crop yield reviewed
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection' Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 3,434
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 32.0(
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
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
❑ IN
❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ IN
❑ ❑
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
❑ IN
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 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
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Exum
Soil Type 2
Aycock
Soil Type 3
Norfolk
Soil Type 4
Wagram
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: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■
❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 05/23/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Other Issues 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? 0000
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?
11
Page: 7

0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/12/2011 Entry Time:12700 PM Exit Time: 12:30 PM
Farm Name: C&G Swine
191_�OMKC22 R1
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77053'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 19407
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
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number : 960057
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
WUP 1/20/2011
Soil Test 2010
new coc in records
"due again 2011"
Cu & Zn levels Min range
Waste Analysis N
L = 1.9 T please apply
5/25111 = 3.7
3/9/11 = 3.6
2/1/11 = 2.7
12/2/10 = 2.3
Sludge Surevy 9/8/10
crop yield records reviewed
"due again 2011"
irrigation calibration 9/28/09
Thickness = 3.6
"due again in 2011"
LTZ = 4.14
irrigation records correspond to rainfall & lagoon
44.6%
records
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 3.096
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 31.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 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: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
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
0011
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
s
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 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
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Exum
Soil Type 2
Aycock
Soil Type 3
Norfolk
Soil Type 4
Wagram
Soil Type 5
Craven
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: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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
❑ 000
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/12/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
27.'Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
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 reviewlnspection 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: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 09/29/2010 Entry Time:12700 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77053'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 09/2912010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis: soil tested: 2010
8/4/10= 1.6
5/27/10 = 2.7
4/01/10 = 1.4
1/25/10 = 2.3
equipment calibration 2009
sludge survey = 2010
Freeboard range
Feb. 6; 2010 = 22" - 7/31 /10 = 36"
"Need to calculate % of sludge.
looks good!
Page: 2

r I
Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 09/29/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,939
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon I PRIMARY 06/30/94 1 1 19.00 35.00
Page: 3

7
Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number : 960057
Inspection Date: 09/29/2010 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?
❑
■
Cl ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
000
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 (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
❑
■
❑ ❑
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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number : 960057
Inspection Date: 09/29/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 Ibs.?
❑
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
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: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 09/29/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Other?
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
L
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
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: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 09/29/2010 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: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
u
Page: 7

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/08/2009 Entry Time:03:00 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address: 1583 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Maxwell Foods Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77053'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 19407
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Mitchell Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Megan H Stilley Phone:
Inspector Signature: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Date:
' Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 10/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
New COC and Permit in records
Waste Analysis 9-2-09 1.9
6-24-09 2.4
4-24-09 3.2
3-13-09 2.9
Soil Test 3-2-09 with highest lime 1.1 ton } need to apply lime
Cu and Zn values within range
Freeboard and Rainfall complete and correspond with irrigation and sludge removal
Sludge Survey 8-26-09 Thick-2.69'
LTZ-4.92' } Need to get pump intake measurement next time
Calibration 9-28-09 with 90 GPM
21) Sludge cleanout in April 2009 - No current sludge analysis for removal
Crop yield complete
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
l
Inspection Date: 10/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,814
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 36.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 10/0812009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
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?
❑ 000
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑ ■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed 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 altematives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 10/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
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
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?
Yes No NA NE
11
Com (Grain)
Soybean, Wheat
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Small Grain Overseed
Norfolk
Craven
Wagram
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
C
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 10/08/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■ 000
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: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 10/08/2009 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: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 06/12/2008 Entry Time:03:27 PM Exit Time:
Farm Name: C&G Swine
Owner: Carl G Kirby
Incident p:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
Phone: [phone]
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Goldsboro Hog Farms Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'32" Longitude: 77°53'22"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator. Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
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: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 06/12/2008
Inspection Summary:
Saw CoC and Permit.
WUP dated 3/25/2003.
Inspection Type: CDmpliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
WARS (lbsN/1000gall): 5/2/08-3.4, 2/1/08-2.6, 12/21/07-2.6, 10/31/07-1.8, 8/15/07-2.5, 6/11/07-2.9
Soil test results (2/15/08): 1.4 tons/acre lime required; Znl and Cul were within acceptable ranges. Lime to be applied this year.
20081RR1/2 (Rye): Pulls 1-4.
20071RR1/2 (BH): Pulls 1, 3-6; (SB): Pulls 9-10,12.
PAN rates met and balanced. Pumping volumes of irrigation events were consistent with changes in freeboard levels. Rainfall
records were adequate.
2007 sludge survey results (10/4/07): LTZ= 5.25', Thick= 2.09'
2007 calibration results (10/1/07): 0.71" ring, 48 psi @gun. 100gpm expected, 100gpm measured.
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 06/12/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 3,211
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 31.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number:960057
Inspection Date: 06/12/2008 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?
00011
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was.conveyance man-made?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ SOO
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 property 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: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 06/12/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 96005T
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Aycock
Soil Type 3
Exum
Soil Type 4
Wagram
Soil Type 5
Craven
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? ❑ ■ n ❑
11. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ E ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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?
❑ E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 06/1212008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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?
❑
E ❑ ❑
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?
❑
❑ .0 ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance 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
0
■ ❑ ❑
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
❑
❑ 0 ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 06/1212008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
0000
Page: 7

