900016_PERMIT FILE_20171231

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Edward Tom Moser
Moser Farm
719 Trinity Church Road
Monroe, NC 28110
Dear Edward Tom Moser:
Division of Wate
Coleen H. Sullins
Director
July 8, 2009
Subject: Receipt of Lagoon Closure Report Form
Moser Farm
ID: AWD900016 (deemed permitted)
Freeman
On July 6, 2009, the Aquifer Protection Section received a completed Animal Waste
Storage Pond and Lagoon Closure Report Form from your facility, This form indicates that all
lagoons have been closed in accordance with NRCS standards and that no animals will remain
on this farm. There is no permit to rescind since this operation was deemed permitted according
to 15A NCAC 2T .1303.
Please contact the Animal Feeding Operations Unit staff at 919-733-3221 if you have any
questions regarding this letter.
Sincerely,
J. R. J hi
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
cc: Mooresville Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Union County Soil and Water Conservation District
AWS Permit File — AWD900016
1636 Mail Service Center, Ralegh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Location: 2728 Capitaf Blvd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604 ope
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748 NorthCarolina
Internet: www.ncwaterquality.org '�'j� 5//
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer (I �/ ` uralla! ,

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment;
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Dear Mr. Moser:
1DEiHNFZ
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
August 13, 1997
Subject: DWQ Animal Waste Operations Site
Inspection Report
Moser Farm, Facility #: 90-16
Union County, NC
A site inspection of your facility was conducted on August 12, 1997 by Mr. Alan Johnson of
this Office. Because you have converted from a farrow -to -feeder to farrow -to -finish operation you
must be sure to maintain timely and accurate information of your waste applications (nitrogen and
volume). A review of this data should be done by December 31, 1997 to note any changes that might
be required in the certified farm plan. Also, maintenance on the swine house should be completed as
soon as possible.
Any further correspondence related to the subject inspection will be sent under separate
cover. Also, please be advised that North Carolina General Statutes provide for penalties of up to
$10,000 per day per violation as well as criminal penalties for violations of state environmental laws
and regulations. If you have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact
Mr. Johnson or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
/7) ,'r?- _L1
D. Rex GIe son, P. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union County SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ
919 North Main Street, N4 CFAX 704-663-6040
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 An Equal FAX
Action Employer
Voice 704-663-1699 0 . , 50% recycled/100% post -consumer paper

®DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review��
°t p DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
16 Routine p Complaint p now -up ol DWQ inspection p o ow -up of 13SWZ7 review p 0ther
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection r 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: 13 Registered p Applied for Permit
E Certified p Permitted
113 of Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Edward Moser Farm County: U loaf .................................................. MRO...........
OwnerName:.Edwar.d.................................. Moser .......................................................... Phone No:.7.6.4 92.Q9....................................................................
FacilityContact:...............................................................................Title................................................................ Phone No.....................................................
Mailing Address:.7.19..Trinity--hu.rch.R1................................................................... Monriae.NC ............................................................ 28112 ..............
Onsite Representative: Twu.Moser.................................................................................. Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator: E.dtiyardl............................. Moser ............................................... Operator Certification Number:1667.1.............................
Location of Farm:
--
::: ::':'::::: .�.................................................
Latitude F-T41" F 'ST7, F-131,, Longitu a (—Sb—j- « 1!11- ke i-11s (sc J" s;-e
:ype of Operation Design:.. Current
Swine Capacity' Population
p Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to FEE=
p Farrow to Wean
® Parrow to ee er
Farrow to Finish
n
I =3
p Other
at- 5R ?J5
Design Current = Design Current
„Poultry Capacity Population' Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer p auy
p Non -Layer t Lp on- airy
Total Capacity
ty250
Desi aci
,,Total SSLW, 134,5w
A
en ral �No
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes \No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? 0 Yes t No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes -No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes L&o
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require Yes ,hrNO
maintenance improvement? .7�
4/30/97 Continued on back
...,..+.. .,... ,,,.. tin 14

