150011_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA .�
Department of Environmental Qual

`,� '•-:s i ar,,.�„ � ram. :s�� .•: h:..: �t y��.y� -_k +'-.wr.,u
Lt
1�.
'scar,<i wrr +w ia"4nn.
'� -};. *�}�al! • 9 ..'!tl",-.=`W3�:1 �'•.`i^. AY!t �'� ��.}i:k'3 •`7FPwr.r�r

Oro
194

• k s.
�. �. , i ., t 71r
i
�� / '�`
� �
_.. .�

i
I - *100— a.Qm , , -

• A_ 1 —
• � `'a;.A. �' ., . _ \ `r : `:+mqA$74i..t�yY�M�t{�'i!Y�'�"�Si�'i'a-rbr .. �/W
IV

`3 rf 'Pat.

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ------------ —_____
Facility Number: 150011 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS150011 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Camden Region:
Date of Visit: 0412612006 _ _ Entry Time:10:45 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Belcross Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Phone:[phone]
Mailing Address: 203 W Farm Waj Gaston NC 278329125 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
1 mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158
Integrator:
Latitude: Longitude:76°08'12"
Question Areas:,
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Joseph J Balok Operator Certification Number: 25218
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Joseph Balok Phone:
24 hour contact name Joseph Balok Phone:
Primary Inspector: Joseph Gyamfi Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number : 150011
Inspection Date: 04/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Lagoon is in the process of being closed down.
Tachnical specialists are Messrs Dwayne Hinson and Jimmy Munden, bath at the NRCS Perquimans County Office. Mr Munden has
been on site since the closure began on Monday 4/24/06.
DWQ-WaRO was notified of the beginning of the lagoon closure by Mr Joe Balok on Friday 4/21/06, Incident # 200601251.
Fields receiving lagoon waste are dry, no run off or ponding observed. An aerway system is being used for waste application on field;
process combines broadcast and injection simultaneously, which is efficient especially for a high plastic (clayey) soils.
Work was called off yesterday 4/25106 due to rainfall, and scheduled to resume today 4/26/06.
Please have your technical specialist complete the Lagoon Closure Form and submit to DWQ Raleigh when closure is completed.
(May wish to mail a copy to DWQ, Washington Regional Office).
Page: 2

Permit: AWS150011
Inspection Date: 04/26/2006
Owner - Facility. Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 150011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,240 0
Total Design Capacity: 1,240-
Total SSLW: 536,920
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon PRIMARY 19.50 55.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number: 150011
Inspection Date: 04/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges $ Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other n.
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ n Cl
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Cl
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
Cl
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
■
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
■
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
14. Are there any required buffers, setbacks; or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
■
improvement?'
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
❑
❑
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
Cl
Page: 4

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Inspection Date: 04/26/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 150011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applicatign
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
❑
❑
■
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
■
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
❑
❑
■
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
■
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
Cl
Cl
❑
■
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 6

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Feel IIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Facility Number: 150011
Inspection bate: 04/26/2006 Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? n
n
n
■
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
■
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
■
I__..__
Yon
Nn
NA
NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number: 150011
inspection Date: 04/28/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No. NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWo of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ M Q 13
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number, 72QO38 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS729 58 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for V1slt: Other County: Perauimans Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/03/2006 Entry Time: 11050 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Willow Qmh Earm Owner Email:
Owner: W C Elliott
Physical Address.,
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
4 miles west of Hertford, on S.R. 1113, Great Hope Church Rd.
Phone: [phone]
Latitude: 36°12'20" Longitude: 76°32'3 "
Question Areas:
il Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
jj Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: William C Elliott Operator Certification Number: 17732
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Billy Elliott Phone:
Primary Inspector: Joseph Gyamfi Phone:
Inspector Signature: ' Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Megan Hartwell
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
- Farm was accepted for the NC Swine Floodplain Buyout Program in 2003.
- DWQ Washington Office was notified of the lagoon closure by Mr. Carl Dunn DWSC-WaRO.
- DWQ staff Joseph Gyamfi and Megan Hartwell accompanied Mr. Carl Dunn to facility to witness the closure of the two lagoons on
3/3/2006
- Closure form must be completed and signed by the landowner and a technical specialist. Please completed form to DWQ-Raleigh,
and a copy to DWQ-Washington Regional Office.
- Lagoon #1 has been pumped to the sludge level, sludge is continuously being agitated with recycled water and pumped to
designated fields. Lagoon #2 has not been pumped yet.
- Contractor estimates he would get to the bottom of lagoon #1 on Monday, 3/612006.
Page: 1

Permit: AW5720038 ' Owner - Facility: W C Elliott Facility Number: 720038
Inspection Date: 03/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Other
Page: 2

Permit: AWS720038 Owner - Facility: W C Elliott Facility Number: 720038
Inspection Data: 03/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
I
Q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
❑
❑
■
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
❑
❑
■
,or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
Q
Cl
❑
■
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
■
improvement?
Waste Application Yea
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS720038 Owner • Facility: W C Elliott
Inspection Date: 03/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 720038
Reason for Visit: Other
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
.
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
❑
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
. ❑
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
❑
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS720038 Owner - Facility: W C Elliott
Facility Number : 720038
Inspection Date: 03/03/2006 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Other
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
Q
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
■
23. If selected, did the facility fail to Install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑
❑
❑
■
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
■
25. Did.the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
■
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
■
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
❑
Cl
■
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

u
Permit; AWS720038 Owner - Facility: W C Elliott
Facility Number: 720038
inspection Date: 03/03/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Other
Otherlssues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

❑ Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency ------- ___
Facility Number: 150011 Facility Status: Active Permit: 6WS150011 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Operations Review Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ - County: Camden Region: Washington
Date of Visit: Q313012005 Entry Time:09:00 AM Exit Time: 10:30 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Belcross FarmOwner Email:
Owner: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 203 W Farm Way Qaston NC 278329125
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°21'00" Longitude: 76°08'1 "
1 mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues Technical Assistance
Certified Operator: Joseph J Balok
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 25218
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Joseph Balok Phone:
24 hour contact name Joseph Balok Phone:
Primary Inspector: Martin Mclawhorn Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number: 150011
Inspection Date: 03130/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
*WUP dated 9/23100
*Reviewed IRR1 and IRR2 records.
*Lagoon freeboard level/rainfall recorded weekly with drops in lagon consistent with irrigation events.
*Need to start using new forms.
19. COC not on site.
37. Left Request for Removal form with Mr. Balok.
*Facility has been depop. since Aug 04.
44. Camden SWCD in process of writing lagoon closure plan. Until lagoon is properly closed, maintain proper lagoon freeboard level
as requireed by permit.
*Waste analysis dated 12/20/04 liquid 0.83, sludge 9.1
7/19/04 liquid 0.98
*Soil test dated 115/05 for 2004 crop year. sample BEL 12-14 requires one tan lime per acre.Cu and Zn within guidelines.
7. Need to mow lagoon dike walls to allow for routine and visual inspection.
21. Missing waste analysis to cover irrigation events during May 2004'on corn.
*This inspection serves as confirmation no animals on site.
Page: 2

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - FaclIIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number: 150011
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
W Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,240 0
Total Design Capacity: 1,240
Total SSLW: 536,920
Waste Structures'
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon PRIMARY 19.50 25.50
Page: 3

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - FaclIIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Facility Number : 150011
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges,8 Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
Cl
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4
f

