980024_PERMIT FILE_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

• JbWaste Application Fields 0 Date: 3/29/2011
Customer(s): JOHN S BREWER
Legend
® Practices (polygons)
James —Jones ------ joneja-Conspian
— streams
-- roads
a buffers
v
Waste Application Fields
Field Office: WILSON SERVICE CENTER
Agency: Wilson Soil and Water
Assisted By: Ricky Hayes
State and County: NC, WILSON
Land Units: Tract: 1947 Field: 1
0 375 750 1,125 1,500
Feet
A

A
V .
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization
This plan has been prepared for:
Brewer
John Brewer
5127 NC Hwy 58 N
Wilson, NC 27893
252-237-3382
05-04-2011
This plan has been developed by:
Ricky Hayes
Wilson SWCD
jrj
1806 Goldsboro St��
NC 27893
als '
Wilson,
252-237-5147
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Nutrient Management with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance procedures
established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal waste utilization plan for
the farm named above. I have read and understand -the Required Specifications concerning anima]
waste management that are included with this plan.
Signature (owner)
Signature (manager or producer)
.-qlj
Date
7 I
Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of Agriculture -
Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices adopted by the Soil and Water
Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By: &,'4-
Technical pecialist Signature Date
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-04-201 1 Cover Page I

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the following
source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
U1
(Closure)
lagoon is an animal waste storage structure that is no longer in operation and is being
closed as part of a closure plan. There are an estimated 494,977 gallons in this
structure prior to closure.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated
Broadcast
2018
Incorporated
3465
Injected
3816
Irrigated
2193
Max. Avail.
PAN (lbs) *
Actual PAN
Applied (lbs)
PAN Surplus/
Deficit (lbs)
Actual Volume
Applied (Gallons)
Volume Surplus/
Deficit (Gallons)
2,018
2,137
-119
524,248
-29,271
--- ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: In source ID, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
* Max. Available PAN is calculated on the basis of the actual application method(s) identified in the plan for this source.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-09-2011 Source Page Page 1 of 1

The table shown below provides a summary of the crops or rotations included in this plan for each field. Realistic Yield estimates are
also provided for each crop, as well as the crop's P205 Removal Rate. The Leaching Index (LI) and the Phosphorous Loss Assessment
Tool (PLAT) Rating are also provided for each field, where available.
If a field's PLAT Rating is High, any planned manure application is limited to the phosphorous removal rate of the harvested plant
biomass for the crop rotation or multiple years in the crop sequence. Fields with a Very High PLAT Rating should receive no
additional applications of manure. Regardless of the PLAT rating, starter fertilizers may be recommended in accordance with North
Carolina State University guidelines or recommendations. The quantity of P205 applied to each crop is shown in the following table if
the field's PLAT rating is High or Very High.
Planned Crops Summary
Tract
Field
Total
Acres
Useable
Acres
Plat
Rating
Ll
Soil Series
Crop Sequence
RYE
Pl
Removal
(lbslacrc)
A
Applied
(lbslacre)
1947
1
17,90
16,83
Low
N/A
Rains
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
44 bu.
35
NIA
1947
1 lA 1
16.901
16.051
Low
I NIA
I Norfolk
ISoybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
34
NIA
PLAN TOTALS: 34.90 32.88
i ,.I '� ;i ,�1,.,,€,F 4}d i 1 N
y.: 1 F i , } `{ fit, V i '' '� i � . , ••I S {F
it k, A`'
Low potential to contribute to soluble
None
C 2
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
Moderate potential to contribute to soluble
Nutrient Management (590) should be planned.
>= 2 &
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
4= 10
High potential to contribute to soluble
Nutrient Management (590) should be planned. Other conservation practices that improve the soils
nutrient leaching below the root zone.
available water holding capacity and improve nutrient use efficiency should be considered. Examples
> 10
are Cover Crops (340) to scavenge nutrients, Sod -Based Rotations (328), Long -Term No -Till (778),
and edge -of -field practices such as Fitter Strips (393) and Riparian Forest Buffers (391).
€E�_a6; .�'i
PLAT,€lnd&O
l
€€N RaringE+h� �E{{€°FPMar:ag`e►n`entERecomniendataon
F 4�t}i,S .ta i.'.: ,.If .,ia .., W'li.,
i..,4i...uu . i'ti. rv.,<l"u, E, LZ! t,..li...4 ....7u i... ,.: , "_ It•. , u s3.:,
0 - 25
Low
No adjustment needed; N based application
25 - 50
Medium
No adjustment needed; N based application
51 - 100
High
Application limited to crop P removal
> 100
Very High
Starter P application only
Preview Database Version 3.1 Rate Printed 5/9/201 1
PCs Page Page 1 of l
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of cropland needed to use
the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements, and proper timing of applications to _
maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other by-products,
commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each field in order to supply the indicated quantity
of nitrogen from each source is also included. A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides
for the utilization of the manure generated by the operation.
Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
ID
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
(lbslA)
Comm.
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
(lbslA)
Res.
(1bs/A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
NutrientA
pplied
(lbs/A)
liquid
ManurrA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
N
N
1000
gal/A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
1947
1
Ul
Rains
17.90
16,83
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
44 bu.
4/1-9/15
170
0
20
Broad.
65
15.94
0.00
268.34
0.00
1947
IA
U1
Norfolk
16,90
16,05
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bit.
4/1-9/15
164
0
20
Broad.
65
15.94
0.00
255.91
0.00
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
524.25
;aa
Tom] Produced, 1000 gallons
9 __w
Balance, 1000 gallons
-29.27
Total Applied, tons
'a A _ A
0.00
Total Produced, tons
N;- w
0.00
Balance, tons
0.00
Notes: 1. In the tract column, - symbol means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 WUT Page Page 1 of 1