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?
" Yes X1lo
❑ Yes XNo
SIrUcturesaao and/or oldi on
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard pIus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes )kNo
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
....... 1.� ........................................... I........ ......................................................................................................................................................
14. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes �No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes XNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
XYes p 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 p No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes 5<No
(If in excess of WMP, or runof entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
I5. Crop type G......................................................................................................... f
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
p Yes No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
fzYes p No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
XYes p No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes IErN0
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes 00
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes KPo
For Certified Facilities Only,
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes )j�40
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes b<No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
Yes p No
IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name r a, '
�_.�7 u.-.�+S=�:i�n.%��tF:sr�fi..���Aac ,u �. • ?a
Revfewer/InspectorSignature: Date: iZ—!2Z
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Faci ' Assessment Unit 4/30/97
aci ity Number.
90_4
Date of Inspection
-
IAdditional Comments
an or.DrawmLys: a��E.

NCDENR
JAMES S. HUNT JR.
GOVERNOR
I WAYNE McDEvmr.
SECRETARY
I�
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 31, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Subject: Notice of Violation
Animal Operation Site Inspection
NCGS 143-215.1 (a)
E. Moser Farm, Facility #: 90-16
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Moser:
Mr. Alan Johnson of this Office conducted a site inspection of your facility on
July 30, 1998. Based on the observations made during the inspection, this report is
being issued as a Notice of Violation (NOV) due to the following deficiencies:
• The construction of a ditch to carry waste from the swine house to the lagoon.
• The excessive growth of vegetation on the lagoon embankments.
• The leaks in the fan duct at the rear of the farrowing house.
• The seepage in the piping where the 8 inch pvc pipe joins the ceramic pipe at
the lagoon.
• An inadequately marked pumping marker. If a drain pipe is to be used this
should be noted in your waste plan.
In light of your deemed permitted status, these deficiencies are a violation of North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1.
It is requested that a written response be submitted to this office by August 15,
1998, indicating the plan of action for the deficiencies noted above. In responding,
please address your comments to the attention of Mr. Johnson. For technical assistance
please contact your local Soil and Water District representative.
9t9 NORTH MAIN STREET, MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 281 15
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/1 O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Page Two
Mr. Edward Moser
Be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from
taking enforcement actions for this or any other violations. If you have any questions
concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Johnson or me at (704)
663-1699.
cc: Union SWCD
Non -Discharge Compliance Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleason, P.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary --
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Edward Moser
Edward Moser Farm
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe NC 28112
Dear Edward Moser:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEFf#eT O tr
ENVIRONMENT AND�i�,�EI
b NATUItAi, RESOURC '&
January 24, 2000
FEB 4 2000
irP Gf IWAME3TAI WASEU1111
1201 W111.1E 16'daA1. RfHt(
Subject: Removal of Registration
Edward Moser Farm
Facility Number 90-16
Union County
This is to acknowledge receipt of your request that your facility no longer be registered as an animal waste
management system per the terms of 15A NCAC 2H .0217. The information you provided us indicated that your
operation's animal population does not exceed the number set forth by 15A NCAC 2H .0217, and therefore does not
require registration for a certified animal waste management plan.
Under 15A NCAC 2H .0217, your facility is deemed permitted if waste is properly managed and does not
reach the surface waters of the state. Any system determined to have an adverse impact on water quality may be
required to obtain a waste management plan or an individual permit. You are reminded that a discharge of wastes to
the surface waters of the state will subject you to a civil penalty up to $25,000 per day.
Should you decide to increase the number of animals housed at your facility beyond the threshold limits
listed below, you will be required to receive approval from the Division of Water Quality prior to stocking animals
to that level. Threshold numbers of animals are as follows:
Swine
250
Confined Cattle
100
Horses
75
Sheep
1,000
Poultry with a liquid wastes stem
30,000
If you have questions regarding this letter or the status of your operation please call Sonya Avant of our
staff at [phone] ext 571.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens, P.E.
cc: Mooresville Water Quality Regional Office
Union Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Dtvtsfon of Soil and Water iConservation, -,Operation Review
� t �
Q�DMAon of•.Soif and Water Cn oservation - COnlpllanCC InSpeetlon
01)ivisio n of Water Quality Compliance Inspection
�. !'I ;,aOtheC,Agency' Operation ReVIeW
I'Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DS1V'C review . 0 Other
Facility Number Date. of Inspection
Time cal' I11spectiott 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted (Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 10 Not O erationaf Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .............eW�...: �!'`.`" ? . .............r/r!?� . Cotinty:.................l.��l i..Q..n..........................
Owner Namc: Ld . :. L.�.�....................................................... L'hone No:..............G C1..,�..
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................ritic:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:........ 715 -?-r............. a.. ....................0.. 0171.' .............................� �.� {.. ............
Onsite Representative:!Fr•oc'e— Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator:,......, /4,.r�.................l.:f.....................................,................................. Operator Certification Number:... �C.IP.l.. ...............
of Farm:
.........
ude Longitude • ' "
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
QZFccder to Finish
VO
❑ Non -Layer
IM Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons -Is ubsurface Drains Present JJO Lagoon Area JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)'?
Discharge uriginawd. at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-rnade?
b. fl'discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. 11' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
❑ Yes $dNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �,-No
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes )!Wo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? ❑Yes MNo
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier;
Freeboard(inches); ...................................................................................................................................................................................................
1/6/99 Continued on back