0 Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 04/12/2007 Entry Time:12:30 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'46" Longitude: 77°53'18"
Take Hwy 111 N from Goldsboro, Make right on SR 1535 (Antioch Rd), Farm is about 1 mile on right
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby Operator Certification Number: 19407
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Mike Kirby Phone:
24 hour contact name Mike Kirby Phone:
Primary Inspector: Megan Hartwell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/1212007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
COC and Permit 2009
Waste Analysis 3-2-07 3.8
2-21-07 3.1
2-14-07 3.3
12-4-06 2.0
'Facility irrigated outside split application window for 100 lb small grain overseed. However, there was a letter from agronomist that
gave permission to go outside of the window.
`Make sure to records freeboard levels weekly
Crop yield complete 2006
Sludge survey complete 5-10-06 thick-1.98' LTZ-5.85'
Calibrations complete 9-22-06
PLAT Complete 9-7-06 - no fields high
Soil samples 1-5-06 with highest lime 4.2 tons
Cu and Zn values within range
Page: 2

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/12/2007
Regulated Operations
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Design Capacity
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 2,614
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 26.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/12/2007 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? ❑ ■ ❑ n
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other n
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?
n
■
n
n
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
n
■
n
n
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
n
■
n
n
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
n
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
n
■
n
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
n
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
n
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
❑
In
❑
n
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? n ■ ❑ n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? n
Frozen Ground? n
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? n
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 04/12/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
n
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
n
Total P205?
n
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
n
Outside of acceptable crop window?
n
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
n
Crop Type 1
Com (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 4
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Exum
Soil Type 2
Norfolk
Soil Type 3
Wagram
Soil Type 4
Aycock
Soil Type 5
Craven
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
n
■
n
n
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
n
■
Q
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?
❑
■
El
0
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
D
n
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
D
■
n
n
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
n
■
D
n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Cad G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/12/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? n
Design? n
Maps? n
Other? n
21. Does record keeping need improvement? n ■ fl fl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
n
120 Minute inspections?
n
Weather code?
n
Weekly Freeboard?
n
Transfers?
n
Rainfall?
n
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
n
Waste Analysis?
n
Annual soil analysis?
n
Crop yields?
n
Stocking?
n
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
n
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
n
■
n
n
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
n
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
n
■
n
n
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
11
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
n
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
n
■
n
n
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? 0 ■ 0 IF,
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ 0 El
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 ❑ ❑ n ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 04/1212007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Othprlssups 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?
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Page: 7

�• r
0 Division of Water Quality
rj Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 960057 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS960057 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Insoection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Wayne Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/14/2006 Entry Time:10:35 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: C&G Swine Owner Email:
Owner: Carl G Kirby Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1775 Antioch Rd Pikeville NC 27863
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35029'46" Longitude: 77053'18"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Carl G Kirby
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Carl Kirby
24 hour contact name George Pettus
Operator Certification Number: 19407
Title
Phone:
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Joseph Gyamfi Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone
Page: 1