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - FaclIIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Facility Number : 150011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
Cl
Crop Type 1
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land -application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
Cl
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
■
❑
•❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - FaclIIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc Faculty Number. 150011
Inspection bate: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application? ❑
120 Minute inspections? ❑
Weather code? ❑
Weekly Freeboard? ❑
Transfers? ❑
Rainfall? ❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly? ❑
Waste Analysis?
■
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment(NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
■
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
Cl
❑
■
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
■
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■
❑
❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 6

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Inspection pate: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
therissues
.................. .... .... ....
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Technical Assistance
......_.................................................................... .
Needed Provided
34. Waste plan revision or amendment
35. Waste plan conditional amendment
36. Review or evaluate waste plan wlproducer
37. Forms need (list in comment section)
38. Missing components (list in comments)
39. 2H.0200 re -certification
40. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (POA)
41. Irrigation record keeping assistance
42. Organize/computerization of records
43. Sludge evaluation
44. Sludge or Closure plan
45. Sludge removal/closure procedures ,
Facility Number: 150011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
■
❑
❑
❑■❑.❑
❑
■
❑
❑
Yes
No
NA
NE
Page: 7

W
Permit: AWS150011 Owner - Facility: Wms Farms Of NC Inc'
Facility Number: 150011
Inspection Date: 03130/2005 inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Technical Assistance
Yes No NA NE
46. Waste structure evaluation
❑
❑
47. Structure needs improvement
❑
48. Operation & maintenance improvements
❑
49, Marker check/calibration
❑
50. Site evaluation
❑
Cl
51. Irrigation calibration
❑
52. Irrigation system design/installation
❑
53. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
54. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
J
55. Wettable acre determination
❑
56. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
Cl
57. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
n
❑
58. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
59. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
❑
Page: 8

Permit: AWS150011 Owner - FaclIIty: Wms Farms Of NC Inc
Facility Number; 150011
Inspection Date: 03/30/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Technical Assistance
Yes No NA NE
60. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
61. Buffer improvements
❑
n
62. Field measurements (GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
63. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
64. Waste operator education
❑
❑
65. Operation & maintenance education
❑
66. Record keeping education
❑
n
67. Crop/forage management education
❑
68. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
69. PLAT Assessment
70.Other
1 ❑
List Improvements made by Operation
Improvement 1
Improvement 2
Improvement 3
Improvement 4
Improvement 5
Improvement 6
Page: 9

0 Division of Water Quality
ODivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency 11
Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time:
r
Facility Number
10 Not Operational O Be
IPermitted,M Certif d 0 Conditionally Certified I] Registered Date Last Operated or ✓ids Above Threshold:
Farm Name: S 'y'I'`�f _____ County: OS-2)
� "lv�
Owner Name: _ fJ_ t_ 1 I .t3 fTG 4� ' " Phonc No: �1 S-7}
%
Mailing Address: -- P �1 1,Ldt►i�., _ - 23 3—)
V
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: r 1 i"ll-) . 2nd
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a 06 0 « Longitude 0• D1 44
Design Current
awule Uapacity ro ulanon
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
P ultry Capacitv Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer PC
Dairy
❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other - l_
Total Design Capacity
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
No Liquid Waste M
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
Total SSLW
L
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
Structure 5
❑ Yes IVNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
�No
❑ Yes
q No
❑ Yes
No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: -- % Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes �'N0
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes [io
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? JQ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ANo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yesli'No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes UNo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ FrozenfGround ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13: Do the receiving crops AFwith those design"at d in the Celt filrdaAnimal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ro
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Odor issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below �0.y.,es=9 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes P.:A°To
Air Quality representative immediately.
,.�,..�:!:�::,"i"?ij'.;„! i ;.<,S:J;iI"..r J€ '�i€flz..=is3'f.. ^�>Grj"...m«:,s ..a33.sig:...t.;•t;€<33:�I�sJ i�l ,_.,„ ,,:C ,:jai ..•€-"��:Et€,:. ,°�`.4";1Ni=.a'.-. 'kk �{;at� € ,-7 tsl:i i;til
Comraruts (refer tfr gneshtc{) €aacpisiuu sny,YFS.answers anri/p €s'{ect►�tioas 'vr={y o#ntr eanmeet { , .4.,
k -S,. t " € s €.a 8 8-,F S M� i !'� `fi }�
Use drawungs�of fatty tg betr,expla3n sitivatxw>s; {nse addlhvnal pans;as;necessttry)�{€a'
'. n �#i, ,; {'> €-{; �€`� s �ItR'¢ a. .i' - 6' u.. ,•_ €! E {. casrr� c E€3 i § c' t3 C; . f ¢ y i+. �., .�a i € Field Copy ❑Final Notes
,a��r�:ssi�.. i...o-•`��k. ii. �'Ya�,..,rld, ui�4,�i�.
W 7/10 tn/
//0 t1 L'I D. I �D '
oC.(' ,1
3/A/°3
Soy 1� r1 /3��3 tj
i'
v
ReviewerAkspector Name r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: R� b
12/12/03 Continued

Facility Number: 1 Date of Inspection I Ili/J�i!
Required Records & Documents
21. pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
TNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
1
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
'No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
0,Yes
No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard J�Waste. Analysis [ISoil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
.� No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
9No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
iel discharge, freeboard
(� g , problems, over application)
Yes
` No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
(3No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) e�-ATo
3I. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? jades --to
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? es o
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? `des—¢TQo
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? .E3 Y" 43--No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. -40_Yx4—B'No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ I20 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113 g correspondence visit.
-- - vrsrt.
o violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further eo ondence about tlitrs
Ad V.,
� �r ska �e:�, xs�,uxrza::;.xr..w� ��ar,:.rt�rr..,......� _,.� �'n+ �...,�,�s..�+ 5 .�.T��, ,.�:u sN„•�h�{,:5's!I,�r..E;: �.:u,...:�i'?v'���
{,tnti h%sc P4i 4 Vex 4w,t 4­1 5
CY5 J l t j i� tj
4,l - ` �, �� �; Fee& t
S � 5 ���>
wry � ems,
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 15 - 11 Date: 15104 Time: 1 1330 Time On Farm: 60 WARO
Farm Name Belcross Farm County Camden Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 203 West Farm Way Gaston NC 27832
Onsite
Representative Joe Balok Integrator INortheastern Carolina Farms
Twe Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Worse --7771
Purpose Of Visit
Q Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Ca of -it Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
1240
497
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier 1 11�
Level (Inches) 1 22
CROP TYPES lCom Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL. TYPES Ro
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 15 - 11 Date:
3/5/64
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
El 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
El
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30.21-1.0200
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
® 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerizatlon of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Latelmissing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39.Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
ReAulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure Irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑ "
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop oval uationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluatlon
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 15 - 11 Date: 1 315104
MMENTS:
`Waste analysis dated 2/10/04 nitrogen is 0.98 Ibs11000 gallons
612103 nitrogen is 1.2 Ibs11000 gallons
3/24/03 nitrogen is 1.0 Ibs11000 gallons
'Soil test dated 11/13/03 Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines. Lime was applied at recommended rates during Oct 2002.
'Wheat crop in good condition.
18. Missing waste analysis to cover irrigation events on wheat for Nov. 03 and Dec 1-9 03. Unable to answer #4 concerning
over application for this crop.
18. Missing waste analysis to cover irrigation events after Aug 2, 2003.
"See DWQ insopection dated 6/26103 referring to waste analysis and soybean crop.
IRR1 and IRR2 records were made available for review.
'Lagoon level is recorded wekly.
"Lagoon level < 19" and not reported to DWQ.
619103 18"
6/16/03 17"
6/26103 16"
6/30/03 15"
7/10/03 16"
1113103 16"
1219103- 18"
1 /21 /04 18"
1 /27/04 16"
213104 15"
219104 15"
2/16/04 14"
2/23/04 14"
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Martin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 319104 Entered By: Martin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

® Division of Water Quality
QDivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency 11
Type of Visit q) Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Vlslt ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time: 2 r'
Facility Number rO Not Operational 0—Helow 0—SeloThreshold
j� Permitted)6 Certified ® Conditionally Certified ®Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: County: c .__.,
Owner Name: l..l t F1 t a +`�-C G �r�4 a�/ �� Phone No: r 3
Mailing Address: _
Facility Contact: Title: 'Phone No:
Onsite Representative: - e- b Integrator: f ^� 1
Certified Operator: `� Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ° 4 14 Longitude • 1
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Ca aci Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer
I
I
❑ Dai
❑ Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer
❑ on -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ILJ Subsurface Drains Present IILJ Lagoon Area JLl Spray Field Area I,
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Li quid Waste Management System
Disebarees & Streiini Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes r7 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other r �
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes allo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. 1s storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway KYes ❑ No
Structure I Structure ure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: ^ I/
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: S" =
Date of Inspection 31
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
�b
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding M PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
� L G
12. Crop hype
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc,)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? Q ! i_rrigaI fop,, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicab a sl etback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [M No
❑ Yes MNo
Z4 Yes ❑ No
J^ 30 S
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
39 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes A0 No
❑ Yes JW No
❑ Yes 50 No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 5,0 No
ISk
❑ Yes
�No
Cl Yes
❑ No 914
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
9 No
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copv ❑ Final Notes
0
N, � � 1
� � Irilak
1
%
)
pl,�t
i I - Tk3,,..4- t 3a
tZ ag m4-L6,4 oa. W
.
Reviewer/Inspector Name I S go
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: reW -
Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: I Ill —
Date of inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ,® No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes I No
❑ Yes O] No
❑ Yes [:]No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
1 ]—
14Clk 'ZqIli,�z
4c"
ww__AA ei�+1i � � n� � � ti'►,s..r �� �✓� c,,l I �1 � � �`�'� I'� .
7) ik r v% eeA J Le-
vl 5 � � � 1 a►-► s,
7 ,1
r r
4,.% 1 1 pk (-trI -Toe , f�k o--� 17 W0.5
-3 ,1 le- 3/ xW 3 a T -r
�K � Cw�r�p''s ►i tJ { �� �� ram? � ?-�YA.� -� 1�
NFtJ
h'1 • '7 ✓J�'! I" "
�
0i✓ 1'��✓ J
,,Mf ���t J"'j
t r �.1/ P�,,,I'
�/� ■ (_G •L� W �1. ,,1 1��� �,/ / •1`• V•11'II �i Pu fi�iWi l-`'
S 1 � � � ' , 1\_ ��'�'� /� 1A A 1 {ii[�1� �l vJ� Iw' - S Y"
CVS+�y`� 1��'/T�'
4,,,, ).,
A�Cy�
�G"►'�� � �+�'1'YU� 4� �''�`� _
Q.11 S 4w
05103101 If/ 0 j wad
eo 4 f r x w:�l l,� k �
U tr r�
JoQ��a� n•'�-,,`{ � (,J�1�� �- `FL-.'�S �'.�5 0 ��bcr9,. s Will ���•► .

❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
1240
1185
Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number Date: 2/121Q3 Time: 1 1200 Time On Farm: 90 WARO
Farm Name Beicross Farm County Camden Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address PO Box 865 Moyock NC 27958
Onsite
Representative Joe Balock Integrator INortheast Caroiina Farms
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry .❑ Cattle ❑ Horse 77771
Purpose Of Visit
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaintllocal referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Capacity Population
❑ Layer
[3 Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERALQUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, []yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding []yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 20"
CROP TYPES 1corn Soybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Ro
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/1 Q/03

Facility Number 15 - 11 Date:
2/12/03
PARAMETER
4 No assistance providedfrequested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
Waste Plan Conditional
❑
❑
[]11. Level in storm storage
26. Amendment
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
[]13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components [list in comments]
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >=10% & 10 lbs.
15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
31. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
32. Organ izelcom puterization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
33. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
34. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
[122. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
35. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
36. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
37. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
38.Operation S Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
39. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Reaulatory Referrals
40. Site evaluation
❑
❑
Referred to DWQ Date:
41. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
1❑
❑ Other...
42. Irrigation system designlinstallation
El
Date:
43. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
44.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
45. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
46. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
47. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
48. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
49. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
50. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3.
Si. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
52. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
53. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
54. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
65. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
56. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
67. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
58. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 1 S - 11 pate; I 2112103
COMMENTS:
'Need to lower lagoon as weather and field condition permit and by following guidance from waste plan.
'At time of inspection there Is not a current OIC.
`Soil test dated 4/5/02. Several spray fields require more than one ton lime per acre. These requirements need to be met.
and Zn within guidelines. Due to wet field conditions, soil test for 2003 have not been taken.
`Waste analysis dated 1 /16103 nitrogen is 1.0 Ibs11000 gallons
7/23/02 nitrogen is 1.1 ibs/1000 gallons
3/6/02 nitrogen is 1.2 Ibs/1000 gallons
'Records are complete and balanced with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
'Lagoon level is recorded weekly.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IlVlarbn McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
3 03/10/03

Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection p Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other 13 Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 7/1$/2002 Time:
p Not Operalionalp Below Threshola
Permitted M Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Belcross Farm County: Camdea............................................. WARO.......
Owner Name:
Williams Farms of N.C. Phone No: 252-435-6930
MailingAddress: R0,11bx.416........ •.................................................................................... Moyorzk..NC...... ..................................................... 279.58 ..............
FacilityContact:...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: dnseph. Balok............................................................................. Integrator: Nortb.Fast.Cafalma.Farms,.Iur...................
Certified Operator:daacph.I. ............................... Bea..........
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Nu m be r: 252.19...
mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound r . 158 t
w
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p horse Latitude ®• ©' ®" Longitude ®• ®' ©"
'Design a Currents x '4 Designs i 'Current1+ Design,Current
,
;M1 "Point y �,� n, Cattle Swore t
�Ca aci l?o ulat�on� � IT flCaPacify Pgpulation
^,5 r }Ski".icapac�tyPopulationti
can ko ee ceder ayer, airy
p
El p
p on ayer p Non -Dairy
{i
��
w ..1,'i., r,,..,1::+...r,°�La>. `•Y_4 .S. !w wf ..5
:.Feedert
-
' , 5 ' ;:Total DeSign-'C•ava'aty ] 1,240
F,
TotalfSSM 536,920
;Number of L'iigoons
❑ u snr ace rains resen � Lagoon Area p pray ye rea
HpIdin ondsal Salad Tra s
rCk ', p o iqu� as a anagemen ys em
p ee er to mis
® arrow to can
p Farrow to
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Discharges &Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: 0 Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? [3 Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes p 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) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [3 yes ®No
=—Waste=Collection=&=Treatment-- --- ---- --- - - - _--
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ®Nq
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ......... j.... S.l)............................................. ....... ................................... ... ..... ............................ ...................................,....................................

Facility Num6er. 15—I1 Date of Inspection FTNgwm
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes H No
M. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & sail sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes H No
p Yes ® No
p No violations or deficiencies were noted urmg this Visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Ca�nmetits� (refer to5quest,�onr#1Explampan" y YES answers acid/or ail! iec6mmendation5°or;anyothereoiniaients' i
� "= U dfawin
s lot facilit to better latnsitua#i ❑Field Co Final Notes
gy� p ons j{use adilit!onal pages-asinecessarli.
- 4 ? i. X h '. k' �a Copy ❑ k .
r.*p >,{{ Aj a ,�
x i L ykJ�r �r 3 �� „
Yl�..l.wr.?.,f.a..%:�a �,, �' �
w'} �`y�(. 1� i s.,Y1 l�. 7,,. _.
P:�m2'....P1:W'.�S`�,tl �, z�.....,^'[',. i. MA #xYY�". �A"�"'�.� d'�', iY i�yrxy 'P r.i,t
M YZ:,.Yi.,4i_�.i'Y•3'4i1''u1.:;..."...ti Md r.i. _
Waste ate 7 5 01 with 1.2 1 s 1000 gal.w.
12/21/01 with 1.1 lbs/1000 gal.
3/6/02 with 1.2 Ibs/1000 gal.
19. Missing 2001 soil test.
* Soils test dated 4/8/02 with lime required. Make a note of when and how much lime is applied by third party crop
_- amger_(Frank Williams),
* Wheat crop was sprayed or chemically burned. The nitrogen that ...... (CONTINUED ON PAGE 3)
Reviewer/Inspector Name entered!liyyAnn Tyndall`Y5 ; A' : �i'
Fr
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05103101 Continued
aci i y Number, 15_11 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes Ig No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No

€,O Division of Water Quality.
- .Division of Soil and Water Conservation
t p Other.Agency
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other 13 Denied Access
Facility Number © [Mile of Visit: 2I8/2o02 Time- llll}
p Not Operationalp Below Threshold
■ Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operatt:d or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Belcross Farm Countv: -Ctuau Rm............................................. :i'.!'.ARO.......
Owner Name: Williams Farms of North Phone No: 252-435-6930
MailingAddress: P.(Q..l ox.4.16.............................................................................................moy.ogIs...I.Y.C.........:................................................. 2.79.59........
°.....
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:.................................................... ... Phone No: ............................................................
Onsite Representative:Jaseph..Salok............................................................................. Integrator: North.East.Carnliaa.fhr.[u.1.nc.....................
Certified Opera tor:JaseplU................................ Raluk.........
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:2518..........................°„
N Swine 13 Poultry [3Cattle [3Horse Latitude ®• ©` ®" Lon;itudc ®• ® ©
Design Current Design" 'Current; „ .., Design Current
S ..Capacity Population 'Poultry, 'Capaelty Population ',Cattle Capacity Population
„wine,
p Wean to veecier
p Feeder to Finish
® arrow to Wean
13 Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
13 Gilts
p soars
p Other
Total Design Capacity ; 1,240
Totali,'SSLW 536,920
i
t3 ' Lagoon p pray ie Numbea� rea
,14oldingPond&7;Salid'Tra s�� No Liquid Waste Management ys em
Discharp,es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: I7 Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes 13 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. noes discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Watei s of the State other than from a discharge? 17 Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identiticr:
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ............... 29............... .................................... ................................... .................................... ..,................................. ...................................

ace lity N um ber: 15_11
I),11V of 111spectiou
7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? [3 Excessive Ponding I] PAN 0 Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
p Yes
® No
p Yes
M No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
M No
p Yes
M No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
U No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plat readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
M Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes M No
In No vio a ions or deficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
'Comments (refer to'question #) ' Ext'latn any YES ans►vers an'd/or�any'recorttmendafions of oily oth_'er cotritnents°'a <'� 3
Us�e'6aWingg`pf fadlity;to better`explain'situations.Iuse�additional,� pages as necessary)" =^ �. �.
a CI Field opy Final Notes
*Wettable Acre Recheck was comp ete.
*Due to past problems with runoff from fields, Mr. Balok has changed irrigation gun ring size to compensate for problem. Ring in gun
is 0.97 and travel speed has been increased. Suggest have irrigation system re -calibrated.
*Waste analysis dated 7/5/01 nitrogen is 1.2 Ibs/1000 gallons.
19. Missing soil test for 2001 crop year.
*Soil test for 2002 crop has been taken but no results.
*Lagoon Ievel is being recorded weekly.
*Wheat crop was chemically burned down, nitrogen applied was deducted from soybeans on IRR2
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin Mduawhorn€r '
1$ t j
e 3'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05/03. 01. .
Continuer!
Vacility Number: 15_ll
Dale of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 13 Yes p No
liquid,level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, 13 Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? 13 Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes p No
' -; , .,
?.Incinerate
,
A,
19. •there,is not a waste analysis to cover irrigation events on soybeans dated 9/3/01. �^
* *Remember to, stay within crop window for soybeans as listed -in waste plan.
7. Some minor rodent activity on inside dike walls of lagoon. Need to keep vegetation low
on dike walls to -be able to monitor.
Need to eradicate rodents,
I
.
1
S.
.
,
ru
,l
r
I
rl

c
5/2
Facility Number Date of Visit: 1111--- i'imc: 1:2Q
p Not Operational p Below I hreshold
■ Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..........................
FarmName: Belcross Farm County: Cam en ............................................. .W.ARQ.......
Owner Name: Williams Farms of North Phone No: 252-435-6930
MailingAddress: PQ.RoxAl............................................................................................ Moyack..N.0 ........................................................... 179.SR ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
Onsfte Representative: dmsepth.20ok.............................................................................. Integrator: W..illRams.Earms..oLLiC,.Inc.............................
Certified Operator: JDsepkJ............................... Balolc.................................................. Operator Certification Number:252A ............................
Location of Farm:
N Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ®+ ©� 0 Longitude ®• ®i ©_
Design , , Current
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
0 arrow to ee er
❑ Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current; Design E, Current:; '�
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity::' Population
❑ Layer p atry
Non -Layer p on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
'Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Brains Presen[3 Lagoon Area p pray je
Holding' Ponds.I.Solid4eaps ❑ o iquiWaste ManagementSystem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: C3 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 Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [3 Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No .
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches) : ................46-

IFacility Number: 15_11
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes p No
p Yes ®N o
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management PIan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
In No violations or deliciencies were nofed urmg this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): 13 Field Copy p Final Notes
4112/01 with 1.7 Ibs.N/1000gal.
* Soil Analysis has been performed and are awaiting results according to Mr. Balok.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Vinson ;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: %at

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 15_11 Mite of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below 0 Yes 13 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? 13 Yes ❑ No
'f .a: -'; wa '•..•fir,, + ��7Y.d. d 3 _ r 1 �sT*a ; y'i,'4 u n' `r�^ ' p,�rr r, �r.�"1,,�{ k , r'-r, r •v :i L, s ii :nrvur;K-o;. -• � ' l .r
FR „ij�yi�i rT', f •%r bT.F Y ,�.7 i r,'F. %�i `M; �"�*�-r +�4^ rs LH.,n�y -•7� ?A, R 1'
K f h}} r•�r,;(X., h 'i F4 Irr,a Li ,i :' �i�'�f L� ,iT
�" cr e !}r. tt� 3.ri r. �� Y it.. t` ,y-
• h d LL 'h
Y it" � � •. u"'Fs�' �`3s;;,�K�"^hrsk+,� t' r Cn � '! * P Y i t'•�'�.7 1 r' e � _' *.Yv i � .� ,,.
,� F ky- e r ir'W`a �' rr iy-1r r',� , ,-,a,��-'+ j".e�- v w- h rk y. r�r:1 t �� - i•.
:'�,� �'. ',:, �,'�. �: rb. 1 x '", 4 t' 'r, Hs,. �+.✓ �a"f^rya^k k}�. L � � t � � ' r ..r.. r yi_
.... "1_ xis, a. Yr "•'..iK.". •...,. �F1' '
' k' U t, ,J.-j' c,i �-.as4a�,, � y. t'a s � .a`:+5 R "a. S �.. 'r' .zr-•,
.. .. ! r.' .!� r• SY� y.%,f . '-'.Y .R 1' ` _ 'f t � y .. �a� :fe r S 1
1s S n[,. v.Y •^ • S _.a q, y '�•v'+f 's _ -i }.I. M i
s.•', �rti _ i- ! f7 - i 's * s, .tip. 1 '��+. S z 3 4 S r -Ii
4V R. r R. ,tra '+3� "ti T �' ��r,t� ; � �' s .� �,� a➢t � "� "ire �`4 '-f�$'�i.� 5'�i,p � i'�"} t
�rt y Vim+ iR a k
c-<
t lru�2�
t•,• r i•k'%iray,.j� �rsy !7
r F � � r �r -}>lt r3• r.i �• r R � - I' r�. , s Y � 1 � q - -
-
dF�rF•,y'' �4Ir. r L 3'rS ,1 6 1 t t jrr .,,i y- Y- s
� 1 tt .1 ra. * { � .� 7 t- r F,'�k t u�;� rr• t� �
1 c
1 •'5 .y n rt.! i'1F'-i S''' x4• .�'1 f� i 5r "9....ri `" 71 MS 3 1' Nt �.SF t _ lit i -
'4 r� s, 3y '. _ , R''t,.'.•r� 7 � _- � ' L `^ - r - 4 i Y - r
�v�! '" � t ,� or � r�" srF � � �w "` t - "r Y}• a� � � .e" 1 `• -r i. �.r v r'- }� x t.Y tt +,. �` t,. � i
r t - �� 1.. ;}ry :rs §rrJy`cei°�1'sf s ��4r 1�,r'r .ar"ka'• '_ 41s. y r r, ' a) - ! :` i �1 �' '�'i ,may }
CL, r`� {s , r. -
SAJ ^{',..
r) it k •'+'.ai7'• � } , ` !!X7-!i
3�� Erv;. + i'-• i�sr�i,E..* rJr � � r. r t>• Y -� yrT� L'a, 'IJ:f ., "i..`� v a t } � �iM�M. : ii! fs� :J '• ���1.
r Sr« R4rws i't rr{f�;j!{+S' Ck�"Rw�,;i''"�].M�iT;'.5�.rFSr}3�4
ai 6.i m i , .s o1 n , .l�.•d i'y a, . ( ..i1 .ei ..y.'N '��c' w� �'Ss ,!k a }� �'Y1r�• 4�H_ '�-"4r,w .i
S d..'..R.� n �lFrh4 ���. j'(,�N•Y! �: tf r�i l'.n tS �J"{ r�'1 OA4��i I -t4i r� .,. Fi } fi +. h��- fl t�- Y 1r. _
t i r.a 4 ! \ ,>,�.N ' swah.'t"-ai -l•' .1 s J C, i "�l c.'�ti a, '•'fir t'� L w1- .r'. } <
1 *1,�� �� �'- a .^r i , ,kp '�' . ; - p � ; c s' t. ,� • 3 v N a .y is
to L, ,� ; ♦ 0 Z,sy-2'?. {,j�> i r'r"•'a , ?7 .;�'l'b+. - �1-%t<rtt' w�',„ y j°"�""�'; -t 4 -s�_?� r�r7 _l"" r 1 �� 1
• . a .. i n r" r :m .t..C.Is a '... � wa». r .. , r r .y . k 5k r ! :. L.
- ' _. 'x � � ri Y4 ] .y ,S--,+a't �- e7K`'�. i� G r r•c:w -V.K•w rE'-'-.L him. "'y r� '
f4 a4'' +�s..s.• `>"' o .s ,ay
rY}yt s'Y ,�; i.ir �/tilt
Madt4f't+aii S •� !','s i-r.i 49�k! �i Lz'�r s :. .T r+r'�' • "Iran S < ��- Z f,�tS •t• .•fitr n
zP' rh �i*t' 9 i f . ! r 4 c • ,.�'rrt';� ,Y w..:._
,r5; f'L i1 4 v�j r S 1 y r r r _ t . r }VSY • - i ,- .L;'S^ F - r s4i K ;;
rrdrltyr t'!{i r4� at : rr a. `_f a r� J r d ''�yt
�r1
'? '- � x� 'atS�s,,:. ' r r-w y '.! ,�Cr's+ a ae. t -.Y� •arS w�.' (. 4.: e "c tis ;,� ; 1 - s
•� ', e i�'y'' ' %L n{ • { .'F � "� �.. - i ��. k „M i YES �3 � �{� !� i l } r �.Fx{
r�N ,?�'�{{�ryy'••�r�,�3J � c.�ii { �^�M ;'.t `M� rF�rt'%#\�"��` !�;4 r,'wr"���`s;kryd4,��.-..'i,�, i,� �c� „� a.� r � t,� �. � d �. � r _
Q',f��•>J ,,e�� cr��i°iS Y' :cy a-r ?� .� •i. 10' � �{r �>..kr"�di"J'r:fl �rs y: �i x 'r-.r.�-. ''
.�:`+r..�',orv� �•! Fe �F w] _ .- r .�„ • st- yY .. � - .+'lam .'1%] I7ra a .^y.. " _� . '' �` � - ..
F,;.r ... � ; is l s ' `?-c'- l •r i ` irz rr ..ti. , � .._ s.". � .., - , - � ..
. °- :x�.?�' �G���:�..�•�'L. .,��y..,i �r t-1.H' � *.' .r_, t.. ;.+ - s.. .r..+.w,- t+, ,,..r.o-`.:_ .,
t- �„'C..} •t >"rN �•I�+F'.yi
Xir_. * tiS�c, tL']r. ,ar. ? .i.•-t .r -

�OF WpTE�Q Michael F. Easley
�O G Governor
r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
To: Producer
From: Scott Vinson
Environmenta Engmeer
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2001
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
co The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
cp An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis,
cp The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall lanCapprication rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate far thereceiving crop or result_ in runoff_ during any given application.
rp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suggested, not a requirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: WaRO
SAV Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-8481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

O Division of Water Quality
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 15 I I Date of Visit: 618/200i 'Time: 945 Printed on: 10/15/2001
Q Not Operational Q Relow Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified Q Conditionally Certified 1.7 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:..... ...............
Farm Name: I5lricf 9 S..I RX�Ii..........................................................1all v, County: !«�Ino fta........... _ .. A► �.......
Owner Name: W�llh�lmS.! &1[7mS..QI. Q�tbl.................. Phone No: 252-4,35.-.693.Q........................ .......... I.,......................
Mailing Address: I'?.l1ax..9l.ti............................ . M.ay.Rel�..INC............................... .. 2.7.95.8 ..............
............................................................... .........................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: josepJI.BaJok ..................... .. Integrator: W.lktlAma.)F�,rma.af.N.Cjuc............................
.......................................................
Certified Operator:aQSgpb.................................... 13wok ......................
Location of Farm:
I mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158
Operator Certification Number:,Z5,Zj8.............................
® Swine [I Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 21 f 00 « Longitude F 76 ° 0$ 12
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
1185
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream ]Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes []No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structured Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .............................................................................................................. ................................................
Freeboard (inches): 27
0.1/01/01 rn»11nued

05103101
Facility Number: 15-11
Dale of Inspection 6/8/2001
Continued
Printed on: 10/15/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
O No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
*Waste analysis dated 4/ 2/01 nitrogen is 1.7 Ibs/l000 gallons
10/26/00 nitrogen is 0.99 lbs/1000 gallons.
*Time to secure new waste analysis.
*Waste analysis that was sent to lab should have been labeled as irrigation and not broadcast.
*Soil test dated 10/13/99 and 12/16/99. lime was applied at recommended rates. Suggest keeping lime receipts.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit.
*Tract 1003 pulls l0A thru 16B crop was wheat that was chemically burned due to poor stand. Need to deduct amount of nitrogen
japplied to wheat crop from amount of nitrogen applied to soybeans.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin McLawhorn
Reviewer/Inspeetor Signature: Date:

05103101
L
Facility Number: 15-11 Date of Inspection 6/81200
-11
Continued
Printed on: 10/15/2001
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
[:]Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
IN No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional ommen s and/orDrawings:
*Need to rebalance IRR2 for wheat using waste analysis 0.99 lbs/1000 gallons from 9/18/00 thru 12/26/00.
7. Need to mow lagoon inner walls to allow for routine and visual inspections.
*Mr. Balok has concern over irrigation design. Irrigation design has two pulls along side of fields with arc throw 180 degrees. Soil
type is RO and runoff is difficult to manage. Mr. Balok would like to have irrigation changed to pull down center of field. Need to
consult irrigation specialist.

40 Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
G Other Agency
L
f Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
n for Visit O• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
F7Facility Number 15 11 Date of Visit: 10/3/2000 Time: 10:00
ro Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified E] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: U91rrQU..FXrAX............................................................................................... County: CA"JaC11 ............................................ 1'.1',A1Rla.......
OwnerName:. .................................................. .................. Phone No: 2524,35.-A93.0 ...........................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 1' ?. Qx.4.b.............................. 11�Q.YR�1c..A�1C........................... . 2%958..............
........................................................... ..............................
Onsite Representative: D.#.Y.ltl.()ldhatM........................................................................... Integrator: l?E?illiama.Fa,rma.p.M.C.►.. jag........................
Certified Operator:Dilyid...................................... Q(djAjp ............................................ Operator Certification Number:ZQ3.5Q
Location of Farm: _
1 mile east of Beleross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158 +
w
® Swine [3 Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3G • 21 00 Longitude 76 • fl8 12
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Panulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Cpacity Population Cattle capacity Pop"lation
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management S stem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated.flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......................................................
.................. ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 20

_ 5/00
Facility Number: 15-11 Date of Inspection 1 1043f2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
Continued on back
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes []No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re uired_Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
No yiolatitins'o_r deficiencies-were:noted:duringthis Agit::Y6u-will:reeeive no further
correspondence 'oui this.visit......................... .... .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Cl Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #). Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Possible discharge from sump pump failure. Appears sump filled with waste and thus waste discharged from the back of the house ne
to the sump because waste could not flow into the sump. Samples were taken to help confirm the discharge event. No reporting of
discharge event had been done to DWQ.
IV
IReviewer/]nspector Name ,Carl Dunn
n.......... _ir....... _4__ as

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: S/00 1
Facility Number: 15-11 Date of Inspection 10/3/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks tack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional ommen s and/orDrawings:
5/00
5/00

O Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number l5 11 gate of Visit: 71t012000 Time: 800
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified Q Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:............
Farm Name: Uc1croAs--arm............................................................................................. .. County: CAUL dgpL............................................ WA►RQ.......
Owner Name: ................................................... Wilfiflims-Earms..U.Nar.th .................. Phone No: 252-.4��:169�4...........................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: Tt'sa. �lx. 1............................................................................................ M.Qy.Q i..NC.......................................................... Z7.95.8 ..............
Onsite Representative: JDAAd.Qldham......................................... ................. Integrator: VI'.illiatMs.Eatrms.U.N.i . rash...........................
Certified Operator: Dxv. 1Xti................................ aldham ............................................ Operator Certification Number:7.0350.............................
Location of Farm: _
1 mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 2iIF 0-0-T Longitude 76 • OS ' 12 {f
Design Current
Swine ranneity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑DairyI _+ I
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................
............................ .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 40

5100
Continued on back '
Facility Number: 15-11 Date of Inspection 7/I0/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
®No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
I7. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ®No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes ® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes ®No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes ® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes ® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes ® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes IN No
. N,6.Violati6liis'o:r:deficioacies•were_aoted:during(bis visit.; 64Will:receive na i'urther
carres• 6idenee about fhisV1sit.............. ......:... ...... .... .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings Of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
7. Need to mow lagoon inner walls to allow for routine and visual inspections.
27. Incineration
*Waste plan includes chronic rainfall practices during hurricanes in Sept 1999.
*Waste analysis dated 4/10/00. Nitrogen is 1.4 lbs/1000 gallons. New waste sample taken on 7/1/00. Results not received.
*Soil test dated 10/13/99 and 12/16/99. Soil test are taken in correlation to when crops are in fields. Remember to take
soil test for thi
ear-2000-.Lime recommendation from 1999 test is < than one ton per acre.
*Waste plan has been amended to be based on wetted acres dated 12/6/99.
* Waste plan includes two year crop rotation for corn, wheat, soybeans.
viewer/inspector Name Martin Mclawhorn
E.A­­_19_­._6__
ce--- ..._... n..4_.
_ .

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100
Facility Number: 1-11 Date of Inspection 711012000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
*Lagoon freeboard level being recorded weekly as required by permit. Level is recorded in ft.
*IRR2 reflects amount of commercial fertilizer applied to crops.
*4/16/00-started calculating IRR2 on wetted acres.
*Records well organized.
27. Incinerated
sign

r cr
• Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 4l712400 Time:
Facility Number 1S 11
Q Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered
Farm Name: 8fr1crass.faJC.ttt................................................................................................
Owner Name: W. JUiatma.FAr ms..Q1-NC...........................................................................
Facility Contact: ......................................
Mailing Address: P.Q.U.Q&.4].{.............
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: )D.a.Y.l11.1'ti. ...............
Location of Farm:
........................ Title:..................
......... ............ ............. I ...... I ............ ..
lW118ml.....................................
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County: Catmdem
..... WARQ.......
PhoneNo. Sir.4S-�t9.fl...........................................................
Phone No:
Howlc...NG........................................................... 2.725.8 .............
ntcgrator:W.iUiAMa.Fg.rM&,Qf..NG,.J.Uc� ...........................
Operator Certification Number:ZQ3.5Q..
1 mile east of Belcross in Camden Co. on east bound rt. 158
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Morse Latitude 36 ' 21 00 Longitude 76 • 08 12 °
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I 1 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management S stem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
l . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: ........................................................................................................... .................................... ....................................
....................................
Freeboard (inches): 33

S/00 -
Facility Number: 15-1 t
Dale of Inspection 1 4/7/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste ADDIICatiOn
Continued on back
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn Wheat Soybeans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
I6. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 iti violatioris:or:deficiencies were:noted'during•ttiis visit.:Yotiwill;receive no further
: correspondence about this:visit.:::: :: :: ::
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Farm is now on wettable acres.
Wheat crop was ?? in due to wet conditions. Wheat crop failed.
Records show farm planned to use emergency BMP's. Farm was not notified about discontinued use
until February. No field over -applied. Nitrogen will be forwarded to next crop due to wheat failure.
36 21 16
76 07 58
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall

Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: s/pp 1
Facility Number: lrll Date of Inspection 4/7/2040
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments an or Drawings:
Fri

I
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
KerrT. Stevens, Director
October 13, 1999
Mr. David P. Oldham
Belcross Farm
P. 0. Box 416
Moyock, North Carolina 27958
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Belcross Farm
Facility No. # 15-11
Camden County
Dear Mr. Oldham:
sY/�• 7uti C Qr
'Sr'RIL $2 ihy6 9 W
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (as it is
viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility by the Division of Water
Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm is complying with
requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and/or General Permit; (2) determine whether the waste
utilization plan is based on total or actual wetted acres; (3) the farm operation's waste
management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator,
(4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or
runoff.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 252/946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely, _
LynPHardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: Camden NRCS
WaRO
LBH files
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation- Operation Review
13 Division of Soll and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
® Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection i
- Other Agency - Operation Review ... .. -
of
Facility Number 15 ]1 D:ucoflnspcction
Titne of Inspection 7000 24 hr. (hh:mm)
f Permitted M Certified u Conditionalhv Certified r- Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
FarmName: Bticrass.Earun............................................................................................... Cc unto: Camden ............................................ W_&RD.......
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
.1Y.iUiams.Eatms.af.Not2h................... Phone No: 252-33S:k9,34...........................................................
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: P.Q..Bus.4lft............................................................................................ May.ock-NIC .......................................................... 17.958 .............
Onsite Representative: Aa.Y.id.Q1.dhAM.DAllt c...CaBatu........................................ Integrator: W..iBleupts..IY.C.Tac..............................
Certified Operator:Ilav►d.P................................... Oldham ............................................ Operator Certification Number: 2035.0 .............................
I-Awation of Farm:
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude 36 '•1 21 OU 7., Longitude :67 0 F 08 F 12 !..
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
1240
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Pouftry Capacity Po uI tion Cattle Ca acity Po wlation
❑Laver ❑ Da. y
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non-Dain'
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 1 536,920
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Discharges & Stream lm tact+
1. Is any, discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Dis barge orizinatcd at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. 1f discharge is ohscr%,;4 was the comc.Naucc man-made?
b. If dischar_ro is observed. did ii reach Watur of the Slate:' (lfyes. notifi' D\kQ)
c. if discharge is observed. trhai is the estimated dote in eal/min?
d. Do¢s di,c;hwee hNpass a laeoou system? (Ifces. motif, DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection S Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Struciu e 5
Ident0icr:................................................................................................................................................................................ .
Frceltoard(iuche):..............5.0::............................................................................................................................................................. .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees. severe erosion,
3/23/99 seepage. etc.)
❑ Yes 9- No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ® No
n/a
❑ Yes g No
❑ Yes Z, No
❑ Yes $ No
❑ Yes g No
Stntcntre 6
❑ Yes B1 No
Continued on back

Facility Number. 15-11 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify' DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
'Waste _application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
6-7-99
❑ Yes
[K No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
i I. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes Z No
12. Crop type Com. Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? [:]Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Pocument
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0• N6 v,iolati6ti1s:6r'deficieticiei were:noted'du•ri'Ttg t'h6'.Viiit'.' Yotd w411'receive:66 further:
-correspondence about this visit
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [K No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes gI No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Z, No
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes 9 No
Comments (refer to question #)c Explain any. YES answers and/or any recommendations,or any other comments.
Use drawings of faciitty to bettei'eaplain situations. (uae additional_ pages as necessary).
Records available for review. # 17 - Need to put the general permit in the manual for future inspections.
# 14 - Waste plan is based on total acres, however there is a large deficit. Facility is pended so that the waste plan can be revised to meet
the wetted acres requirement.
# 15 - Lot of weeds in the fields. The wheat crop did not amount to much and it was chemically burned. The applied nitrogen was
deducted from the next crop.
19 - Overall, the MR2 records are very well kept however, on the fields where wheat was and nitrogen deducted from the next crop,
rthe nitrogen levels do not match. This could be from the change of acreages. Recheck your records and make the necessary corrections.
(fields 9-16)
V,
yr S
Reviewer/Impector Name Lyn B. Hardison
TZavinwarlln¢nnrtnr Cianstturnr 1,y111 / ( ��� Tin*n! , / I I

r l
Facility Number. 15--11 Date of Inspection ti-7-99
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30, Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes IR No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ® No
saaaionau Lommenis anaior Urawmgs: . .
- Animals are incinerated and ashes are land applied on an area behind the houses. A,
- The hydrants are located nexi to a V-ditch. Be careful while operating from each hydrant to eliminate any possible discharge.
- Continue to manage the vegetation onthe dike wall. Practice weed control upon need.
If you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, ext. 318.

® Divisi66 of Soil and Water Conservation Operation evie
®:Divisi6n of Sodand,WateriConservation Co�nplianre Inspection
Division of Water Quuhty COmplianee lnsi pCclion ? }! t t k •a 1 is t M.° f a p : , �i"
., . O'Othcr`Agency -#Operation Review '
14P Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other �
Facility Number 15 1l Date of Inspection 1112/98
Time of Inspection 9:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered 92Certified ® Applied for Permit [Permitted 10 Nat O erational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: � t aua�,ixGatat~IC.............................................................................. W........ County: Camdut............................................ ARQ......,
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Mailing Address: P. .Bax.41b.
Witlitama.Earma.at'.North................... Phone No: 9.19,05,69.30 ............................................
Title:................................................................ Phone No:
iktoxock.NG................................................
7.79511 .............
Onsite Representative:.I?a,XW..01db#m............................................... ................. ... Integrator:.. .i1�u+�ma.Farm.of.NC..Iw................... .... .... ............
Certified Operator: J).&yW..P.................................. 01d1mm............................................ Operator Certification Number: 20,JS .............................
Location of Farm:
a.antilt~.�agt4.nClsraaa.ita.atnd�tt..�o. ant.ea�at.b,vtutt�i.irx..1S ............
Latitude 36 ° 21 00 766 Longitude =OF 68 l2
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non-I,ayer I I I[] Non Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds � ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
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: ❑ I,agoon ❑ 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? (I.fycs. 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 ® No
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 lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
G. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ® No

c.uneneueu an Ouch
Facility Number: i5-11 Date of Inspection 11/2/98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures (LatoomMoldine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Strl[ctuN .5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard. (11): ..4,5..................
................................. ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Anplieatiort
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop hype ........ a> u.tSila��. . �ixau>�..........a..................... NQxbgm......................................................... ......................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
O.No.violations' or-de'ficiencies:were:ntited:during this:visit. Youswill-re'ceive'no- further.;::.
: ;correspondence Aboiltthis'visit:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
i Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
iUse drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Carl Dunn
Reviewer/Inspector Sienature: Date:

® `Dtvtston of Soil and Water Co y
,.. ,< n nscryation Cor Otioncc Inspection
Dmgion of Sol[ and Wa#er Conservation Coin lia
�'I)!1visiod(if Water Quality + Ciimp[►ance Inspection u t r a't� 3 : ��
Q Other Agency `Operation °Review.
140 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number l5 11 Date of Inspection 9/2/98
Time of Inspection 1000 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered ® Certified ® Applied for Permit [3Permitted 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
FarmName: Urpli10.u..Uxeatuck...................................................................................... County: Camdem ............................................ WAKO
Owner Name: ................................................... Wiilliatat3JFAtrM3.0f.N9x1h................... Phone No: 9.19,05-62,30 ..........................................................
Facility Contact: I AYM.Oldham............................................... Title: WA5k.1 ,.SP9dAA1W.................. Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: Pf?.Box.416............................................................................................ M9,V.Q k.1N. C:.......................................................... 7.7.9,58.............
Onsite Representative: 0j v.Ld.Q dktAm........................................................................... Integrator: W..iliiAM .F8X. A?f.NCjM.C...............................
Certified Operator: Daviii.p................................. !,%Idunt............................................ Operator Certification Number: 20,350 .............................
Location of Farm:
A,
Latitude 36 ° 21 00 Longitude 76 ° 0$ 12
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
1240
1240
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,240
Total SSLW 536,920
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
it. Il' discharge is obsen ed, was the conveyance man-made9
b. lfdischarge is observed. did it reach Surface Water? (if yes. notify DWQ)
c. lt'discharge is observed. what is the estimarea flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenancelimprovement?
6. Is facility not'in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design`?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/7 5/97
❑ Yes 0 No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
- . ! ! i

Facility Number: 15-11 Date of Inspection 1 9/2/98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
L.ununueu an uucx
❑ Yes ® No
Structures (Latoons,Holdinp Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: #1............... . ....................................................
Freeboard(11):...............21.1..................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[]Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ........................ Qat.............................................. SoYbeAA5.................... .........................wbpa...........................................................................
16, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
19. is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
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?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
to No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities 0n1v
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
-IN o:v'itilations or•deiiciencies:were•noted•du'ring this:visit., You will, receive no further....
-.correspot de i!e About this:Vis.it. :. .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
* Mr. Oldham is keeping IRR2 by field groupings - will be separating on a per field basis on wetted acres
12. Need to mow inside dike wall as part of routine maintenance
v
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Pat Hooper 252/946,,6481 ,, - _ a ,: u't , 4
Reviewer/Inspector Sisnature: Date:

v Animal Operations «'
Waste Plan
Facility Certification # Certified
Number Owner / Farm Name Address & Phone Design Capacity and Permit # Operator In Charge Integrator Physical Loc
153 Sterling L Gregory 340 Hwy 34 North Swine Certified Henning S. Bartlett Hwy. TZ 1 mI
Belcross NC 27921 2,235 E006093
Sterling Gregory Farm 338-8427 Wean to Feeder Removal Comments
Feeder to Finish
15 _ 11 Williams Farms of PO Box 416 Swine Certified David P. Oldham I mile east of Bel
North Carolina, Inc. Moyock NC 27958 1,240 E007021
Belcross Farm 919435-6930 Farrow to Wean Applied for Permit Removal Comments
AWS15001 I

4 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Dther
Date of Inspection 2-I I�q'1
Facility Number �1
r Time of Inspection 3 ' o c7 Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Nanje: E�',, Z�te f�" �_....- County:
Owner Name:._ Phone No:
Mailing Address:"' _
On site Representative: _ M+`� �a� _._.„„ Integrator:
Certified Operator: +�e 0,'e L' a � . „ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude u*�4 Du Longitude �• �' �"
Not O p e 7 —tio n—a _1_1 Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
--. nNw'7z. ,N_ % - �.R^t',. i.,t! .�" '"�-""",'.' t,�
Sw
Poultry.r a =Number: .:Cattle;; r Number
❑ La er ❑ Da'
❑Nan Laver ❑Beef
❑Other Type of Livestock �k
•::: Numlier�,
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
?
Farrow to We
Number of Lagoons I Hb(durg P<onds� ❑Subsurface Drains Present
❑Lagoon Area ;rn ❑Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes R No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®No
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 RNo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a Iagoon system? (If yes, notify DWG ❑ yes 10 No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes 2 No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑Yes W No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require El Yes gNo
main tenance/improvement?
Continued
on back

-6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria? - '
4.
❑ Yes M No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Struchires (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds) -
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
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 adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
W'astc Analication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Oniv
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes _M No
❑ Yes t'No
15 Yes
❑ No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes
E9 No
N Yes
❑ No
CK Yes
❑ No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
Q�No .
❑ Yes
ERNo,
❑ Yes
52 No
❑ Yes
U No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Yes
'KNo
❑ Yes
ONo
Comments (refer to question #) Explaizt any YES answers andlor;any recommendations or any other comments:
Use drawings of facipty to betteryexplam situations` fuse addnbanaI pages,as necessary) ne '
.......
-s.,.e�s � >�,�d�,�ti y.,^ r ins ; a � ►,�,1 y
L" I k q row- ►r t 1 r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
i- TJ /�u�w� - w
Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.
DIVISION OF.,ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERAT14NS SITE'VISITATION RECORD,
Date:[ 2` 1995
Time: -
Farm Name/Owner: : K �,1 �Q,._ LQ.nn�.�n d f�J•+e
R14[-_k
Mailing Ad ess:
County: cq
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation:. Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: No. of Anima s on Site,p
DEM Certification No.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACN W
Latitude: Longs. tulle: Elevation:
Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Ft + 25
year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) Yes or No
Actual Freeboard: peL: Ft Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or
Was any erosion observed? Yes or No 1%QY'1 rn: n.,Ut
Is adequate land available for spray? No Pr
Is .the cover crop adequate? C or; No
Crop(s) being utilized: c.. _
Does the facility meet SCS,4inimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? C-e or No 100 Ft from wells? es or No
Is the a_MMal waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or
Is animal waste d,applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state b an -made ditch,.,, flushing'
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or &'
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes off -manure,
�d app4ed spay rrigated on speci 'c acreage with cover crop)? ie or No
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit -
Comments Sketch on Back of Sheet
{

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
i`�..
Sketch: r/
1
1
f

UPI
ales
17 RI 'r1:
r �
`'• r s
17 Il
Smallmouth
7.
13,
.t, t
133i 3 •\
Ta, C , s
J' 131 `1340 -
139 3 .
l 313
} 1 -9 •-3 4iarcwl }
_ 13� 13L
133R �y 11 U7
G R L
P f S M A L W A
i
=a.
�- ,f,' 9ur1e Mlb ila�Lae1 _
17M
V 1
G ELIZABETH CITY
M p o ��
a
1 _
la !
O
American colonies and believed the
Stamp Act to be unconstitutional.
Almost surrounded by water, the
township of Camden is only 10 feet above
sea level. The Pasquotank River lies to the
west as does Swamp Canal, North River
to the east, and the county is bordered on
the south by beautiful Albermarle Sound.
One of the few remaining stands of
Atlantic white cedar grow in Dismal
Swamp State Park.
►l
i

NWrrJ IMWAVIDAMM, z t-
t V4
4*1
Arlp
77
WAR MONA.
Im SIR �w
� WITII� L4
v. � '10 -1 . 4 4"� �,Q I MW
fi,.
MY
-10
a

MIT
�� � � �` ka.: �.�. i �� �.�`i.V-�S t--3?'ae .�3✓�4 -- - �:a�. is
L.