I9acility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, El Yes V No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Cl Yes C�No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
❑ Yes
)'No
Waste ApUlication
10.
Are there any buffers that need nrtintenanec/improvement'?
❑ Yes
)4No
1 l .
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
❑Yes
N.No
12.
Crop type ..............1!! t....................................................................................................................................................................................................
13.
r
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
$,No
14.
Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
❑ Yes
�XNo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
NNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
OYes
❑ 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
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
' ❑ Yes
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
UNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
ElYes
XNo
22,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
XNo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ItKNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
kNo
N.o:violations:or: deficiencies :were ni&� d: daring :thisyisit.. Y-ou w�ilfreceive not Earthier :.:
.. ...... ......
... .
eorrespgiideihce; a:�out; this visit.:: ::: :..::... .....: ::::: .. .::::: :
Comments (referto question #): j Explain any YES answers and/or any, recommendations or any other comments J
Use drawings of facility to better explam'situations. (use additional page's as necessary): f
r .
&,_r",,,Mj ke�o W +1Ae_ CXV6"-� �KCCISWAI rvx�r- Mose-w-S �tctkA& 6e\
z +Cetnn ► �cQ G. y 1w t l� h�� c� �o b� >� erwi, e4 p ri Dr- r I
�i� S Tr7 L�� � � W� Yl� 'i� tM�.•e-� a�� n•e� r.,.�% � � c�ic►�t� n-
�-b.s.,•�-
5
Reviewer/Inspector Name
to VI
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �� �� �� Date: `� 1 1/6/99

Draft - Revised January 20, 1999
JUSTIFICATION..& DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number Operation is flagged for a wettable
Farm Name: acre determination due to failure of
On -Site Representative: cl Part It eligibility items) Ft F2 F3 F4
InspectorlReviewer's-Name: s- 1�rLrLwj Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
Date of site visit: 3
Date of most recent WUP:
exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Annual farm PAN deficit: pounds
Irrigation System(s) -'circle #:1. hard -hose traveler; 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system w/portable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART 1. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
El Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D,* and D./D., irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 , 75% rule exemption as verified in Part 111. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail -the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11 - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part Ili).
PART II. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination.
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
bufferlsetback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
-small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part 111.

I
Draft - Revised January 20, 1999
Facility Number --
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT FIELD TYPE of TOTAL CAWMP FIELD I COMMENTS3
NUMBER NUMBER'S IRRIGATION ACRES ACRES %
SYSTEM
p 1 1
�R11SJ I ♦ .11 _i2_1,_ ..ter__ r�____J _ -I .f1
I., r.. �„J ul a,ra, �+ua�4rrc, ur frrru ,„u,,,ucl .a n,al �r u...cu n, Y,ca yr nwu u1,[u wciq �+�.F+�.1w„y u+r V!"4YYiY1�
and type of irrigation system. If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer % ill have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible, otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS'- back-up fields with CAWMF acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres gnd. having received less than 50%
of its annual FAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