The Nutrient Management Recommendations table shown below provides an annual summary of the nutrient management plan
developed for this operation. This table provides a nutrient balance for the listed fields and crops for each year of the plan.
Required nutrients are based on the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements and soil test results. The
quantity of nutrient supplied by each source is also identified.
The total quantity of nitrogen applied to each crop should not exceed the required amount. However, the quantity of other
nutrients applied may exceed their required amounts. This most commonly occurs when manure or other byproducts are utilized
to meet the nitrogen needs of the crop. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited so
as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field. In such situations,
additional nitrogen applications from nonorganic sources may be required to supply the recommended amounts of nitrogen.
Nutrient Management Recommendations Test
YEAR
1
N
(lbs/A)
P2O5
(lbs/A)
K2O
(1bs1A)
Mg
(lbs/A)
Mn
(lbs/A)
Zn
(lbs/A)
Cu
(lbs/A)
Lime
(tons/A)
Tract
Field
1947
1
Req'd Nutrients
170
30
20
0
❑
0
0
0
Acres
App. Period
16.83
4/1-9115
Supplied By:
�,
8'li�a
11i'1§S!13a�1�1
ll
=�lla�li�� �
(t,�
CROP
Soybeans, Manured, Full
Season
Starter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Commercial Fen.
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Soil Series
Rains
Residual
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
ample Date
44 bu.
11.12-10
Manure
65
87
9
24
1
3
1
0
val
Rating
35 lbs/ac.
w
BALANCE
-85
57
-11
24
1
3
1
0
E
Field
1947
1A
Req'd Nutrients
164
30
20
0
0
0
0
0
App. Period
16.05
4/1.9/15
Supplied By:
.;, :'(lilt
alNIT•. o g
i R."A' S i
i. r,VCis¢
S'_t .�h�9��i
CROP
Soybeans, Manured, Full
Season
Starter
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Commercial Fert,
0
0
0
❑
0
0
0
0
Soil Series
Norfolk
Residual
20
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
RYF. Sample
Date
42 bu.
11-12-10
Manure
65
87
9
24
1
3
l
0
P Removal
I Rating
34lbs/ac.
w
BALANCE
-79
57
-11
24
1
3
1
0
NOTE: Symbol * means user entered data.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 NMR Page Page 1 of 1

The Required Soil Test Values shown in the following table provide a summary of recommended actions that should be taken if soil tests indicate excessive levels of
copper or zinc. Fields that receive manure must have an annual soil analysis for these elements. High levels of zinc and copper can adversely affect plant growth.
Alternative crop sites must be used when the concentration of these metals approach excessive levels. Site life can be estimated by dividing the amount of copper and
zinc to be applied in Ibslacre by 0.036 and 0.071, respectively and multiplying the result by 0.85. By adding this quantity to the current soil index for copper or zinc, we
can predict life of the site for waste disposal.
In addition to copper and zinc indices, this table also provides a summary of lime recommendations for each crop based on the most recent soil sample. Application of
lime at recommended rates is necessary to maintain soil pH in the optimum range for crop production .
Required Soil Test Values
Tract
Field
Crop
pH
lime Recom.
(tons/acre)
Cu-1
Copper Recommendation
Zn-I
Zinc Recommendation
1947
1
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
6.0
0.0
45
None
116
None
1947
IA
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
6.0
0.0
45
None
116
INone
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-09-2011 STV Page Page 1 of 1

Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation
or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface water is
prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns
or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly apply the
waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to properly dispose of the
waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an agreement with a landowner, who is
within a reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use of the land for waste
application. It is the responsibility of the owner of the waste production facility to
secure an update of the Nutrient Management Plan when there is a change in the
operation, increase in the number of animals, method of application, receiving
crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for
realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical data,
climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are regulations that
restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year.
Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per acre per year but
less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter strips are installed where
runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field Office Technical Guide Standard
393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste application.
Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift from the land
application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is applied to
conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the
application does not occur during a season prone to flooding (see "Weather and
Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such
that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does
not cause drift from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order
to control odor and flies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 Specification Page 1

8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or
when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that
the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The
potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted
crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient loading rates on
these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted
to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior
to planting of the crop or forages breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the
following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from
a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any
residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste, other than swine waste
from facilities sited on or after October 11,1995, shall not he applied closer that 25
feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than
those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public
right-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or
wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to
prior converted cropland provided the fields have been approved as a land
application site by a "technical specialist". Animal waste shall not be applied on
grassed waterways that discharge directly into water courses, and on other
grassed waterways, waste shall be applied at agronomic rates in a manner that
causes no runoff or drift from the site.
16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks,
etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management system.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 Specification Page 2

17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all disturbed
areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas shall be fenced, as
necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as trees, shrubs, and other
woody species, etc., are limited to areas where considered appropriate. Lagoon
areas should be kept mowed and accessible. Berms and structures should be
inspected regularly for evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate
the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a
regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular maintenance
checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops
for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on crops for
direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant with no further
applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of
the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons.
Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level between the markers. A
marker will be required to mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage
ponds.
22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least
annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the
rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require waste to be applied
based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower application rate than a nitrogen
based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the soils shall be monitored and alternative
crop sites shall be used when these metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be
adjusted and maintained for optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis
records shall be kept for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste application
records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years.
Waste application records for all other waste shall be maintained for five (5)
years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 Specification Page 3

Crop Notes
The following crop note applies to field(s): 1
Soybeans -Full Season, Coastal Plain: Mineral Soil, low -leachable
The suggested planting dates for soybeans in the Coastal Plains are from April 20-May 20. Review the
NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding
variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 2-4 seed/row foot for 7-8"
drills; 4-6 seed/row foot for 15" rows; 6-8 seed/row foot for 30" rows and 8-10 seed/row foot for 36"
rows. Increase the seeding rate by at least 10% for no -till planting. Seeding depth should be 1-1 1/2" and
adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can be
broadcast or banded at planting. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbs/acre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable soybean production.
The following crop note applies to field(s): 1 A
Soybeans -Full Season, Coastal Plain: Mineral soil, medium leachable
The suggested planting dates for soybeans in the Coastal Plains are from April 20-May 20. Review the
NCSU Official Variety "green book" and information from private companies to select a high yielding
variety with the characteristics needed for your area and conditions. Plant 2-4 seed/row foot for 7-8"
drills; 4-6 seed/row foot for 15" rows; 6-8 seed/row foot for 30" rows and 8-10 seed/row foot for 36"
rows. Increase the seeding rate by at least 10% for no -till planting. Seeding depth should be 1-1 1/2" and
adequate depth control is essential. Phosphorus and potash recommended by a soil test report can be
broadcast or banded at planting. Soybeans produce their own nitrogen and are normally grown without
additions of nitrogen. However, applications of 20-30 lbs/acre N are sometimes made at planting to
promote early growth and vigor. Tissue samples can be analyzed during the growing season to monitor
the overall nutrient status of the soybeans. Timely management of weeds and insects is essential for
profitable soybean production.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-09-2011 Crop Note Page Page 1 of 1