Permit: AWS960057 Owner • Facility: Carl G Kirby
Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
• CoC & Permit available on site
• WUP dated 3/25/2003
• Waste Analysis:
6/28/06 = 2.7
5/17/06 = 3.6
5/3/06 = 3.6
3/13/06 = 3.8
12/20/05 = 2.8
Soil test report dated 1/5/06, Lime (max. 0.6T) to be applied in September 2006 just before planting Small Grain on Coastal
Bermuda. Producer plans to take deep soil samples from pulls 1, 2 & 6 having elevated Phosphorus Indices
' Reviewed waste application records, complete and balanced with Weather codes and inspection initials.
• Lagoon levels recorded weekly. Changes in levels are consistent with pumping and precipitation events.
• Rainfall recorded with structural check initials.
` Remember to secure irrigation calibration & sludge survey by 9/30/2006.
• Reviewed crop yield records for Rye overseed (dated 4/10/2006) and Coastal Bermuda (7/3/06). Please keep in mind deadline for
harvesting Rye overseed is 4/7.
` Copy of animals inventory up to May 2006 in notebook.
• Farm & Records are well managed.
Page: 2

11
Permit: AWS960057
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006
Regulated Operations
Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Design Capacity
Facility Number : 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,200 1,200
Total Design Capacity: 3,200
Total SSLW: 96,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 06/30/94 19.00 30.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006 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? n ■ n n
Discharge originated at
Structure n
Application Field n
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made? n ■ n n
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) n ■ n n
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
n
n
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
n
■
n
n
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
n
■
n
n
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
n
■
n
n
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
n
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
O
■
n
n
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
n
■
n
n
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
n
■
n
n
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
n
n
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
n
■
n
n
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
Cl
■
n
n
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
n
■
n
n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
n
Hydraulic Overload?
n
Frozen Ground?
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? n
Page: 4

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
In
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
n
Total P205?
In
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
n
Outside of acceptable crop window?
In
Evidence of wind drift?
n
Application outside of application area?
n
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Wagram
Soil Type 3
Craven
Soil Type 4
Exum
Soil Type 5
Aycock
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
n ■
n
n
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
n ■
n
n
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑ ■
D
n
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
n ■
n
n
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
n ■
n
IF,
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
0 ■
n
n
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
n ■
n
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby Facility Number: 960057
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
WUP? D
Checklists? D
Design? D
Maps? D
Other? D
21. Does record keeping need improvement? D ■ D D
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
D
120 Minute inspections?
D
Weather code?
n
Weekly Freeboard?
D
Transfers?
D
Rainfall?
D
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
n
Waste Analysis?
D
Annual soil analysis?
D
Crop yields?
D
Stocking?
n
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
D
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
D
■
D
D
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
D
D
■
n
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
D
D
D
■
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
D
D
D
■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
D
■
D
D
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
D
D
■
D
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
D
■
D
D
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
D
■
D
D
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
Page: 6

Permit: AWS960057 Owner - Facility: Carl G Kirby
Inspection Date: 07/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 960057
Reason for Visit: Routine
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
n■nn
Page: 7

(Type of Visit QQ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 96 57 Date of Visit: 10-13 2004 Time:
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...-._------- _
Farm Name: C. G.Swials................................................................................................... County:!'Y.a1'jle..-__..._....... __.... __....... 1Y.RRQ........
Owner Name: CArl......................................... Kit:b3:.Sr............ __.................................... Phone No: 919: 135..7..413__......_........_........._......._............
Mailing Address: 1.7.7.S..AntiRsb.l;nasi................
_................ _._................................... : flikuk.ikk..Mc ................. - _...... x.7.863..............
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Garl.Kirby.....................: .............................. Integrator: Gclldsbuil2.GAS.F.alnitts...__.......... _...................
Certified Operator:GalCl.fa.................................... Kirby .......... -.-.................................. Operator Certification Number: 19.4.Q.7....... _...... ..............
Location of Farm:
I�
® Swine [I Poultry [I Cattle [I Horse Latitude 35 29 46 Longitude F 77 53 F18 N
Design Current
Swine ('anarifv Pnnnlatinn
® Wean to Feeder
3200
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy,
❑ Non -Layer I ❑ Nori-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,200
Total SSLW 96,000
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. notiN DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..__... __...... __............. _...........................
Freeboard (inches): 36"
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 96-57 Date of Inspection 10-13-2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc')
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes N No
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? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
[]Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN [_-]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc > 30(
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N No
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 N No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N 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 N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
. , .
Comments (refer to question.#) ` Explain any YES answers;and/or auy -recommendations-- - or- aoy-.., other comme_,-_-_ nts_
-
Usedrawings of facility to better eiplain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) Field Copy El Final Notes
Y
)rds available for review
to Analysis: 8-25-04 = 1.8 lbs
7-15-04 = 2.5 lbs
5-11-04 = 2.7 lbs
4-22-04 = 2.7 lbs
4-8-04 = 3.1 lbs
2-11-04 = 2.5 lbs
1-30-04 = 2.9 lbs
114-03 = 1.6 lbs
10-15-03 = 2.6 lbs
8-11-03 = 2.0 lbs
analysis - dated 1-7=04 - serves for year 2003 analysis lime was applied in May `04
e sure to pull samples for this year 2004
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B 13odiso.n .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
12112103
Date:
Cnndnuad