OPTIONS BRANCH -- WQ Fax : [phone] Apr 21 ' 97 14 :13 P- 02/02
REQUEST FOR REMOVAL OF REGISTRATION
The following farm does not meet the 2H .0200 registration requirements. Please inactivate this
facility, on the registration database.
FacilityNtunber.
Farm Name:LI
Owner.P�
Mailing Address:
County:.,
This Operation is:
pasture only (no, confinement)
dry litter poultry operation
out of busincssfrto ants on site
closed out per MRCS Standards
—t}]1P513o1d�(lesstha, 250=s int, or
30,000-poultry with a liquid animal waste maaagctnent systcrn)
I'L
I am fully aware that should the number of animals :increase beyond the threshold limit or the
operation meats the 2H .0200 registration requirements for any reason, I will be required to
notify and re--registex with the Division of Water Quality.
Signature: Z:Iate,
Please return complete form to:
I)EHNR-DWQ
Water Quality Scenes
Camplissce Group
P.O. Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
R R-a197

AF
fAF
NCDENR
JAMES B. HUNTJR.
GOVERNOR
°:,j �.1NAYNE MCDEVITT •
�_�"SECRETARY
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
November 24, 1998
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Subject: Site Inspection
E. Moser Farm, Facility #-. 90-16
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Moser:
Mr. Alan Johnson of this office has been asked on several occasions about the
appropriate time and proper method to take soil and waste samples. Also, during his
inspections, he has noticed that while the storage capacity may be adequate in the
storage pond/lagoon, in some cases it was not at the level set forth in the waste
utilization plan. Mr. Johnson has also noted that some animal operations using
hay/pasture systems do not appear to be properly managing the hay crop in the waste
application fields. This letter is to highlight some concerns and provide some
general guidance for the animal facilities regarding the management of the storage
pond/lagoon and waste application fields. For more specific/detailed information,
please contact your technical specialist or your local agricultural extension service.
Be advised that should a farm be found violating its farm plan and/or have an
unpermitted discharge, besides facing civil penalties, the facility could be required to
apply for an individual permit. Currently, most farms are operating under a general
permit.
Waste applications
Just as you manage the animals at your facility, proper management of the
waste (lagoon/storage pond level) is important. The waste must be pumped from the
ponds at the correct time and provide for maximum utilization of the nutrients by the
crop. Remember, waste application rates in your farm plan are based on agronomic
principles, and assumes the waste will be applied when the nutrients are required
(e.g., applying waste to corn at tasseling or bermuda grass in November is of little
use for the uptake of nitrogen). Also, the established application rate assumes that
the previous crop has been removed from the field.
919 NORTH MAIN STREET, MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 29115
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED'I O% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Page 2
Grass and small grain crops grown for hay should be harvested in a timely manner. To
maximize nutrient uptake, as indicated in the waste utilization plan, and for highest quality, the
crop should be harvested at early boot stage (generally every 4 to 5 weeks). Small grain for
silage can be harvested in the soft dough stage when direct cut. Contact your agricultural
extension agent or technical specialist for proper guidance.
General Recommendations for Nitrogen W ApRlication for Common Crops:
• Small Grains: One-third (1/3) N at planting and remainder in late February or early
March.
• Corn/Sorghum: For facilities that pump and haul, N should be applied prior to planting.
For those facilities that irrigate, a split application with half at planting and the remainder
when the corn is 18 inches high.
• Fescue/Orchardgrass: Apply one-half (1/2) of the N in mid -February to March and one-
. �.
half (1/2) in mid -August to September.
• Bermuda grass: Establishing: 30 to 40 lbs N/ac at planting and 30 to 60 lbs N/ac when
runners appear (6 -8 wk. after planting). Maintaining: 50 to 60 lbs N/ac in April and the
remainder of the recommended amount in equal increments in June and July or after each
cutting.
.Finally, there have been instances where the amount of waste pumped (as shown in the
waste application records) from the lagoon/storage pond does not appear to agree with the
amount of waste produced by the animals. One would expect on an annual basis that the amount
pumped would be approximately equal to the amount being produced. For example, if a dairy is
generating 453,000 gal/yr in waste, then approximately 453,000 gallons of waste should be
accounted for in the waste application records over a year. However, there may be some
difference due to how low the storage pond was pumped, the number of cows being held in the
facility, or the amount of rainfall.
Soil analvsis (FREE)
Fifteen to twenty (15 to 20) soil samples per field (20 acres or less) is desirable. The
samples should be thoroughly mixed and sent in as one sample. Each sample should be pulled 4
inches deep for pastures and no -till systems and 8 inches deep for conventional tillage systems.
Taking samples during the fall is advisable. The state lab is not as busy at that time and
can provide a more timely turn around with the results. This is also a good time to apply lime if
recommended by the soil test. When liming is necessary, it is important that it be applied as
suggested_ Maintaining proper soil pH is as important (if not more so) than fertilizing to
maximize crop production.