Waste Structure Closure Plan
This plan has been prepared for:
Brewer
John Brewer
5127NCHwy 58N
Wilson, NC 27893
252-237-3382
05-04-2011
This plan has been developed by:
Ricky Hayes
Wilson SWCD
1806 Goldsboro St
Wilson, NC 27893
252-237-5147
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Waste Structure Closure Plan
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance procedures
established in this closure plan.
Signature (owner) Date
Signature (manager or producer) Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of Agriculture -
Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices adopted by the Soil and Water
Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By: a 'A
Technical Specialist Signature 6,te
-------------------__---_------------------------------------------_---- a- --------
Previe�� Database Version 3.l Date Punted: 05-04-2011 Cover Pa 1

Waste Storage Closure Source Description
SOURCE: lagoon
Date Measured: 05-03-2011
Lagoon Dimensions: TOP - 191 X 54; BOTTOM - 175 X 38; SIDE SLOPES - 1:1
Liquid Depth: 7.80ft.; Liquid Volume: 494,977 gallons. Waste Sample #: 07308
Total Depth: 7.80 ft.; Total Volume: 494,977 gallons
Estimated Plant Available Nitrogen
Applic, Method
(Ibs N/1000 gallons)
Source Total (Ibs)
Broadcast
4.08
2018
Incorporated
7.00
3465
Injected
7.71
3816
Irrigated
4.43
2193
Maximum PAN
Available (tbs.) *
Actual PAN Applied
(Ibs)
PAN Surplus/
Deficit (tbs)
Actual Volume
Applied (Gallons)
Volume Surplus/
Deficit (Gallons)
2,018
2,137
-119
524,248
-29,271
* Maximum PAN Available is calculated on the basis of the actual application method(s) identified in the plan for this source.
Database Version 3.1 Date Printed, 05-09-2011 Desc. 1

Land Application Table: lagoon
Source Type: Closure
Manure
PAN
PAN
Liquid
Req'd
Applied
Manure
Crop
{lbs/A}
l
{ bs1A)
Applied
Applic.
Source
Total
Use,
PLAT
APPhe
1000
Amount
Applic•
Tract
Field
ID
Sail Series
Acres
Acres
Rating
Crop
RYE
Period
Method
N
N
gal/Acre
(Inches)
1947
1
U 1
Rains
17.90
16.83
Low
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
44 bu.
411-9115 1
Broad.
170
65
15.94
0.59
1947
lA
U1
Norfolk
16,90
16.05
Low
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
42 bu.
4/1-9115
Broad.
1 164
65
15.94
0.59
lagoon Summary:
Source Volume Available: 494,977 gals.
Source Volume Applied: 524,248 gals.
Excess Application Capacity: 5.9 %
NOTE: * indicates user defined value
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 5/9/2011 LAT Page Page 1 of I

Lagoon sludge often contains high concentrations of zinc and copper. High levels of these metals in soils can adversely affect plant growth. The following table provides a
conservative (maximum potential) estimate for increase in soil index values.* Due to inherit variability of waste and soil sampling, it is recommended that conservative soil
target levels be set for copper (e.g. Cu-I < 700-1000) and zinc (e.g. Zn-I < 300 for land where peanuts may be grown; for other cropland Zn-1 < 700-1000). Alternative
application sites should be selected if the following table indicates that concentrations of these metals may approach excessive levels. For maximum copper and zinc soil index
limits, see the NRCS Nutrient Management Standard (Code 590).
Estimated Soil Metal Concentrations
Tract
Field
Soil Sample
Crop
Source
ID
Applic.
Inches
Waste
CU pptn
Waste
Zn ppm
Soil Test
CU-1
Soil Test
Zn-I
Cu-I
Adj.
Zn-I
Adj•
Estimated New
Number
Date
Soil Cu-1
Soil Zn-1
1947
1
13259
11-12-10
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
U1
0.59
4
26
45
116
15
49
60
165
1947
1A
13259
11-12-10
Soybeans, Manured, Full Season
Ul
0.59
4
26
45
116
15
49
60
165
* NOTE: The equilibrated post application soil index may be less than the projected maximum value. Practical methodology for more precise estimation is not available.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 05-09-2011 Metals Page Page 1 of 1