acility Number: 96-57 Date of Inspection 10 13-2004
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes; check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect ai the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comments and/or" Drawingsi_ ;..
mall grain overseed has been planted.
eed to consult with you Technical Specialist to make sure the PAN and crops are correct with actual crop in the
gilds and double check the IRR2's
•eeboard levels and rainfall are recorded.
ontact me with any corrections you may make to the WUP.
you have any questions, contact your Technical Specialist or us @ 252-946-6481 or me directly 252-948-3842.
12112103

A
wa.Po
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 96 57 Date of Visit: 12-09-2003 Time: 1340
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
O Permitted ®Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: C,d:G..Sw me.................................................................................................... County:W..ayne............................................... 1'4'.gRO........
OwnerName: Cark......................................... Kkby.Sr .................................................... Phone No: 919=115=2613 ...........................................................
Mailing Address: 1.7.I5Antiasla.Knad............................................................................ Pikf:ulle..NG......................................................... 2.7.8.6.3 ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: Ga1CI.lfitbY.................................... g Goldbox..a.Rag.Farmss......................................
Certified Operator:Gara.0.................................... Kirby................................................. Operator Certification Number:194Q.7..............................
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry [3 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 29 46 ,1 Longitude 77 • 53 6 r-18-1
"
Design Current
'S.wineL rnnarity Pnnnlatinn
® Wean to Feeder
3200
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Po ulation
❑ LayerI A ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,200
Total SSLW 96,000
Number of Lagoons I_� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area I❑ Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds/ Solid Traps � ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past. discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......................
Freeboard (inches): 26"
AG/nt/A1

_VJ/Val Vl
Facility Number: 96-57 Date of Inspection 12-09-2003
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 maintenancelimprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload [
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
a.�nsu�ucu
w
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
- (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect At the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No- -
❑ Yes ® No
Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
'it j ' r l:irntari ``YES'answers and/or an recommendationsµ?or"an other eomin nhU:r `
G�ommentstrefer. toiqueshon #) , Ex Y� Y Y k
_
s YF w3 h { i�5; FA ., - ��„.v i 7 +�
eUsesdrawings�of faiwttyltotbetterreaplatnxsrtuahons (use addrhonal pages+asinecessary) ❑ r
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes a
t .,'..
Records available for review.
`
Waste Analysis: 11/4/03 1.60 lbs
10/15/03 2.60lbs
8/11/03 2.00lbs
6/4/03 2.60lbs
4/17/03 2.70lbs
2/26/03 3.201bs
Reviewer/Inspector Name , "` ^,
Lyn B: H
p dLs_on . .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 75 - 1--n 3

O5103101 Continued
Facility Number: 96-57 Date of Inspection 12-09-2003
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 pemrnanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ® No
Soil analysis available up thru 2002
Soil samples for 2003 are @ NCDA Laboratory
Lime was put out in June 2003
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Spray fields are shared with fac. # 96-57 which is adjacent,
PAN balances are transferred between IIR2 records of both farms. This is documented on the IRR 1.
Vegetation on dike wall is well established.
Practice weed control in spray fields and on dike wall.
Freeboard levels are kept as required.
Suggest to uss the IRR 2 form from teh NPDES guidances - one IRR2 form per field and the lagoon is identified ( I
on the forms (either-fac..96-56 or 96-57)
�a
J

(Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 3/27/2002 Time: 820
p Not Operationalp Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: C&G Swine
Owner Name: Carl Kirby Sr
County: Wayne ................................................ WaRO........
Phone No: 919-735-7613
Mailing Address: 17.7.5.Antioach.Road.......................................................................... Pi nvillAAC.......................................................... 27R0 ..............
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Carl.Kirby,.GeorgeP.ettus,ALke.Kirby....................... Integrator: Goldsbarn.Hog.Farms................... ....................
Certified Operator:Carl.G................................... Kirby ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 194117.............................
Location of Farm:
a Swine p Poultry p Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ©• ®1 ®" Longitude ©• ©°
Design : Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population--. Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity. Population
® Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
[3 Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
E3 Layer JE3 Dairy
p on- ayer [3 Non -Dairy
E3 Other
Total Design Capacity 37200
Total SSLW 961000
I Number of Lagoons 1 ' 'p Subsurface Drains Present Ilp Lagoon Area Ip Spray �e rea I
Bolding ;Ponds /Solid Traps,... ❑ No Liquid Waste anagement yytem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: E3 Lagoon p Spray Field p 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?
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p 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? p Spillway p Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ............... 24 ...............

ace ity Number: 96-57 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Bermuda Pasture Small Grain Overseed Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
H 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 or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N 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 A WMP?
❑ Yes
®No
i I
IV
p No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments( refit to uestion.# : EaP lain any.;YES answers and/or any recomme."ndations or any other comments.
q )
Use drawings of facility -to betterexplain situations -(us eadditional pages as necessary) ❑ Field Copy 13 Final Notes
x _
Records available for review.
Waste analysis: 1/31/02 = 1.9 lbs.; 12/5/01 = 3.1 lbs.; 10/1/01 = 2.1 lbs.; 8/1/01 = 2.41bs.
Soil analysis up through 2001 available - lime was put out in 2/2001.
Make sure to pull soil samples for this year.
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
AN is transferred between this farm and #96-56.
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly as required. (SEE PAGE 3)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn -& Hardison .:. entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: „' - Date:

05103101
Facility Number: 96�57
Date of Inspection
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 13 Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ® 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 p No
-getanon on ame wau is wen estaousnea.
nall grain is well established.
ate: To complete review of irrigation records, you must review records from this farm and farm 496-56 at the
me time to follow the applied PAN. If you decide to separate the irrigation records, it will be fine by DWQ.
you have any questions, contact your Technical Specialist or us at 252-946-6481.

r
lyx � Dti3sma a INatAE'r" ty v F
-j
&
U Y tD DR3stoa of Soil and Water Conservation
Y
. /�
$�I-i� �>5. I 10113e A
taw . SFr}'rr£G
r a/J _
j{
Type of Visit O• Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
—
Facility Number Date of Visit: 6-29-2000 1355 Time: Printed on: 2232001
96 57 �
r O Not Operational O Below Threshold
[} Permitted 9 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: CA.G.5-sine............... _... _.._... _.......... ..._..._..__..---...___.. ..._ County:..;ryne.................._..._._..._._....._ WaBQ.._....
Owner Name: Phone No: 919:.Z3S....._..._._.__..__-
Facility Contact: _...._._...... -_-. _ -_ Title:..____._.__..___..._ ..............--.....---. Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1775.AntioachBd.___...._...__._._...... _...... _. _._.._ P.ikevAk.AC...... _.... _.._... _.............. _._... .......... 2.7.86$ ._......
Onsite Representative: Cad.j i6y Gerais e.PettMS_.......__..................._--...._..._. Integrator: Goldshoma Hog.Ea[ms...._..................._.
Certified Operator. Cad......._...-.__..._....____ Kildxt:.......___.__.__............— Operator Certification Number: .I29Q7_............. . .
Location of Farm:
® Swine [IPoultry ❑ Cattle [IHorse Iartitude 35 • 29 46 Longitude 77 • 53 18
urscnarges s stream impacts
] . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 9 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ii'discharge is observed.,tas the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed. chat is the es- imated flow in gal/min? n/a
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon svg1em? (If yes. notify DR%Q) ❑ Yes Z' No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El 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 Z No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Stncture i Structure 6
ldeutifier:
reeboard ("inches): ...
........ _.. 7...... _....
_......._........._..._.............._..........._..._.