Page 3
Waste samples/analysis ($4/sample)
The state lab now has. the capability to conduct analyses and provide the results within
two working days via the internet. Through the US Postal service allow seven days. Take
samples in a timely manner such that waste application rates can be based on the most recent
sample results.
Six to eight (6 to 8) samples should be taken around the edge of the lagoon/storage pond,
approximately 6 feet from the edge and 12 inches below the surface. These can be mixed to
make one sample. The sample should be refrigerated if it is not going to be shipped the same
day. Always mail waste samples in plastic containers.
For farmers who do not have to agitate the lagoon/storage pond prior to application, it is
strongly suggested that waste samples be taken prior to waste application. This will prevent the
producer from having to go back and complete the waste application record at a later date.
For farmers who apply waste to hay fields and pastures, it is strongly suggested that
waste samples be taken quarterly if the waste is applied anytime during the growing season.
If you have questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Johnson
or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex GIeason, P. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union SWCD
Non -Discharge Compliance Unit.
Regional Coordinator

Count
union
Owner
IEdward IAIoser
Nianager
Address
719 Trinity Cfiurch Rd.
Monroe Nr_ 128112
Location
Certified
Farm Name
Eawara ivioser v arm
�5one Number
764-9209
Lessee
F
Region
0 ARO @ MRO 0 WARO 0 WSRO
:OFRO ORRO OWIRO
................
kNVV'I� I EWT' '0­N'T'J4-&IT'Y­C'H* F,�4klkiil *•5'0".0'N­T'HE'RT.- * ACROSS• FROM• JC,N "OF -Sk-2,15,3,
.................... I—— ................................ 0 .......
Certified Operator in I
Backup Certified Operator
Comments
...............
............... .... ............
-6
oser
Date inactivated or closed
.................
M Swine [3 Poultry [3 Cattle [3 Sheep 13 Horses 13 Goats [3 None
Design Capacity
Total 1,150 Swin
SSLW 252,000 Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Feeder

A Latitude
Longitude
Start
ee e16.8
Technical Richard E Pigg
Specialis
ateg ator
p Request to be removed p Removal Confirmation Recieved
Higher Yields
Vegetation
Acreage
Other
Comments Basin Name: radkin
Regional DWQ StaffMMEMMM Date Record Exported to Permits Database

1
N.C. DEPT. O NVIKONMUNI', 11BALI,TH _...
&'NA=i�l.�I2�I,-�.Fi�OUItC�S
Q.�.O- A1iG-1_
--- R DlYl5..... Df mooing�_�
Mc
Ve
�_ n G