GENERAL LAGOON CLOSURE INFORMATION:
Closure Start Date: 05-10-2011 Closure End Date: 05-20-2011
-------------------------------------------_------_-_
Preview Date Printed: 05-09-2011 Info Page 1

Di on of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency °£
r� !@[3
,[] tvision of Water Quality
10'
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of inspection
Facility Number 'L' '
Time of Inspection Q U 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered Certified 13 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted 113 Not Op-e-ra-tio-n-a-lj Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ..���.........�:.%1.-..:`.-'............... 'f...............................................................
Owner Name: , tc.I` .. .. ......... ' ."--................................................. Phone No. ...i.{9d.......ZV....-PIV .........................
Facility Contact• t "" �'�iitle: .................... Phone No:
r� G
141ailing Address: - 5 .......r.�......c........ ..........................
................................................................................ s.......................h` �/
Onsite Representative:... w+' !...............................................
p ...........�...f"!...................................................... Integrator:....I �'c
Certified O erator;-.•..••...:.--..., t^'" ....
p...�?........�..................................................................... Operator Certification Number:................
Location of Farm:?
..... ............ .................... .....
Latitude �•.� �" Longitude �• U` 0"
General
1 Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes dRo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in 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?
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?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ YesANo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
o
ElYes 2<0
❑ Yes In !No
7/25197 Continued on back

Facility Number: I
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'?
Structures (Lagoons,11olding Ponds, Flush 111it-5, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 StrLICILffe .5
El Yes a150
[]Yes No
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard kft): .............
1.0. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? 0 Yes
11. Is erosion, or any Other threats to the integrity .ofany of the structures observed'? 0 Yes No
12.1 Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 0 Yes NO
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWO)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers" 0 Yes IN, 0
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'! [01 Yes No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type . / 5­..edql,-j ................
.....................
.16. ,Do.the-receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management PK'i'n (A�,%M'P
j)P Elyks 10
cll,�".s e ""0
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvem6nt?
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 represent.itive? E] Yes O'No'
22. Doe 5 record keeping need improvement? 0 Yes
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a. copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? El Yes N
24. Were any ditional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? Yes-, No
W
d N
a Ye' No
25.­X any additional noted which cause n6ncof`ll�liance6f [heTerI&T�'r. 0
No.violations or'de'fidmdes were noted during this visit.- X6u4ill receive no further
correspondence 64otilt this'Visit..,
6im nts'(refer to' question :4)I*p pin S
answers and/or 'any 'recommen6i!ons,.orl,any jother 'ci 4
sfacility''.6. '"Id"pages as.necessary drawings ofdd idiiwin (use a itiona
I
'7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Z
Date:

itine 0 Comulairt 0 Follow -tun of DWL4 insLection
Facility dumber L
® Registered M Certified Q .Applied for Permit [3 Permitter:
Farm Name:
Follow-u p of DSWC re��iew_ O Other
� l —
t Date of Inspectiot!
Time of] nspection 24 hr, (hh:tnm)
© Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Countv:...... 4..j- .`�Cc `....................................
Owt! s Name: ................................................... ............................ ........................................... Phone. No:.................................................,.....................................
Facili"y Conluw.................................................................................Tit1L:................................... ............................. Phone No:...................................................
-Mailino Address : ............................................ ......................................................................... ..................................................................................... ..........................
t1n;ilf' �'� t V': f /1 1 ���/t �'a.7. t�, ......._..... Inteurator ....../....:....I.Ui.�. .� ..
.• nr"en s ! e .......
Certified Operator;................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number ..........................................
Location of -Farm:
c
Latitude �T 0 i 1=11 Longitude ' 1 "
Swine
Design Current
Capacity ` Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Faro", to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoonsl Holdiing:Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present JpTaroon Area 10 SprayMQ
Field Area
_•
"F [] No Liquid Waste Management SystemF f
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes I
ZYNO
2. is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes o
Discharge ori;inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes e&No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes E�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 o
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes XJNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes �YNO
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes VNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 13 bro
7/25197 Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes PrNo
Structures (LagoonsJfolding Ponds, Flush Pits etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [(No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboardft....................`.............. .................... f....------............................................................................................................ ..............................-----
( ):........... ...... ..........:: ...........-.�................. ................................... ...............................
.............................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ,� No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ;eyes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
1
15.
Crop type ......... .`�.. .1E�r........ L......1. A. ................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
,O No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ZN0
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
1
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
11Kes
❑ Yes
;No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
P<O
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[�(No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
o
For
Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
o
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
VN0
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
EIA0
0-No.vialations or deficiencies.were-itoted-during this, visit. Youm'ill recei:ve-ito ftirtlier
: eorrespbndeb0 6 out -this'.visit:- .
zr to N)_p IU5 tv fte-lb pol__4 TE
Cr' r�iD
6A P)
p`] r Ff Af r•-D 2 Pf 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: `b ) L ci

