900055_PERMIT FILE_20171231

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Tommy Moore
2913 Rocky River Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Dear Mr. Moore:
EDIEHNF;Z
DMSION OF WATER QUALITY
August 13, 1997
Subject: DWQ Animal Waste Operations Site
Inspection Report
Tommy Moore Farm, Facility #: 90-55
Union County, NC
A site inspection of your facility was conducted on August 12, 1997 by Mr. Alan Johnson of
this Office. The facility was in good shape.
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 Gleason, P. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union County SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
G11J
919 North Main Street, 0 FAX [phone]
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 Nvf An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 704-663-1699 5T16 recycled/10°k post -consumer paper

iIR I; i F9'..
SWC
t w
�, ;,
nimal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQAnimal1 11f 1Inspection•
t �y?'A
i3' 6;,._. K •f�" iw.. ^Ili 1, 1
yy
p Routine p Complaint p Follow-up of DWQ Inspection p Follow-up o review p Other
Date of Inspection z_
Facility Number
Time of Inspection�: ,� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: 17 Registered p Applied for Permit
Certified p Permitted
p Not 0perahana Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Tommy F. Moore Farm
County: Union ................................................. MRO...........
OwnerName: T.ammy................................... mooze .......................................................... Phone No: 28380.7.3.......-----....................................................-•--
Facility Contact:.............`--.......................................................------..Title: ...... Phone No:
MailingAddress: 2913.Rucky.River..Rd........................................................................ Mon rme.NC............................................................ 2811Z ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: ................................................................................................... Integrator:
..............................................................
Certified Opera tor:TommyF............................. l&Oxe ............................................... Operator Certification Nuniber:1755,a .............................
Location of Farm:
i
............. ....................................................................................... ......................................................................... I "
Latitude ®0 4 «
Fype of Operation Design Current,
Swine ' Capacity. populatlon
p Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
p rarrow to can
® Farrow to ee er
150
p Farrow to Finish
p Other
Longitude
e Design " .,','Current ». Design Current .,-i
Poultry ' :�3 Capacity. population' ;Cattle: Capacity Populationlo
•h
Layer '` p Dauy
[] Non -Layer I on- atry
Total Design Capacity
g Total MW 7MOO
Number of Lagoons ! Holding Ponds , 0 u surface rains Present 10 Lagoon Area 10 Spray MeTaTlrea
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? 0 Yes T�p,'�T0
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes KNo
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? []Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes 0 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) 0 Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 0 Yes 1allo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes �kNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ,NNo
maintenance/improvement?
4130147 Continued on back

7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are th;re lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 S jIture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
.............3........................................................... ..........................1. .........................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
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 en Bring waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crap type ��------ t� . ...,1 f {ri l�. •----.......%� �... !�....
u Yes )<No
p Yes 9
10
p Yes p No
Structure 5 Structure 6
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For CertifiedacilitielOnll
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes �irNo
p Yes ONo
p Yes )No
Yes p No
p Yes )<No
p Yes ANo
p Yes ANo
p Yes x No
p Yes �No
p Yes ra'No
p Yes >io
p Yes )kNo
p Yes )No
Yes %Qo
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 ,p•` �. �'"
p ��'� ! !' o:d E!NNIFOUR
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facif! vissessment Unit 4/30/97
Facility Number: 90_4 Date of Inspection 0
Additio�a3"Gomdienfs�and/or`DrawinEss`"� > � �r
e

Draft - Revised January 20, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number - Po Operation is flagged for a wettable
Farm Name: /17evrlf- acre determination due to failure of
On -Site Representative:_ iyY41,714 /�?�� � Part 11 eligibility items) F1 F2 F3 F4
�T
Inspector/Reviewer's Name:jL0,1a�• �, Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
Date of site visit- �$'/Jc�7 exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP: 3 Annual farm PAN deficit: g�, pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle Irr. 1. hard -hose traveler, 2. center -,pivot system; 3. linear move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5, stationary spunkier system wlportable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable• pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an 1 or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D2ID3 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 sianed.by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part Ill. (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 1I1).
PART It. 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
buffer/setback 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 III.