s�
f- tsp;
l3' 'Z
�ajfh.
M
NCDENR..
JAMES B. MUNTJR. s
GOVERNOR
'WAYNi� MCDEVITT .; ..�
SECRETARY
--
..'S�
wx w 9S a�\
.'ro.•" IU
r• ;
1
i
y
J
—+b/
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORE:SVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 31, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Subject: Notice of Violation
Animal Operation Site Inspection
NCGS 143-215.1 (a)
E. Moser Farm, Facility #: 90-15
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Moser:
Mr. Alan Johnson of this Office conducted a site inspection of your facility on
July 30, 1998. Based on the observations made during the inspection, this report is
being issued as a Notice of Violation (NOV) due to the following deficiencies:
• The construction of a ditch to carry waste from the swine house to the lagoon.
• The excessive growth of vegetation on the lagoon embankments.
• The leaks in the fan duct at the rear of the farrowing house.
• The seepage in the piping where the 8 inch pve pipe joins the ceramic pipe at
the lagoon.
• An inadequately marked pumping marker. If a drain pipe is to be used this
should be noted in your waste plan.
In light of your deemed permitted status, these deficiencies are a violation of North
Carolina General Statute 143-215.1.
It is requested that a written response be submitted to this office by August 15,
1998, indicating the plan of action for the deficiencies noted above. In responding,
please address your comments to the attention of Mr. Johnson. For technical assistance
please contact your local Soil and Water District representative.
919 NORTH MAIN STREET, MOORESVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28115
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMVLOYCR - SO9o' RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Page Two
Mr. Edward Moser
Be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from
taking enforcement actions for this or any other violations. If you have any questions
concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Johnson or me at (704)
663-1699.
cc: Union SWCD
Non -Discharge Compliance Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleason, P.
Ic Water Quality Regional Supervisor

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine O Cam laint O Follow-ug of DW2 ins ection O Follow -tie of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered #Certified [3 Applied for Permit © Permitted
[] Not Operational Last Operated:
/Date
Farm Name: ..............at W��t .........../.,l.. O.. f� � ......... County:.............1, .1T!%.l�S... t.:�........................ .......................
.......... ..... ✓YI
OwnerName: ..........................h 1r-'! .. ........ &4.s er.............................
Phone No: .......... 7. .. ......91...Z0.7................................
Facility Contact: .............................................. ... Title:.................,. .. Phone No:
MailingAddress: .....2Z. t..........I..r....!..►.,................... a..........0 cA..................
............................................. ...........
Onsite Representative:.......... 5,1.1.Gc.!r...........V..�11 d.S. fir'......
Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator:...... ............. D.. .? .......... I.................... Operator Certification Numbers... II.T.-O ....................
Location of Farm:
t.lC3n.�S......... rrn, .....,cv� ..... .SC�.....,� lS............. �C i:... s .... c,� ►ii 3' a� 5..-
0�'1...... i'.....4�.1,...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... .
Latitude - 0 ©1 FT-S7- 11 Longitude KED • 6 © 44
�Capacity`�`Popuiation
Design , Current Design Current
Design ; ''Current /
Swine
,Poultry' Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Pop»fation •
❑ Wean to Feeder'
❑Layer
❑ Dairy
F
Feeder to Finish
h
❑ Non -Layer
❑Non-Dairy
n
❑ Farrow to Wean
Other
«%
s
Farrow to Feeder❑
.
❑ Farrow to Finish`:
Total Design Capacity -�
�
e 6
S r.
❑BoarsxGilts
Total SSLW
Number 4f Lagoons / Haldmg Ponds
�f a, 3.
❑Subsurface Drains Present
❑ t.agoon Area
❑Spray Feld Area
RE
,..
dt 5.,.,
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
N V'
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
El Yes
J�(No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
-R ices
❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
I�No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUlnin?
(1. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
XYes
❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
,Kio
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
[f No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
1KV0
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
*No
7/25/97
0

Facility Number;
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
dOCNo
Structures (Lagoons fflolding fonds Flush Pits etc.
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ANo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): �.............................................................................................................................................................................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
&0
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
QkNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
)fyes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9.12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
I3.
Do any of the structures lack ade uate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
0Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
dWp
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ......................... G. k. ..... f... .G PI.'rN.! � 1�e.t..............................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
KIo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
JRNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
CKNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
5?LNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
$2 No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fait to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
Mio
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
b*s10
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
t5No
0 ° No.vWai tions ar deficiencies. were noted during this:visit.:You '01 r&ei ive,it'+urther
e6fr606MOO about (his: visit:• :
�ecLlr'ArCa` y3 e cicA'!�'tt.A. ' 1'e
~c r rc�. It kc 5 e c- ko 47-c r- to rl e- w d5 i 6!� `�.� ��� o t3 r` i S ciJ A;4
`foe- It/RCS /'-_4�rniC0'( ��.i�(e�Zwe,s, 14561
�r: IIJ � ,i k (
, I e- J` z, �t` mllv r2a-, - Va,f rcl w Z re__ b�no���
ber
PYOPe-dr 4i5ee 44.U�u
F �� t/eq e_4 Cirxr � n m er ' 4 6eK N
vrticur-�_e r- � s h e_eAL-i c�C,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:

State of North Carolina
'Department of Environment;
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Dear Mr. Moser:
(DaHNF;Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
August 13, 1997
Subject: DWQ Animal Waste Operations Site
Inspection Report
Moser Farm, Facility #: 90-16
Union County, NC
A site inspection of your facility was conducted on August 12, 1997 by Mr. Alan Johnson of
this Office. Because you have converted from a farrow -to -feeder to farrow -to -finish operation you
must be sure to maintain timely and accurate information of your waste applications (nitrogen and
volume). A review of this data should be done by December 31, 1997 to note any changes that might
be required in the certified farm plan. Also, maintenance on the swine house should be completed as
soon as possible.
Any further correspondence related to the subject inspection will be sent under separate
cover. Also, please be advised that North Carolina General Statutes provide for penalties of up to
$10,000 per day per violation as well as criminal penalties for violations of state environmental laws
and regulations. If you have any questions concerning this report, please do not hesitate to contact
Mr. Johnson or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gle /kn, 1. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union County SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ
919 North Main Street, ;* FAX [phone]
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 NvfC An Equal Opportunity/Affrmative Action Employer
Voice 704-663-1699 50% recycled/ 10°k post -consumer paper

® DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
p DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
9
- F
outine p omp amt p Follow-up o inspection o ow -up o review p ter
Date of Inspection `' j
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: 10 Registered p Applied for Permit
n Certified p Permitted
p Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Edward Moser Farm County: Utt ojx................................................. W.0...........
OwnerName: Edward .................................. Moser ......................................................... Phone No: .7.64-.92.09 ...................................................................
Facility Contact:...................................................... .... .Title: . Phone No:
Mailing Address: .7.19.Trinity-Chun:ch.Rd..................................................................... Moxime.NC ............................................................ 28112 ..............
Onsite Representative: Tom,Moser.................................................................................. Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Eft.ard..T............................. Moser ............................................... Operator Certification Number:1.6.67.1 .............................
Location of Farm:
,r................ ..... 1.......... ........... 1.... 4............................ ......,............ ....... ..a ....... �......-... ...... W........................
Latitude F—M70' 151' 19 «
7
MN�:',.MffWW!FI.'r!,IMN+WWH•IfViM�M.:i.NN1 MMWNINiYNN YM{N.'u VW:Nµ.....iNN.. {i"�f1iW�VY.s1
�:_':: :�:�� Lei ��3�!Ii•�'.ir�tYMiRiTb��.d'�w.���im�Ml�1t
!1 01 moll, 111li•
)e of Operation Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population •Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to .nus i
❑ arrow to Wean
® Farrow to FeedeF
250
Farrow to Finish
p Other
p Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Total Design Capacity
5, ": Total SSLW
,.--1s3 �
Design Current
Capacity Population
auy
❑ on- airy
250
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes T No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �o
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? []Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonsiholding ponds) require Yes ANo
maintenance/improvement?
4/30197 Contilrueaf on back
. 1;. .,,,, .lam ,

7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? u Yes >�10
8. Arty there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes �KNo
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
s.................. ............ .................... ....... ........ .... ........................... .......................... ............ .......................... ............. ................... I..............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes )(No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes XNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? XYes p 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 Iack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? X(Yes o No
Waste A1plicatignn
14, Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes 5<No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoofff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crap type Gf...................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes k No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? kyes p No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? XYes p No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? p Yes 0
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? p Yes 00
21, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? []Yes KO
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readiIy available? 0 Yes X10
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? p Yes JKNa
24. Does record keeping need improvement? XYes p No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, FaciWAssessment Unit
IV
Date: _F %Z kz
4/30/97
ace ity N umber: 90_4 Date of Inspection
Additional Comments'and/or..DrawingssT"�,,