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Lr!XA
Health and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
Jonah B. Hunt, Jr., , Secrnor
etary E)
Jonathan B. Howes, Secrets FE
Boyce A. Hudson, Regional Manager
Division of Environmental Management
August 10, 1995
Wendell Murphy
5553 Crepe Myrtle Court
Wilson, N.C. 27880
Subject: Compliance inspection Report
Brewerson Farm/Murphy Farms Operation
Secondary Road 1108
Wilson County
Dear Mr. Murphy:
On July 26, 1995, Mr.. Steve Mitchell, from the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance inspection
of the subject animal facility. This inspection is a part of the Division's efforts to determine potential
problems associated with liquid waste disposal systems.
Mr. Mitchell's site visit determined that wastewater from your facility was not discharging to the surface
waters of the state, nor were any manmade pipes, ditches, or other prohibited conveyances (for the
purpose of willfully discharging wastewater) observed.
Please continue to properly manage the waste and wastewater generated by this farm to prevent the
possibility of an illegal discharge. Effective wastewater treatment and facility stewardship are a
responsibility of all animal facilities. The Division of Environmental Management is required to enforce
water quality regulations in order to protect the natural resources of the State.
This office would also like to take this opportunity to remind you that you are required to have an approved
animal waste management Alan by December 1997. This plan must be Certified by a designated technical
specialist or a professional engineer. For a listing of certified technical specialists or assistance with your
waste management plan you should contact your local Soil and Water Conservation District.
The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions
regarding your inspection please call Steve Mitchell at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kenneth Schuster, P. E.
Regional Supervisor
cc:.. Wilson County Health Department
Ricky Hayes - Wilson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Steve Sennett - Regional Coordinator, Division of Soil and Water Conservation
RRO and Central Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, Raleigh, North CaroUra 27609 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%recycled/ 10%post-consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attenti n
Facility No. R
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 26, 1995
Time:
Farm Name/ Owner: Brewerson Farm/Murphy
Mailing Address: 5553 Crepe Myrtle Court Wilson, NC
County: Wilson
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address / Location : S . R . 1108
Type of Operation: Swine _XX_ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM -Certification Number:
ACNEW
Latitude: 35' 47' 14" Longitude: 77` 59' 32" Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year. 24 hour
storm event (approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes Actual Freeboard: 1.9_Ft. Was
any seepage observed from the lagoon (s) ? No Was any erosion observed? No Is
adequate land available for spray? Yes Is the cover crop adequate? Yes
Crop (s) being utilized: Coastal
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? Yes 200 Feet from Dwellings?
Yes 100 Feet from Wells? Yes
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a. USGS Map Blue
Line? No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with co r crop)? Yes
Additional Comments:
Inspector Steve Mitchell Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit I Use Attachments if Needed.

OPERATIONS
BRANCH - WO Fax:[phone]
Jul 18 195
15:55 P.01/07
p4it` I;a�Nnte 7671
uate % /K 1pda6qr '
a
!i/� F
From
i[T
�UifQK nIAdIYI4' a��kflliGC!
t;,u1Q pt.
'nt �flr
Phone a
Phone d
a TATION RECORD
Fax N Fax 41
Owner: z 4617 /5;,l Farm dame: ,e6v6?z-.-76 ,� f
County; 1 t Se
Agent Wsliing Site: Phone: 7,3 2 -,2. 71J
Operator, Phone:
On -Site RepreSentaftvc: Phone:�—
Physical Address:
Mailing Address:
Type of Cperalion: swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacfty: Number of Animals on Site:
�atrtude: T° Longitude: '17 ° .._30'
Type of Inspeotion: Ground Aerial
Circle Yes or No
Does. the Animal Waste Lsaoon have sufficient froubom'd at I Foot+ 25 year 24 how' slorm event
jApproximately 1 Foot t 7 inches) Yes or No
Actual rreeboard:
Feet - Inches
For facilfiles with mere then one lagoon, Please address ft other lagoons` f► eboard under thQ
comments sectlan.
Was any seepage observed from the lagQot7(s)? Yes or No
Was thare erosion of the darts? It"e:: or No
IS 8dC-1ua#e land availabie for land appllcatloP7 Yes ar Nu
Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Additional Comments:
�i> ! .A l L. 6 Y✓ A
8,'Unatai,u o(Agent
Fax to j919) 715-3559