Draft -Revised January 20, 1999
Facility Number
Part Ill. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBEW-2
TYPE of
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
T
FIELD NUMBER'
- hvdrant. pull. zone. or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers depending on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system , If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, ins pect odreviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operationwill be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER' - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS' - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres and having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 199B) 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.

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
Tommy Moore
Tommy F. Moore Farm
2913 Rocky River Road
Monroe NC 28112
Dear Tommy Moore:
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RE5CYURCE5
N.C. DEP'r. 4W
MNV[RONMENT, HEALTM
January 24, 2000 & NATURAL RESOURCES
FEB 4 2000
Glt<ISION OF INVIR8OMBTAL MAAASEMEAj
Subject: Removal of ReglIP&MLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Tommy F. Moore Farm
Facility Number 90-55
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, �p
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

�.
' " w Division of Soil and Waterton servation-Operation Review € F
O'Dtvlsion of Soil'and Water Conservation- Compliance Inspectiont'
1V]' Of Water Qll ]hty ComphanCe�InspeetiO,n P
,OOther Agency ,Operation Review,
'Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection O hollow -up of DSWC review 0 Other �
Facility Number J 5 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted WICertified © Conditionally Certified © Registered 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Faun Name: ..... .Ovf'�Git�t.s,! Ji!,Q.OV ?—.J. 91 ...t!tl� County: V� �.S�.i \....,.......
/ y:............LA .........
OwnerName, fii€�rtn 6/........^i,,.................................................... Phone No:.2..tC�..,3....'....�J..3........................................
Facility Contact : .................................................. .......... Title: .... Phone No:..............
Mailing Address: ... .'jl.-. ............%�4�. .. �t1.CJr......g.j.......................... ....... C}k�AfZ7t................ ....,..............................�Allz.......
Onsite Representative: ......... T, .44f..hl� ....... t. ,.. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:..... ...�s�.- ............
Location of Farm:
.atitude Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish JE1 Non -Layer 1E] Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
arrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑Gilts
El Boars Total 55LW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEI Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impact4
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance arm -€Wade`'
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If dischar-e is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
❑ Yes gNo
❑ 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 lei No
Waste Collection &'treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) 34? ................................................. ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
1/6/99 Continued on hack

S
Facility Numbe;,; -- Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes IQ&o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes $�No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes KNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes �ij
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markin+s?
❑ Yes KNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes j-No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
❑ Yes ',J�No
12. Crop type
........diP%L�. �.....�... .,.G .<.,t ...; .
..........................
13. 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 ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate wastc application equipment?
❑ Yes VNo
Required Records & Documents
17, Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes %No
t
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 ANo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ,KNo
r
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes %ONo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ E�No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes �] No
24. Does facility require afollow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes KNo
13- NA.VIohtlonS:Ordeficiern,ies .were na e'd. during this visit:. You "11'retreive nu further- .:.: .
core(,sporideitce: abbot: this visit............ . • . . . . • • ; . . . • • • . . • • • • • • • • . . ; • ; - ' • '
Comments (refer to question #i):' Explain any YES answers and/or any, recommendations:or any other comments .;` � + �i M
Use d" vings of facility.to,tietter explain situations. (use additional page`s as necessary)' ii
•tE
t
r 1
ill jp j[ri l
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
�I! r
E
Date: �f— G Cr 1✓
1 /6/99

NotJ
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
MOORESVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
November 24, 1998
Tommy Moore
2913 Rocky River Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Subject: Site Inspection
T.F. Moore Farm, Facility #: 90-55
Union County, NC
Dear Mr. Moore:
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.
9t 9 NORTH MAIN 9TREETo MOORESV ILLS, NORTH CA Ra LINA 28115
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN P-QUAL OPPORTUNITY /APFIRMATIV% ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% 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 Nitroeen A lira 'on for or mon ro s:
• 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 601bs 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 analysis (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 'n 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,
1 D. Rex Gleason, P. E.
'1 Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union SWCD
Non -Discharge Compliance Unit -
Regional Coordinator

Count
union
Owner
Tommy Moore
Manager
F-
Address
Location
Certified
Farm Name
I i ommy ju. iviLoore ju arm
Phone Number
1283-8073
Lessee
F
Region
0 ARO @) MRO 0 WAKU 0 WSHO
0 FRO C) RRO 0 WIRO
From. Monroe'take NC 260S, turn xigVon -Rorky. Jyver - Nfoare* fRTappFo�x.
.. arm. on '
............ .
..........................
jK-b,f itQe RKp g . ..
e -Rdand-L
............................................ ..........
...........
................................................................
Certified Operator in Charge Yommy F. Moore
Backup Certified Operator
Comments
Date inactivated or closed
....... ........
.... .. .......... .. . ....... ...
ESwine 13Poultry 13Cattle [3Sheep 13Horses [3Goats 13None
Design Capacity
................ S ... Meld
................ ...

Latitude
Longitude
p Request to be removed © Removal Confirmation Recieved
Higher Yields
Vegetation
Acreage
Other
Comments Basin Name' IYadkin
Regional DWQ Staff MMMMMIM Date Record Exported to Permits Database

`
Division of Soil and Water Conservation E3 Other Agency
E
Division of Water Quality
`t
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection / 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered gCertifted [3 Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated: .......
r
Farm Name: ................... ..Q4M.Ow........... ,w17e. . .. County:........... n.co........................... ..........
.............
Owner Name:..... ................... fly.............. Phone No:
FacilityContact: .................................................... :......................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
rr ,
Mailing Address: ....C........ �' °.4F% ................................................ -�%1.1.�...........
.Gt, try
OnsiteRepresentative:........................................................................................................... Integrator:..................................................................... ......
Certified Operator: ...... T�1................................. Operator Certification Number,.... .: , ......
Location of Farm:
... ..�.,....:,,,,,�..y........... ..,,. ..r,.�..........
.....4-. �. J.. Y.... ..........
iCl? �G.f� ....K,ver........ ........ F►r .,r.t*.�....... can....S.t .................... ......= l�. 5.....►+I.;.....t�.ta......C...i .((A4 ,......
LatitudeLongitude �•'"
tzenerat
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes $LNO
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes INo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes kNo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes �kNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes kNo,
mai ntenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Al No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ),�No
7/25/97

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes 1.No
Structures (Lagooins.Hold•ing Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes 1No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..!'�iYz.....'.......................................................
................................... ...................... :........
Freeboard (ft): �.
.....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes PVo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes KNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes 61*�lo
(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?
❑ YesA No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes CE!No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... !�A1.n�.Gl....................................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes KNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes %Z-No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes $No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes C�&o
20. Does facility �N
require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 1 0
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 56Ao
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes RNo
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ YesC1 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? • ❑ Yes WO
No.violatiails:or. derciencies. wer'enotid,dudfig this:visit., :You'Wili receive ni o' further : ;
. corre 000deke ab:oot Phis:visit ;
Kt—, Vk.ocq-e_,
w" 41s
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Mooresville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Tommy Moore
2913 Rocky River Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Dear Mr. Moore:
Al
Ll
IDEHNR
DMSION OF WATER QUALITY
August 13, 1997
Subject: DWQ Animal Waste Operations Site
Inspection Report
Tommy Moore Farm, Facility #. 90-55
Union County, NC
A site inspection of your facility was conducted on August 12, 1997 by Mr. Alan Johnson of
this Office. The facility was in good shape.
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 Gleason, P. E.
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: Union County SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
AJ
919 North Main Street, NK * FAX [phone]
Mooresville, North Carolina 28115 An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 704-663-1699 50% recycled/ 10°%o post -consumer paper

a DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ
■Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspectiont
� ; ` "` •'�"` is �..
p Routine p Complaint p Follow-up ot DWQ inspection p Tonow-up of DSWC review p Other
Facility Number
Farm Status: 17 Registered p Applied for Permit
■ Certified p Permitted
p of perational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Tommy F. Moore Farm
County: Union .................................................. MR0..........
OwnerName:.T.afo uW.................................. Moore ......................................................... Phone No: 28.1.80.7.3....................................................................
Facility Contact:.............................................................. ...Title: ... Phone No:
Mailing Address: 2.9URacky.Rixe:r..Rd.....
Onsite Representative:.....
Certified Operator:Top nW...F.,
Location of Farm:
Montr,ae. NC.
........ Integrator:
............................ 28112..
Moore ............................................... Operator Certification Number:17558 .............................
Latitude ®� ©� ©�� Longitude ® a
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes r0
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? © Yes )kNo
Discharge originated at: © Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p 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) O Yes ONO
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes 1allo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes rSeNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ,�No
maintenance/improvement?
4/30197 Continued on bank
�. , .. ,..., or• nn rr

7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? a Yes KNo
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes Q0
r r nHolding
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ❑ No
Freeboard (ft); Structure 1 Suture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
............r...uc1............................ ,..$................................................. .............. ...................................... ....................................... ...............................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes XNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes ONo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes *0
(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? AYes p No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? © Yes ANo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff en ering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type e4r.Ft�L.]eS ..... ....... .Zrt P................... ! .. r! ......................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ;OcNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? p Yes •QfNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? p Yes xNo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? p Yes KNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes +®'No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? p YesTo
For Certified Facilities Only 7
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? p Yes )kNo
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? p Yes <No
24. Does record keeping need improvement? Yes 4&o
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section,
Date:
Unit 4/30/97
Facility Number: 90_4 Date of Inspection

State of North Carolina
-� Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Tommy Moore
2913 Rocky River Rd.
Monroe, NC 28112
Dear Mr. Moore:
�EHNR
DMSION OF WATER QUALITY
September 15, 1997
Subject: Certification/Notice of Violations
T.F. Moore Farm, Facility #: 90-55
Union County, NC
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.
P.O. Box 29535. Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% 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 Iagoon/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 (704) 663-I699.
cc: Union SWCD
Facility Assessment Unit
Regional Coordinator
k1i
Sincerely,
Aex;61as
Aeg
"Water QualiI Supervisor

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Tommy Moore
Tommy F. Moore Farm
2913 Rocky River Rd.
Monroe NC 28112
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Tommy F. Moore Farm
Facility ID#: 90-55
Union County
Dear Mr. Moore:
EDF—= H N
N-c. T)r?T. ()p
ENVIR0N;d?-_'�fT, HEALTH.
& NATURAL R1aS0UitC! S
NOV 19 1996
DIVISION OF INHIONMENTAL MANA115111IT
INOORESVIlLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General 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 91gn33-0026.
SinaPreston
A, oward,Jr., P. for
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Mooresville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P,O, Box 27687, N
W
Raleigh, North Carolina 2761 1-7687 )a; An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

\1N
Site Requires Immediate Attention: _
Facility No. ` 0-.S 5
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 47- Z $ , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Own(
Mailing Address:
County: r j 1,J 1 n -✓ integrator Phone:
r_ Zg6)2.
On Site Representative: _ Phone:
Physical Address/Location: 5 _
Type of Operation: Swine-LPoultry_Cattle_Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:_Z S
Latitude:35 ° SS' _1�0 " Longitude:$D ° 3`]' 10 " Elevation: Feet
Circle SrNo
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches)rYes or No Actual Freeboard: _�Ft. CQJnches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o No Was any erosion observed? Yes o No
yAG
Is adequate land available for spray? or No Is the cover crop adequate?(Yes or No F�c �'es
Crop(s) being utilized: S (_�) e
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? Yes or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or(s)
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes o No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or�q 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 N�o
Additional Comments: P/-/) n/a 1 /W0 u/&1 19 W"n75 I
InspectorName S.q fA/C �QQ--
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Signatur , Z".,