!0
x State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources • 0
Mooresvifle Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor p E H N R
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
DMSION OF WATER QUALITY
September 15, 1997
Edward Moser
719 Trinity Church Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Subject: Certification/Notice of Violations
E. Moser Farm, Facility ##: 90-16
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Autry:
The deadline for the certified waste management plan to be implemented is December 31, 1997,
and there will be no extension of the deadline. With this in mind, this letter will touch on some of the
general components and issues that are of concern during an inspection.
As a certified, or soon to be certified, farm your files at a minimum must contain the following
information, and need to be available for review during the inspection:
Certification forms
Site diagram - showing fencing, streams, buffer zones
Waste application records/forms
Maps of acreage and irrigated fields
Waste utilization plan
Waste and soil analysis records
Emergency action plan and mortality & odor control checklist
Regarding waste application records, all information should be recorded. This includes (but is
not limited to) the field used, total minutes waste was applied (if required), the amount of waste irrigated/
hauled, the amount of nitrogen applied and the crop nitrogen balance. The crops and fields that are being
utilized for waste application must be specified in the certified waste management plan. For those
facilities that grow hay, the date when the hay is harvested should be recorded. If you feel the plan does
not allow you the flexibility you need, contact a technical specialist to have the farm plan modified.
For lagoons/storage ponds, remember that a freeboard of 12 inches plus an additional 5 - 9
inches (depending on location) for a 25 year/24 hour rain event must be maintained from the top of the
storage pond/lagoon. If there is an emergency spillway/pipe, then the level must be maintained to
compensate for a 25 yr/24 hr storm. A pumping marker must also be installed. This may be a pipe or
other structure that is already in the lagoon. Whatever the marker is, it must be prominently identified.
Aw,
919 North Main Strut, W FAX [phone]
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 N)af An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 704-663-1699 _ 50%, recycled/10°b post consumer paper

Page 2
The question often comes up as to what warrants a Notice of Violation (NOV). An NOV may
be issued for the following instances, among others:
a) inadequate freeboard,
b) inadequate land for waste application,
c) application on an unapproved crop/acreage,
d) discharge of waste from lagoon/facility,
e) excessive vegetation on the sideslopes of a lagoon/pond, or
f) other minor deficiencies.
Examples of a deficiency would be the waste or soil analysis forms not being up to date or the
application records not being filled out properly.
Please note, failure to submit the certification form by December 31, 1997, does not exclude you
from the responsibility of maintaining your storage pond/lagoon levels and waste application records.
Also, please be advised that North Carolina General Statutes provide for penalties of up to $10,000 per
day per violation as well as criminal penalties for violations of state environmental laws and regulations.
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Alan .Johnson or me
at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. Rex Gleas eeggional
Water Quality Supervisor
cc: Union SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
A7

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Edward Moser
Edward Moser Farm
719 Trinity Church Rd,
Monroe NC 28112
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Edward Moser Farm
Facility ID#. 90-16
Union County
Dear Mr. Moser:
LDF—:HNF;Z
N.C. DEFT. OF
ENVIRONP.1FNT, HEALTH,
& NATURAL RESOURCES
NOV 19 1996
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendatifiis60a�� rh`re'�-Blue- ��{��`�����bo�n' Stud
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North aar lirn�tr6'it��i 'Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 919I733-0026.
SiaPreston
A.oward, Jr., L.,ector
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Mooresville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
,v�0��
P.O. Box 27687,
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 7687
NTufru- An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 50% recyclecl/Ur% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention: _
Facility No.2jd 44C
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 10'V) . 1995
Time: �kaW
Farm Name/Owri(
Mailing Address:
County: t jt�UZ� _Integrator: _ Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location: Cg(v� A Q�CsciVvkr EL I (\\4\A.r C�\ .
-r
Type of Operation:Swine,PoultryTCattie_Design Capacity N umber of Animals on Site:
Latitude:. °
Longitude:
Circle Yes or No
Elevation: Feet
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) Qor No Actual Freeboard: k Ft. C-, Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes oQ Was any erosion observed? Yes o fo
Is adequate land available for spray? &s or No Is the cover crop adequate? oesr No
Crop(s) being utilized: cx�s� �G.0
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings?(Yes r No
100 Feet from Wells? G or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or Q)
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other vv
similar man-made devices? Yes or@ If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or(R)
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Signature k -r�_