RAI-
4-o oLlo

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources •
Raleigh Regional Office f
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor aHNFZ
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
July 7, 1997
Murphy Family Farms
5553 Crepe Myrtle Ct, S
Wilson, NC 27893
SUBJECT: Operation Review Summary and Corrective Action Recommendation
Brewer Farm Facility No. 98-24 Wilson County
Murphy Family Farms,
On June 27, an Operation Review was conducted of Brewer Farm, facility no. 98-24. This Review,
undertaken in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OD, is one of two visits scheduled for all registered livestock
operations during the 1997 calendar year. The Division of Water Quality will conduct a second site
inspection.
During the Review, it was determined that waste was not being discharged to the waters of the State,
and the animal waste collection, treatment, storage and disposal systems were properly maintained and
operated under the responsible charge of a certified operator. A copy of the completed review form is
enclosed for your information. The following observances and questions were discovered and noted for
corrective action or response:
1. The solids in the lagoons need to be cleared out as part of your certification process. Upon
completion, vegetation needs to be established on the lagoon berm to stop the occurring erosion.
2. Continue in clearing the required amount of land and then proceed to establish the crops called for
in the waste utilization plan.
3. The farm is registered as a farrow -to -feeder operation. Mr. Brown indicated that the farm will be
used for breeding purposes. When you apply for certification, make sure that the type of operation
accurately reflects farming practices and your waste utilization plan incorporates this.
The Division of Soil and Water Conservation appreciates your cooperation with this Operation Review.
Please do not hesitate to call me at 919/571-4700 ext. 208 if you have any questions, concerns or need
additional information.
Sincerely,
1
Margaret 0' efe
Environmental Engineer 1
cc: Wilson Soil and Water Conservation District
Judy Garrett, Water Quality Regional Supervisor
DSWC Regional Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 Nfm� An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-571-4700 50% recycled/ 100% post -consumer paper

trwQ
Animal Feedlot Operation Review�4�:V
`<` Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
F
all
Routine 0 Ctunplaint O Follow-up of [MO inspection O l: ollow-up of DMVC review O other
Date of Inspection 12M i ,
Facility Number 97
Time of Inspection = 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered © Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not Operational I
I�Date Last operated:
Farm Name:..'.i�iL,1...h..+......................... County: �j(l�k�..'.............................. .......................
// }caner Name:.. 1'ft(� —SPhone No:
.I7.........................................................I..........,
Facility Contact: . ] a'. A. .....Lr),.�-.lZ ...... Title: .. .. Phone No ....
[''' t �j-[ f.........+.....................r...................,.......
Mailing Address:SsSJ C I!,•11"""' /�r� (L �r � J 1i✓' fts.ah'✓.....,.,...... I ........................ F.V .......... ..........................
Onsite Representative: ... �.�Y.� �.'? ...�z��F 5�..''7............................................... Integrator:.../.�I.N.... A�J............... �1... /......................................
Certified Operator,.. :I. - ..../.l...C..'............................. .... ..... Operator Certification Number,.................... .
Location of Farm: �2 / � / -D
r................................................................................................................................................................................................................................_.........................1
Latitude �' �` ��� _ _— Longitude �• �� 0°� _
Design Current Design Current Design .Current
..Swine F Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle:.: - ` Capacity,. Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer I I JE1 Dairy
❑ Non -layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity..
Total SSLW
Number f Lagoo / Holding Ponds, JI_l Subsurface Drains Present LU Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge ori-inatecl at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. dicl it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. ]f discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Dues 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/i m pro vemen t?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
Cl Yes No
❑ Yes l
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes 0
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
Continued on back

F'aciitty Number: 91 — Z
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'? ❑ Yes 0<01
Structures La goons Holdin Ponds, Flush -fits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes P<O
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure fi
Identifier:
Freeboard(fty.......��,Q........................f t.L7,............... ...................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes o
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Eal o
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type 6��_ . .............................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWIVjP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23, Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were anyyadditional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes �blc
3
❑ Yes
........... .................... I ..................
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
.......
❑ No
No
2rNo
No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
ElYes
No
V[2�NO'
25. W e any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No'violations-or. deficiencies. were -noted during this.visit.- Nou.will receive no further
correspondence about this.yisit.,".,
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Coniments� refer to uestion #): -Explain any YFS answers andlor ainy�recommentlattons pe any other carrumetits; ,f
j ,xa� �� 3 -.;- .: s z -..; ° ':_ u - ass-.5 �'---`�``
Usesi ra►v�ngs of faciiit 1 better explain situatttons. (use addtturnal pages as necessary) .l
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name i f�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,I�.vL / . Date:

State of North Cartna
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Boyce A. Hudson, Regional Manager
Division of Environmental Management
August 10, 1995
Wendell Murphy
5553 Crepe Myrtle Court
Wilson, N.C. 27880
Subject: Compliance inspection Report
Brewerson Farm/Murphy Farms Operation
Secondary Road 1108
Wilson County
Dear Mr. Murphy:
On July 26, 1995, Mr. Steve Mitchell, from the Raleigh Regional Office conducted a compliance inspection
of the subject animal facility. This inspection is a part of the Division's efforts to determine potential
problems associated with liquid waste disposal systems.
Mr. Mitchell's site visit determined that wastewater from your facility was not discharging to the surface
waters of the state, nor were any manmade pipes, ditches, or other prohibited conveyances (for the
purpose of willfully discharging wastewater) observed.
Please continue to properly manage the waste and wastewater generated by this farm to prevent the
possibility of an illegal discharge. Effective wastewater treatment and facility stewardship are a
responsibility of all animal facilities. The Division of Environmental Management is required to enforce
water quality regulations in order to protect the natural resources of the State.
This office would also like to take this opportunity to remind you that you are required to have an approved
animal waste management plan by December 1997. This plan must be Certified by a designated technical
specialist or a professional engineer. For a listing of certified technical specialists or assistance with your
waste management plan you should contact your local Soil and Water Conservation District.
The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your cooperation in this matter. If you have any questions
regarding your inspection please call Steve Mitchell at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kenneth Schuster, P. E.
Regional Supervisor
cc: Wilson County Health Department
Ricky Hayes - Wilson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Steve Bennett - Regional Coordinator, Division of Soil and Water Conservation
RRO and Central Files
3800 BarrettDrive, Suite 101, Raleigh, North Carollna 27609 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer W% recycled/ 10% post-conazrier paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. ,y c
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 26, 1995
Time :
Farm Name/Owner: Brewerson Farm/Murphy
Mailing Address: 5553 Crepe Myrtle Court Wilson, NC
County : Wilson
Integrator: Phone
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/ Location: S . R . 1108
Type of Operation: Swine _XX_ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number:
ACNEW
Latitude: 35' 47' 14" Longitude: 77' 59' 32" Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour
storm event (approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes Actual Freeboard: 1.9_Ft- Was
any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? No Was any erosion observed? No Is
adequate land available for spray? Yes Is the cover crop adequate? Yes
Crop (s) being utilized: Coastal
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? Yes 200 Feet from Dwellings?
Yes 100 Feet from Wells? Yes
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue
Line? No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with co r crop)? Yes
Additional Comments:
Inspector Steve Mitchell Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Re regalres irh;hadlato ailFXGcn
Fadlynumbar ,T -
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Bate: ins
Farm Name: 9 Cw61z- -s'o ,� f
0vApent'Vlslttng Site: feu,✓
�Q erator
On -Site Represenwv+e:
Physical Address:
Malting Address:
phone., 2 ,� 7 —2- 7 it
Phone:
Phone:
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
De5i n Ca act
g p `y Number of Anlrnals on Site.
Latitude; _! 2 Longitude: - T
Type of inspection: Ground Aerial
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animel Waste Legoon have sufficient freeboard of 9 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Fact t 7 inches) Yes or No
Actusl freeboard:
___ Feet __�__�.Inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons heboard under tho
comments seotion.
Was any seepage observed from the lagaon(s)? Yes or No
Was there erosion of the darn? Yes or No
IS adegMta land available for land application? Yes or No
Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Additional Comments:
Signature of Agent
Fax to [phone]