5/00 Continued on back
Facility Number 96-57
Date of Inspection 6-29-2000 Printed on: 2/232001
5. Are there auv immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (jet trees, severe erosion ❑Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properh• addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes 9 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
Z 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 APptication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelmmprovement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pondmg ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
®No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
] 3. 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 determmation?
❑ 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. design, maps. etc.)
❑ Yes
[K, No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (jet 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
19 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
13No violations:or'deficiencieswere:noted'duiing this visit:; Yoti,*Urekeive no further:
Correspondence about this visit .. :.:....:.:.::..:.:. . _ .:.....
Records available for review.
Waste samples are collected within the permit requirements.
Soil analysis for 1999 available. Secure samples for yr 2000 by Dec. 2000. Lime was applied.
Irrigation records are being kept per new WUP and by pulls. There are some residual entries on the IRR2 from the
A WUP and there are some fields that were shared with fac. 96-56. This was accounted for in both WUPs.
Freeboard records are up to date.
Lagoon levels remained compliant thru/out the hurricane season and afterwards. CONT. P 3
IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name

• LRIL.iewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00 I
Facility Number. 96-57 Date of Inspection 6 29-2000 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 ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes gj 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 animal 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
The new WUP is written on actual wetted acres therefore this farm is exempted from the wetted ac. requriements.
The grounds are well kept.
'you have any questions, contact me @ 252-946-6481, ext. 318.

DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Routine p omplaint p Follow-up of DWQ inspection p rouow-up of uswo; review p vtner
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ©24 hr. (66:mm)
Farm Status: o Registered p Applied for Permit
E Certified p Permitted
in Not Operati=1 Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: C&G Swine County: Wayne ................................................ .WaRIJ........
OwnerName: CarJ......................................... Kirby.Sr............. _...................................... Phone No:735-1613 ...................................................................
Facility Contact: Cad!G.Kirhy.......................... _...................... Title: Owner ....................... ......................... Phone No:....................................................
MailingAddress: 2396.111g.D.addy. d........................................................................... Pikpyilk.AC .......................................................... 27863 ..............
Onsite Representative: Carl..G. Kirby............................................................................. Integrator: Goldsham.Hog.F.arms.......................................
Certified Operator:CarJ.G................................... Kirby .......... _.................... ............... Operator Certification Number:19.40.7 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®" Longitude ©• ©` ®"
pe of Operation - Design -:Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to P mis
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
-p Other
-Design Current _ -Design Current
Poultry.. Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
ayer p a>n
[3 Non -Layer p on- any
ToW Design Capacity
Tota1.SSLW 96,000
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds Subsurface Drams resenP3 Lagoon Area 113 Spray Field Ares
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
p Yes ® No
13 Yes N No .
p Yes p No
p Yes 13 No
p Yes p No
p Yes N No
13 Yes ® No
p Yes N No
4/30/97

j.Vq;!lityNumber: _57
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Laeoons and/or Hoidin¢ Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
.............. 3_1.7.......... _.... ...... _... ...................... _... ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
Structure 4
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
Structure 5
..............................................................
Structure 6
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
15. Crop type ...... Cnastal.Bramiuda.Cuass...... Small Sxcain).(W��hc�aat,.Barley..................... _......................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated m the Anill Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
- IV uuuc wiw 1VM. iw uy.
e"dor';:insect, dead-animal'(mortality) checklists. Also a copy of send. # 633 specifications.
a --
ine spatchy arras on'lagoon wall: Mr. Kirby is working to maintain these.areas. s y "E
L.
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: '4„\) W. Mrk\.�,1a Date:

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. 29—�7
S'05- /SOA
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: 9";t- , 1995
Time: ,I..e
------------------
Latitude: '�L9 LEG Longitude: ')-) Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Ft + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) QrEP or No
Actual Freeboard: ;)— Ft n 4ff Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o No
Was any erosion observed? Yes or�
Is adequate land available for spray? <iET�r No
Is the cover crop adequate? or No ACZces L'�7rriEd�Ale �3C2��
Crop(s) being utilized:�/YFi�F�
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? C!535 or No 100 Ft from Wells? es or No
Is the al waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or&9!>
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state b3Lman-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or
�
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manur,e� I,dN�
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with over crop)? Yes or V /"
�22 d � %fie-
Inspecto Name Signatur1A
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
Sketch: