370015_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

P
acts r ;(.. 3' .- N
Nt)v
ION!i
i Y r._+o�n Ks'tL'f

I'
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
370015 Facility Status:
Active Putt: AWS370015
Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Gates Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0512212017 Entry Time; 09.00 am
Exit Time: 10:15 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Paul Lilfey Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
Paul T Lilley
Phone:
252-357-2575
Mailing Address:
146 NC 37 S
Galesville NC 279389608
Physical Address: 916 Main St
Facility Status; ECompliant Not Compliant
Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36' 25' 03" Longitude: 76' 45' 44"
Location: Hwy. 37 t mile north of Galesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Gatesville NC 27938
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lllley Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil: Jan 2017
6-21-17 = 1.30
10-20-16 = .51
3-17-16 = 1,68
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: rainfall/freeboard; POA from Matthew; 912016 sludge survey - LTZ=4.251ST=3.0; calibration 2016
page: 1

n
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/22/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine- Farrow to Wean
20
20
Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
200
Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
150
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.00
19.50
Lagoon
PRIMARY 10101/86
15.60
page: 2

Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/22/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges _& Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
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.eJ 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
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)?
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Yea No Na No
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
Yes No Na No
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na Ne
❑■❑❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number:
370015
Inspection Date: 06/22/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Conn, wheat, Soybeans
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Xaj No Na Ile
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
W if P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
Cl
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number:
370015
Inspection Pate: 06/22/17 inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yea No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility faii to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
ED
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
MCI
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
Cl
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑M
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No Na Ne
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑M
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(Le., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
0
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 370015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine �^ W County: Gates Region:
Date of Visit: 06/09/2016 Entry Time: 09:45 am Exit Time: 10:40 am Incident #
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm
Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley Phone:
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 S Gatesville NC 279389608
Physical Address: 916 Main St Gatesville NC 27938
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Location: Hwy, 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts Waste Col, Star, & Treat
Records and Documents Other Issues
36° 25' 03"
❑ Denied Access
Washington
252-357-2575
Longitude: 76` 45' 44"
Waste Application
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s)-
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 1-4-2016
3-17-16 = 1.68
9-2-15 = 1.27
IRR records are complete & balanced out, with one irrigaion event on corn in field that was in plan for just pasture, used PAN of
13D, need to add corn on this field in the WUP.
Reviewed: freeboard/rainfall; sludge survey T=3.9, LTZ = 5.2; calibration is past due, please do a calibration of equipment before
December 2016.
Please keep stocking/mortality records on forms, not just calendar.
page: 1

11
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/09/16 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.00
21.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
10/01/86
15.60
16.D0
page: 2

R
Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/09/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
NQ__No Ke
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)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
■ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No No Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

00
Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number:
370015
inspection Date: 06/09/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
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
❑ N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. noes the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
01313
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

r
Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/09/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine.
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑ ❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
01113
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
M ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
1
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

i,
0 Division of Water Resources
❑Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number: 370015
Facility Status:
Active Permit: AVV8370015
Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Dale:
Reason for visit: Routine
County: Gates Rogiow
Washington
Date of Visit: 05/04/2015 Entry Time: 01.00 Pm
Exit Time: 2:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm
owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley
Phone:
252-357-2575
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 S
Gatesville NC 279389608
Physical Address: 916 Main St
Gatesville NC 27938
Facility status: 0 Compliant El
Not Compliant
Intogrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36° 25' 03" Longitude:
76' 45' 44"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Galesville west side of Hwy. 37,
Quostion Areas:
Q Dischrge & Stream Impacts
El Waste Col, Stor,
& Treat ® Waste Application
Q Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Dale:
Secondary Inspector(s►:
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
4.21-15 = 3.16 soil tested: 12/2014
IRR records are complete & balanced out for corn & soybeans.
S. Survey dated 11-20-13 total= 3,13 LTZ= 5.64
Reviewed; rainfall, freeboard
REMEMBER: to get sludge survey soon.
page: 1

I
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection pate: 05/04/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity
Current promotions
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
450
Q Swine • Other
70
70
® Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Total Design Capacity: 720
Total SSLW: 74.810
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed pate Start pate Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.00
20.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY
10/01/86
15.60
16.00
page: 2

r
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley FacNty Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/04/15 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection • Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No No No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
11 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
Q ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
11 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
[] []
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
Q ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
11 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes_No_Na
No
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
❑
13 ❑
❑
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?
❑
El ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
U ❑
❑
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
Yos No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ©❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

i
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T I-Ney Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/04/15 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
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 andlor land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
©❑
❑
determination?
17. Dees the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
El ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yos
No No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
U ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
11 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
El ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/04/15 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit Routine
Records and Documonts
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
®❑
❑
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
10 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge?, If yes, check the
©
❑ ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
®❑
❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
D
0 ❑
[]
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
El ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
LI❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31, Do subsurface Tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
[]
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32, Were any addifional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWM P?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
11 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
El ❑
❑
page: 5

U Division of Water Resources
rl Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
370015 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS370015
Denied Access
inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Gates Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
05/22/2014 Entry Time: 09:30 am
Exit Time: 10:30 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Paul Lilley Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
Paul T Lilley
Phone:
252-357-2575
Mailing Address:
146 NC 37 S
Galesville NC 279389608
Physical Address:
916 Main St
Galesville NC 27938
Facility Status:
Compliant Not Compliant
Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36° 25' 03" Longitude:
76' 45' 44"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Galesville west side of Hwy. 37,
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone :
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspoctor(s):
Marlene Salyer
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested 112014
5-2-14 = 1.01 corn
7-15-13 = 1.06 corn 2013
Irr records are complete & balanced out.
SSurvey Baled: 1112013 Avg. T 3.13 LTZ 5.64
Phone:
Date:
Reviewed rainfall, freeboard, & IRR records. Mr. Lilley has a healthy herd and has concerns about PED, so I met him offsite and
rode with him to farm.
page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/22/14 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
450
Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74.810
Waste Structures Observed
Disignated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Data Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
FINAL
19.00 1
21.00
Lagoon
PRIMARY 10/01/86
15.60
page: 2

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/22/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
a ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
E ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
MED
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
No
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ng
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/22/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. floes the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Lease Agreements?
Other?
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
Weekly Freeboard?
Waste Analysis?
Soil analysis?
Waste Transfers?
Weather code?
Rainfall?
Stocking?
Yes No Na No
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na No
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
page: 4

i
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility : Paul T Lilley Facility Number
370015
Inspection Date: 05/22/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Np Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
t
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yea No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
(i,e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
[]
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. floes the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: CqmpJjan2e Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine — County: Gates Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/16/2013 Entry Time: Oq-15 AM Exit Time: 1 Q@20 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 5 , _ _ Gatesville NC 279389608
Physical Address: 916 Main St Gatesville NC 27938
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°25'03" Longitude: 76°45'44"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat © Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley
Operator Certification Number: 19370
Title
Phone:
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 2-5-13
11-19-12 = 1.71 - wheat
7-17-12 = .78 - corn
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Freeboard & rainfall are recorded.
Looks goodl
NOTE: sludge survey is due Dec. 2013
Phone
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner • Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 05/16/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
300
O Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
150
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
20.00
agoon
PRIMARY
10/01/86
15.60
15.00
Page: 2

i
C
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/16/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4: Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Ulley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 0511612013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total Phosphorus? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
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?
❑
In
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yee
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: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/16/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vislt: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stacking? '
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■
❑ Cl
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? Cl ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/16/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Via It;
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No
NA
NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■
❑
❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e.,
discharge, ❑ ■
❑
❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
IN
Page: 6

t
f
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency II ---II
Facility Number: 370015 0
Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Q=Ijange In§pection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: ; ates Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 061OUZQ12 Entry Time: Q%3 Q AM_ Exit Time: 10:00 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 S Gatesv!Ile NC 279389608
Physical Address: 916 Main St Gatesv!Ile NC 27938
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°25'03" Longitude: 76°45'44"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 19370
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector.
Inspector Signature:
Marlene Salyer
Secondary inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: Soil tested: 1212011
11-22-11 = .34
IRR's on wheat are balanced out.
Phone:
Rainfall & freeboard are recorded. Sludge Survey is due in 2013 and caliberation is due in 2012.
Looks Good!
Date:
Page: 1

i
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 06/07/2012 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
19
Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
200
© Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
150
Waste Structures
Type Identifier
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Designed Observed
Closed Data Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
21.00
agoon
PRIMARY
10101/86
15.60
16.00
Page: 2

M
r
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number. 370015
Inspection Date: 0610712012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes
No NA
NE
,1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the Stale other than
❑
■ ❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
❑
■ ❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■ ❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
' ❑ ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Applicatlon
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: 3

1
Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility. Paul T Lilley
Facility Number : 370015
Inspection Date: 06/07/2012 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
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?
1100
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ONO
❑
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?
❑ IN
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner • Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 06/07/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Vlslt: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ ■
❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS370015 Owner -Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number : 370015
Inspection Date: 06/07/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Other ISSUBs Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewertinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
IN
Page: 6

n
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 370015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Complaint County: Gates Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/25/2011 Entry Time:09:00 AM Exit Time: 11:11 AM Incident #-
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm Owner Email:
Owner; Paul T Lglj@y Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 5 Gatesville NC 279389606
Physical Address: 916 Main St Gatesville NC 27938
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°25'03" __ __ Longitude: 76°45'44"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 19370
On -Site Representativels): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: 1-6-11 = .60 soil tested 12-2010 all parameters looks good.
Sludge survey 4-2011 & exempt until 2013.
IRR's om wheat (132) are complete and balanced out.
Everything looks good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/2512011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for visit: Complaint
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity
Current Population
O Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
O Swine -Feeder to Finish
450
300
❑ Swine - Other
70
O Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
100
Waste Structures
Type
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
720
74,810
Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
30.00
agoon
PRIMARY
10/01/86
15,60
29.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number; 370015
Inspection Date: 05/2512011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Complaint
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA N€
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
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: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 05/2512011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Visit: Complaint
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn,
Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
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
Cl
■
❑ ❑
Pian(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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
1 B. 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?
❑
■
Cl ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
l
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 0512512011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 370015
Reason for Visit: Complaint
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - FociIlty: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05l25/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit. Complaint
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? UMOO
name__ v.. PM Ne MP
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon/Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
O
age: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 370015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compljgnp& Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Qjtes Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 03/31/2009 Entry Time:09:00,Aid Exit Time: Incident#:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Litlev
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146 NC.3Z S Galesville NC 279389608
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Integrator:
Latitude:36°25'03" Longitude:76°45'44"
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherlssues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
3-28-08 = 2.3
3-26-09 = 1,6
soil 3-10-09
Looks Good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015
Inspection bate: 03/31/2009
Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
300
Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
ag oon
FINAL
19.00
19.50
agoon
PRIMARY
10/01/86
15.60
Page: 2

S
Permit: AWS370015 owner - Faculty: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 03131/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
c. 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 (Led large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
IN
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

h
Permit: AW5370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 03/31/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
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
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Cotton
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Pasture)
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: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 03131/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■ ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Other issues
Yes
No NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■ ❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

J
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Faclltty: Paul T Li Hey Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Data: 03/31/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VisIt: Routine
Other Issues 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 reviewlinspection 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: 3ZOQ15 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Gates I Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/06/2008 Entry Time: QQ:05 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: P_aullil(gly Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146-NC. Z S Gatesville NC 279389608
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Latitude: ;fig°24'48" Longitude: Z6°45'3§"
Question Areas:
© Discharges & Stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
3-28-08 = 2.3
7-9-07 = 0.84
Soil test 2-5-08
Remember to do the caliberation of irrigation equipment. I sent info and forms on 05-08-2008.
Please try to do sludge survey ASAP!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/06/2008 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
400
Swine - Other
70
60
Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Waste Structures
Type
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSI-W:
720
74,810
Identifier Closed Date start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
20.00
agoon
PRIMARY
10101/66
15.60
Page: 2

!1
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facillty: Paul T Lilley
Inspection pate: 05/06/2008 Inspectlon Type: Compliance Inspection
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
0
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Vlsit: Routine
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?
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑
■0
❑
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
❑
MOO
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

n
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 05/06/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number. 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 ibs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn (Grain)
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?
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
1 B. 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.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Ulley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 05/06/2008 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 fall 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?
❑ ❑ ■
❑
Otherissues
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 11000
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

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number:370015
Inspection Date: 05/06/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues 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 : 370015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Gates Region: }(yashinaton
Date of Visit: ,OQ/j3/2007 Entry Time:08:10 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Paul L!llev Farm
Owner: Paul T Lilley
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Galgsvjlle NC 279389608
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Galesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Integrator:
Latltude:36°24'48" Longitude:76°45'36"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 19370
On -Site Rep rosentative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
1-9-07 = 2.5
Looks good!
soil tested 2006
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 06/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
O Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
450
A Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon FINAL 19.00
agoon PRIMARY 10/01/86 15.60
Page: 2

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3, Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5, Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
110
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
Cl
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
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
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?
Com (Grain)
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Winter Annual
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
0000
0000
❑■❑❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
0
Page: 4

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 06/13/2007 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?
❑ MOO
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after a 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?
❑ 0
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ in
❑
❑
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 ❑ ■ Cl ❑
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

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 06/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31.'Did the facility fail to notify regional DWo of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 370016
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

14
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 370015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inagection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Gates Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/2112QQ6 Entry Time:10:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Paul T Lilley
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 5
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Phone: [phone]
Latitude:36°24'48" Longitude:76°45'36"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Marlene Salyer
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil test 1-17-2006
Waste analyses:
4-17-06 = 8.6 sludge agaited
3-13-06 = 2.8
Looks Good!
Phone:
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lllley Facility Number : 370015
Inspection Date: 07/31/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
20
Q Swine -Feeder to Finish
450
450
Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
180
Total Design Capacity: 650
Total SSLW: 74,810
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deslaned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
FINAL
19.00
35.00
agoon
PRIMARY
10101/86
15.60
Page: 2

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number; 370015
Inspection Date: 07/31/2006 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? ❑ m ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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? ❑ M ❑ ❑
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
❑
IN
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
IN
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
000
B. 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: 3

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Inspection Date: 07/31/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 370015
Reason for Visit: Routine
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
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 2
Winter Annual
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Pasture)
Crop Type 4
Cotton
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 andlor 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: AWS370015 Owner - FaclIIty: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 07/31/2006 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?
Q
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
❑
■ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
■ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Q ■ ❑ Q
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T !_illey
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 07/31/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
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 reviewMspection 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: 5ZQ015 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS370015 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Gates ._ Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/22/2005 Entry Time: 09:20 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm Owner Email:
Owner Paul T Lilley Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 146 NC 37 S Gatesville NC 279389608 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°24'48" Longitude: 76°45'36"
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Paul T Lilley Operator Certification Number: 19370
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Paul Lilley Phone:
24 hour contact name Paul Lilley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: 12-17-04 = 2.1; 3-31-04 = 1.2; 6-22-05 = pulled but results not back yet
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
The freeboard level and rain events are recorded weekly,
Looks good.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Swine
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine - Farrow to Wean
20
® Swine - Feeder to Finish
450
O Swine - Wean to Feeder
180
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Page: 2

i
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
17icr aaG & Stream Imparts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Yes
❑
No NA NE
M ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
01113
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?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
M ❑ ❑
No NA NF
Wastes Collertinn. Storage & Treatment
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 andlor 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?
Yes
No NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
n ❑ ❑
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)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 1 M1 0 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
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Corn
(Grain)
Crop Type 3
Cotton
Crop Type 4
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

0
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NF
Waste Application
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)? ❑
N ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
Cl
0 ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Cl
Yes
0 ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
moo
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?
❑
0
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E
❑ ❑
Page: 4

b
Permit: AWS370015 Owner - Facility: Paul T Lilley
Facility Number: 370015
Inspection Date: 02/22/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other IRFLIP.R Yes No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ M ❑ ❑
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.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/!nspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

]Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted 6 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
L� l
Farm Name; ......... `i !1..�..........t..�i...'±3.r t+.._..............._...._..._.._w............»
L•l
OwnerName:... . K . !► ,.1 »............»..........»... !.1. ....»...».....».........................
Matting Address: _ ._ .._..............._..... .»...»._....»......._....... .................
:1+ Time.•
o— Not Operational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or bove
County:Threshold:...........
»...»._»..
�i
PhoneNo: ....._ .... ._. » .... _» _.».. _ ....................
Facility Contact: Title:.._»...._........_..».......»»...»..».....__. Phone No: ._.»................. _._.....
Onsite Representative:.» Integrator.
. _...W _. _._ ..__.. -� .. ... .............. .».........
' ay 7a
Certified Operator:..........K&L—_
.V �........ „...... ....... .....,....,....,.,..__ .... ,.... ,... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
M Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' I '4 Longitude • 6 64
DischaMes $ Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [_-]Yes A 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 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 1P No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes q No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway [:]Yes ArNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: __i).4.1, —W 4. f. ina _ _ .411G9r' c_....... » _ .........................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

i Facility Number• —
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?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
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? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
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?
Odor I.asues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
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
Air Quality representative immediately.
'oc
❑ Yes ro
❑ Yes Et No
❑ Yes 2No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes IF No
❑ Yes No
❑Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,1 No
❑ Yes ap No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [No
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
l�+ e 3����i� 1,2 l��•�9%03 �l o, 3 3����3 0,75,.'
/3//3 b,// *j
h ✓tip /w11 �w y�[�C.[J _ �O+n✓ L►�ie.1 A-1 hr. 144 rQry k4J 1 Gull l.✓/�:rM�% w�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: I1 /3
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 3 7 — 1-5--1 Date of Inspection 1 ca
e
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes M No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ WUP, checklists, design, reaps, etc.) ❑ Yes R'No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, ch�c the appropriate x below. Yes ❑ No
❑ WaSWApplication Epreeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil 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 No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes (K No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes A No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWIVIP? ❑ Yes j\ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? o
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? es o
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? `�— No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. J3)[es�[!'No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After l" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
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 37 - 15 Date: 1123104 Time: 1 1130 1 Time On Farm: 45 WARO
Farm Name Paul Lilley Farm County Gates
Mailing Address 146 NC 37 South
Gatesville NC
Phone: [phone]
27938
Onsite
Representative Paul Lilley Integrator, [independent
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold I
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
® Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Sao
450
20
90
O Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWCISWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ 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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier old prima E sec
Level (Inches) 1 25 25 25
CROP TYPES Cotton lCorn Soybeans Wheat Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
S IDS RoA AtA ToA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ 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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier old prima E sec
Level (Inches) 1 25 25 25
CROP TYPES Cotton lCorn Soybeans Wheat Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIELD
S IDS RoA AtA ToA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

t - 9
Number 37 - 15 Date:
1123/04
fFaclilt.y
RAMETER
pp No assistance provided/requested
8. Waste spi11 leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
9Waste spill contained on site
[110. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
Cl
12.' Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13- 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
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re-certificatton
[116. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
[122. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
[}
[123. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39.Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcallbration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation system deal latlon
❑
El
El Other...
gnlinatal
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 certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop oval uatlonlrecommen dations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsolllng, 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)
❑
El
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 37 _ 15 Date: I 1/23/04
COMMENTS:
C dated Sept 24, 2003. Facility has been certified until this date. Addition requirement with General Permit is to record
on freeboard level weekly and to notify DWQ if lagoon freeboard level is < 19" within 24 hours. Be sure to review permit
lards.
'Waste analysis dated 10/24/03 nitrogen is 0.39 Ibs/1000 gallons
3/20/03 nitrogen is 0.75 lbs11000 gallons
'Need to secure new waste analysis to cover irrigation events on Fescue after 12129/03.
'Soil test dated 3131/03 Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
`iRR2 records are complete and balanced.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 212/04
Entered By: IMartin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

a t
O..Divisibn.'of Water Quality
,Division of Sol] and Water Conservation
Other Agency ..
[ � 3
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 p Denied Access
Facility Number I)nte of Visit: 01/30/2003 'rime: 930
p o perationai p BelowThreshold
p Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ••••••••••••.•.•.•••
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm County: Gatm.................................................. WAR-0 .......
Owner Name: Paul
Lilley
Phone No: 252-357-2575
Mailing Address:.146.11C.37.South.................................................................................. GatesUle°NC........................................................ 279.38 ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative:Pa�ul..Lilley.................................................................................... Integrator: In.depteiulAul............................................................
Certified Operator:EauLT..................................... 1juey ................................................. Operator Certification Number: l9.3.7.0.......................
.,..,
Location of Farm:
g Swine ❑ Poultry p Cattle 13 Morse Latitude ® a ®� ®�� Longitude ® • ®4
Swine
i
[3 can to
Design Current
Capacity .Population
Feeder
[3 Feeder toFinish
13 Farrow to Wean
13 Farrow to ee er
g Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current - Design • Current ,
Poultry', 4. Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population-,
[3 Layer p Dairy
[3 Non -Layer p on- airy
p t er
Total Design Capacity 90
Total SSL'W 127,530
Number of Lagoons,;,.'-,,', p u sur ace rams resen p agoon rea p pray �e rc.�
Holding Ponds / Solid;Traps " p o Liquid asle managementSystem
0 .,,..
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed -from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: [3 Lagoon p Spray Field 13 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) 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 ONO
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? I] Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway N Yes p No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identifier: ..............laid .............. ......... .primary. ......... ........ secondary ........ ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard(inches). ............... is" ..............................I.B...............................1al............................................................................................111—°°..°°-11.......I.......

ro
�racurty Numner: 37_15 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 17 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? p Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? p Yes IS No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? p Yes S No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes IM No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload © Yes a No
12. Crop type Cotton Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes ®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? p Yes p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? p Yes p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? p Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? la Yes IS No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
p Yes
p 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.)
p Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
is No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
p No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
24,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
® No
p No violations or deliciencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about
is visit.
Comments �referto`q`uest.ion#} Ex.lain,an .YESanswers-and/oran �%recommendationsor"an othercomtfiertts:
Use,drawrng;s'.offacility:to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary), . jt3Field Co Final Notes i
i s
J a- r
Soy test ate 2 8 02 Cu, Zn an P wrt m guy a mes.
y
*Soil test for 2003 have been taken with no results. Follow lime requirements.
*There were no irrigation events for 2002 crop year due to low lagoon levels. Mr. Lilley planning to install fresh water well
in order to
add water to lagoon during drought conditions. Reminded Mr. Lilley about 100 ft buffer requirements.
*New waste analysis taken - no results.
*Animals are rotated through paddock areas.
7. Burial
ReviewerA nspector Name MarttnMclGawhorn..T'_�,�1, 1A,r:aE� 'In
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

,- 0516101 Confr► ueic
Facility Number: 37_ 5 1)ate 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 0 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 I& 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

Facility Number Date of Visit: 7/30/2Q02 Time: 1:15
p o pera Bona p Below TNresNold
p Permitted E Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: •••••••••••••••••••••••-
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm County:lGatgS...............................................•... WARC?.......
Owner Name: Paul Lilley
Mailing Address: 14A.XC3.7-Soutb..•.•.................
Facility Contact: ................................................ .........
Onsite Representative: Paul.Lilley........................
Phone No: 252-357-2575
............................................ •........... lG atcu it l e-N C........................................... •............ 2708 ..............
Certified Operator: PaulT.................................... Lilley..
Location of Farm:
.........Title:..:............................................................ Phone No:....................................................
...:................................. Integrator:.......................................................................................
.................................... Operator Certification Number: I9,3.7.0............................
.oca ion: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of ilwy. 37.
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle p Horse Latitude ®• ®' ®'° Longitude ®• ®' ®"
Design CurrentP. nt
Swine
Capacity pCapag tY, P pu3lation Cattle Capac ty Fopula tion
❑ can to Feeder
FI'opulatioq'oult „!'..
❑ Layer p airy
.,J.
�'- on- ayer ;'-V ❑ Non -Dairy
❑
11
i..
❑ Other
{ 1.....
'� Total �Des1'_` achy 9�
•
{ 127 530
F 1 Total SSLW
1
ii
�
r I III �{11 'I II II 7, �';` ii _
61 Pray Fieldrea
N un>ber of g t u sur aee rains resen a oan Area
ooT h ❑
fi
nl I G'
I
5 Holden Ponds'La
��f I ial
g Soljd {raps I 0 q g y
ti o Liquid Waste Management System
��.I� i:Ji�.
_„J„I,a-_.
❑ Feeder to Finis
p arrow to can
❑ arrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
❑ Gi is
❑ Boars
Discharges &Stream Impacts
_ __1.__Is anycharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon ❑Spray Field ❑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) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (!f yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? [3 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
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑Spillway ❑Yes ®Na
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .............. Qid.............. .......... 'rimazy........... ....... 1s eeandazy.......,.........................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): .�7................ ...32............................... 3.T................ .................................... ................................... ....................................

aci i y Number: 37-15 Date of Inspection
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? p Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p 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
g 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
p Yes
N No
12. Crop type Cotton Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
U No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
ig No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
17, Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
g No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
N 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
N No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
p No violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence a ou is visif�
Comments refer t1.o"'"aestio i # Ez`"Ia�tt'an`�;f`i7 S answers and/or ari"";recorriiriendatioas orAn other comments i '� ^' '" 1 q
frfigs }p.;�' 1* fib' -' t4� d mkt• : 1C'K ;.{{.!�,
n � 't�' � .
Use`dt•awl gs of.fac�lity to li tterlexpiain s xuatioi : (u^se addttcQn$i�P g s- eessary}: ~'
, - p Field Copy p Final Notes sit ,,
�y57:A
F��.�y#
,y} #, v". ",s.:r�f a _ 1Y + %'
.r&r �e�v��7.rll.�u.':°.ic"�����,�.."�12�?��ai, �� '�3�' ��3lahulxi^
���tlF��^r'�-!�rs�r�i.:Y+ES�..�..�3:i�:.f' "=�z.-� �'-:ii .d�1.4%�n� ��?.t.,1NfJSFciI,ti1TBi5le-eY?�aM1,Tti'e-i'i'�+3k'.✓�dFd'7:t:S�'-T^�'Rk436EF.�a'.. .:
Last irrigation events were 4 10 01 with waste analysis dated 3 28/01.
* Soil test dated 3/30/01 with no lime required.
* Soil test dated 2/8/02 with no Iime required.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Scott Va son �,` entered 1y Ann Tyndall r °,', ,a.=_,� y'i „,a , E._
,i .,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: !�L

r
O5103101 Continued
aci i y um er: 37_15 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 0 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, (3 Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) Cl Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? 13 Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No
A

Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 9/2b/ZOOt Time: 8:Q4 Printed on: 10/1/2001
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
p Permitted ■ Certified 13 Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm County: Gates ................................................... WAR.O.......
Owner Name: Paul Lilley Phone No: 252-357-2575
MailingAddress:.1.4.6.NC.37.&........................................................................................... Ga.tiesxille,NIC......................................... ............... 27.9.38, ...........
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Paul..Lilley................................................................................... Integrator: fndepeadQ,nt....................................................... .....
Certified Operator* Paul ......................................... iRney.................................................. Operator Certification Number: 19,370.............................
Location of Farm:
.oca ion: Hwy. 37 1 mile norlh of Gatesvilie west side of Hwy. 37.
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®a ®` ®66 Longitude ®• ®° ®Gi
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Weanto Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to can
❑ Farrow to ee er
® Farrow to Finis
Cl Gilts
❑ Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer p OaIrY
❑ on -Layer_ ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 90
Total SSLW 127,530
Number of Lagoons ❑ u sur ace rains resen 13 Lagoon Area JE3 Spray Fie 91111
Holding Fonds l Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I , Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: E3 Lagoon p 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? na
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 p Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) 3.6.............................. 3.5................ ............... 3L............... .................................... ............. ....................... ....................................

P'acility Number: 37_ l5 Date of Inspection FgTrumm Printed on: 141112001
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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® 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
N No
1 l . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
M No
12. Crop type Fescue, Corn Cotton Wheat Soybeans
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?
Cl Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
13 No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
© No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
Reouired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
p Yes
0 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
26.
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
10 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
N No
In No violations or deliciencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Comments'(refer toquesiiion #}..;'8xplais any�YES answers ar3d/ar any ceeom:mendatsons or any;ather,comments'�
,{ t ;
Use::dravrtngs of, facility'ta better;explatn sttuafions {use additional pages as;'ge&ssiey)
,. ❑ Field Copy
,;
2,Pthal Notes
Records available for review.
Animals on the ground, rotated between paddocks.
Waste analysis 3/28101 = 1.1 lbs.
Hadn't irrigated since April.
Has applied for permit.
May want to begin recording freeboard levels weekly to prepare for permit requirement.
Soil analysis will be mailed to me later.
SEE PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Har 'son ntered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �� y ,, Date:
(0 - Z _p

r
05103101
Continued
Date of inspection ® Printed on: 101112001
Facilify Number: 37_15
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
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)
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?
Cl Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes
p No

Michael F. Easley
Q
Governor
7r William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
> : Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
To: Producers
From: Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Date: October 3, 2001
Subject: Animal Compliance Routine Inspection
Year 2001
Enclosed please find a copy or copies of the Compliance Site Inspection(s) (as 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 with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the faun 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 Anuntal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the faun 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, crosion, and/or nuioff.
As a renunder, please note the following which are conditions of the Certified Aiiiinal Waste Management Plan and the general
permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p 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/stomge 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
q) All 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.
(p Soil analysis is required annually.
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,
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. Tit no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available_ Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in rtutoff during-M'yen_at) )Ucation.
cp 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 required 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
cp The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance with the CAWMP and General Perrttit by properly
managing, supervising, and documenting daily operation and maintenance. The OIC also has the responsibility to certify
monitoring and reporting information. The failure of an OIC to perform his/her duties can result in a letter of reprimand,
suspension of certification, or revocation of certificates.
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 (PDES) pennit 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 your Tecimical
Specialist or me at 252-946-6481, ext. 3 t8.
Cc: WaRO
LBH Files (inspection form only)
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-948-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

p Division of Water Quality
-. „ � Dlv'isiott-ot' fail anater onservation
f p-Qther, Agency
i.•
(Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Dale ofvisit: 2/f9120o2 'Time: f30a
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
p Permitted M Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm County: Gates....................................................WARO......
Owner Name: Paul Lilley Phone No: 252-357-2575
Mailing Address: Rt.l..Box.47........................................................................ Gates.ville-N-C ........................................................ Z7.9.3t1..............
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:.............. .. Phone No:
Onsite Representative: P.a.ui.Lille..y.................................................................................... Integrator:1ndep.........,............,.,..................................................
Certified OperatorTauLT..................................... Lilley ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 19.3.7.0.............................
Location of Farm:
coca ton: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Morse Latitude .®0 ®` ®" Longitude ®• ® ®°
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry' Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer p airy
In Non -Layer p on- airy
p Other -
Total Design Capacity 90
Total SSLW 127,530
Number of Lagoons
pSubsurface
rams
PresentE agaon rea p spray re reA
' Holding`IPonds/ Solid' Traps ,
;
anagemen ys em
p
o
LiquidWaste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach 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. 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? p Yes ll No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure C
Identifier: .............. Wd.............. .......... primaq.......... accoxi Lary........
Freeboard(inches): ............... 27........ ........ ............... 27................ ............... 2.7................ ....................................

Facility Number: 37-15 Date of Inspection
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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
p Yes
®No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
U No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p 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?
p Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN p Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Cotton Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
ONO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
(3 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p 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?
p Yes
®No
Required Records & IDocgnients
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
19, Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
ONO
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p 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
® No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted urmg this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
Comments (refer to question 4): Explain any.YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
sedrawm s of aerlitY to�better exPlain sitations(use.add�tr�oalp a„s necessarY.). ,� Final NotesCoPY
-�
,ges
❑--F-el—dy-
i�
*General permit has been applied for but not received.
*Animals are rotated between paddocks.
*Facility has not irrigated since April 2001.
*Remember to take waste analysis 60 days before - 60 days after irrigation events.
*Suggest keeping lagoon freeboard levels in preparation of general permit,
*Soil test dated 3/30/01. No lime required. Soil test for 2002 crop was taken in Dec. 2001 but results have not been received. Follow
lime requirements.
7. Burial
Lai w, horevrewer nspector ameiMartrniVe
l i E
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

O5103101
Continued
act y Number: 37_15 Date of Itfspeclion
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?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
p Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes p No
A.

Facility Number Date of Visit: 9/26120t)1 Time: 8:04 Printed on: 10/1/2001
Not Operiitionalp Below Threshold
p Permitted ■ Certified 13 Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Paul Lilley Farm County: Gates ................................................... 1?RWA1t.O...:.,.
Owner Name: Paul Lilley Phone No: 252-357-2575
Mailing Address:.146.N.C.3.7..5........................................................................................... Gatuvillc..NC ........................................................ 279.38 ..............
Facility Contact* ...............................................................................Title:.............................. ... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Paul.Lisle,y.................................................................................... Integrator: Andeptendrn1............................................................
Certified Operator: Paul ........................................ Mey..................... ............................. Operator Certification Number: 19.3.7.4.............................
Location of Farm:
.oca ion: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37. &
rr
®Swine p Poultry ❑ Cattle p Horse
Latitude ®•®° ®�� Longitude
Design Current,
Swine . Capacity Pbpulation
[3 Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finish
p arrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Fmish
p Gilts
p Boars
Design 'Curre.nt
Poultry' Capacity r6p'61attan: `'Cattle'
© Layer c3 Dairy
p Non -Layer 1 113 Non -Dairy
13 ter
Total Design Capacity
T.otaLSSLW
Population ,''�
90
j 127,530 J
.Number of Lagoons
0
Subsurface
Drains
resen p
�
Lagoon Area p pray �e Area ,.
Holding Posids / Solsd'Traps__
- .......
-__......
System
p
o
Liquidas
aManagement
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: [3 Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ®No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? na
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ® No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Cl Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 0 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches)..36................ ............... a6................ ............... 3.f............... .......................... .......... ....................... ............. ....................................

Facility Number: 37_ 15 Date of inspection ® Printed on: 10l1/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, (3Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? []Yes ® No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? p Yes H No
9, Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
It.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes
®No
12.
Crop type Fescue, Corn Cotton 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?
p Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
lb,
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
Re
wired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
p 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
N 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)
p Yes
M No
23,
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
M 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 N No
p No violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visa .
�Gl1lil!?'�II�JVi41ALl1Ay Ws1fGL�G�tcAtlyAUL.InuA►lVu7-�uacau�aauVua��n�ca,aauca.waa�)� 7
�, S r' r }4f i �s Fib le Op na Notes
ecor s available for review.
nimals on the ground, rotated between paddocks.
`aste analysis 3128/01 = 1. I lbs.
adn't irrigated since April.
as applied for permit.
lay want to begin recording freeboard levels weekly to prepare for permit requirement.
A analysis will be mailed to me later. SEE PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn.B: Ha
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
on ... � nteredby.Ann Tyndall•• � ..
Date:
O ��

{
05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 37_1 Date of Inspection ® Printed on: 10/1I2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below la Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No

.e.
w QFD r QUak a. , ivi�ion of Wat k
�� o .0 _Division ©f W'A Waicr on servatatin
t
M Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 5/24/2001 Time: 1133 Printed on: 9121/2001
37 l5
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
13Permitted EB Certified [3Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: !'aqt [gill y..k axim_.............................................................................. County: GaltCM............................................. ..... V►{ 0.......
OwnerName: Paul ......................................... Lift........................................................... Phone No: 251-15.7z25.7.5 ..........................................................
MailingAddress: Rj.1.B.ax..47............................................................................................. GatenvAcAC ........................................................ 17939 .............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Pahl.ailky.............................. ..... ....... Integrator: Indrp� Wgiat................. .......................................... ................
Certified Operator: Pltlill......................................... Linty.................................................. Operator Certification Number: .12.3.7.R.............................
Location of Farm:
Location: Hwy. 37 1 mile north of Gatesville west side of Hwy. 37.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 1 36 ° 2q qf3 Longitude 76 ° 45 36 66
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacitv Population
poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer
10 Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Nan -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
® Farrow to Finish
go
60
Total Design Capacity
90
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
127,530
❑ Boars
Discharges dr. 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 time State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ yes ❑ No
c. !f discharge is observed, what is the estimated Mow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systcm? (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? Cl Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............... old ........................priltxat y.................... Immdairy........ .................................... ........................................
21 21 21

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 37-15 Date of Inspection 5/24/2001 Printed on: 9/21/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ l;xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
13. llo 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?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) T7his 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
IT 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 fait 10 discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
10 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
*General Permit has been applied for but not received.
*Suggested recording lagoon level in preparation for permit requirement.
*Waste analysis dated 3/28/01 nitrogen is 1.1 Ibs/1000 gallons.
*Fescue window is open to year round application. Contact tech spec. if change needed.
*Need to put soil test in record book.
*Discussed IRR2/waste analysis schedule. Remember to take waste analysis 60 days before/60 days after irrigation event.
*Fescue field needs to be cut and hay removed as soon as possible.
*Need to lower lagoon level as soon as possible as weather permits and by following guidance from waste plan �
-�- - —
Reviewer/Inspector Name artEn McLawhorn
RPvinwPr/lnenPrtnr CionaturPt liatnt

' 05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 37-15 Date of Inspection 5/24/2001 Printed on: 9/21/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or 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 ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or llrawtnasb I
a

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 13, 1999
Mr. Paul Lilley
Paul Lilley Farm
146 NC 37 South
Gatesville, North Carolina 27938
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Paul Lilley Farm
Facility No. # 37-15
Gates County
Dear Mr. Lilley:
s. 5fATE a
� QuAM V"
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,
/� . � �G46z�✓
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: Gates MRCS
WaRO
LBH files
9Q Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 278M Telephone 252-946-Ml FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

r7d' Division of Soil and.Water Conservation ;O eratlOR Review ss a ._.' i r p r
3 s Division of Soil and,Water Conservation Compliance0.lnspection
t Division of Water Quality Compliance Inspection
p Other Agencys Operation Review, t
r Routine p Complaint p o ow -up of inspection p o ow -up of DSWC revieN% p Other
Facilih• Number
i 1:rfeur,nrc
I'inIt, of I I i011 L_ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
a Permitted M Certified a Conditionally Certified a Registered 113 Not Operationa Date Lass Operate[);
Farin Name: k'.atiJ.Lille)'..Earm............................................................ County: Gates WARD
Owner Name: Paul ......................................... Lilizi......................
FacilityContact: .............................:.................................................
Mailing Address:146.NC.3'1..5onth...........................................
Onsite Representative: kaui.Lillc):.............................................
Certified Operator•:Pa.ul.T.................................... Ulley ...........
Location of Farm:
Plione No: 252-35.7-.2757.5.... I......
Title................................................................ PhoneNo:
..................................... Gates ille.NC........................................................ 279,3R ..............
.................................... Integrator: �ll�l.Giptdelxend ettx)...................
..................................... Operator Certification Nuniber:19320 .............................
A,
V
Latitude ®0® ®1, Longitude ®• ' ®�
Design'Current Design Current Design Current
Swine. Capacity Population , Poultry `Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to ee er
❑ F ceder to F inis
p Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Fee er
g Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ airy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ on- airy
❑ ter
Total Design Capacity 90
Total SSLW 127,530
Number of I:..agoo'ns ❑ u stir ace rains resent ❑ Lagoon rea p pra) Pie rea
Holding Ponds'[Solid Traps p No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharc,tes S Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
g No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
g No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If ves, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVinin?
d. Does discharge bypass a la��oon system? (If ves. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
g 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
g No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (Freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway
❑ Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3, Structure 4 Structure 4;
Structure
G
Identifier: ........ .......Qld.............. .......... pnitnary......... ........ secondary. ........ ................................... ...................................
...................................
Freeboard(inches):..............45..4............................45 4...........................4.5A.........................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
Continued
on hack

-ciity. umber: 37-15 I1:11r-d Iu.nCL-6111E 5727/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
p Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
p 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
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Cotton
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the.faciiity 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?
p Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage &. General Permit readily available?
p 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
IN No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
Cl No.vialationscieilcies.wvere.noted during.this visit.:Y''ou w' iii:r'ece'ive na further.' '
.• cOrxCs�arlde�Ge.a�ioltxt�lis.�rasat. .•. .�.•..•.•.•. ......•.•
nCommentsefer t61gtestion #) Et
ap- la. �n!
Y:.J<A9 L'i.s
s�e
.h
sa> t -....n. jri, `�: : �. �443 ,�E � i. ♦Y.:.. 'E. J'l.n€i .& ,t i - 1 N'ry _� �,.rr'1 �
�Tr..n .a rnvy�r`. wn -ns inni��ir k�':1,n+4o.'-nv rlin lrl-c i114 �1AIr1C lIICP�OI�I�I�Ill �l9�l lla APC+�J CfRP!`PCCA MV� _. ..
.N .. x .r,.. ,...
rs on the ground and animals are rotated around and several lots are taken out of rotation for vegetation growth.
ce sure to pull waste samples within 60 days of application. Use the correct acreage on the IRR2 records. Suggest to determine
actual acreage of each pull. If you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, extension 318.
IV
��,y i3 Hardison -', „Entered.yAnn0. Tyn"da11�, �.�<
�,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1��8� Date: 5_r�►i f��j

Division of Soil and Water Conseiyatton Operation Review
Drnsion of Soil and,Water Gonset~yataon ,Compliance Inspection } '
4
.,Division of Water Quality Compliance Inspection „
0 Other Agency -Operation .
tRevtew r
14D Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 5=a7.4P
Time of Inspectiou 9= a5 24 hr. (hh:mm).
0 Permitted ® Certified D Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ��....... ..� Cuunty:...
n.... Qh�................................................G4���................................,........ Wl.............
Owner Name:........P ...........................L41.................. ................................. ........ Phone No. .....
�4.,� .-...,.17 7.rr. r .�. ...............
FacilityContact:..................................... ............ --.........................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:. 12! l ...../k/ 3.7.7 5....... .. tr%lax..................... &!;G............ _93.1..,�..0
Onsite Representative: ...... &4d ................... ......... 4a. t.1A-7....................................
Integrator:.......................................
Certified Operator: .......... BU1.........7....................4! Ze-{ .. Operator Certification Number:. 1,`,�,:5�.,.- ...................... .... .................
Location of Farm:
r
................................................................................. ..............
Latitude �° 11 Longitude • i i4
Design Current
Swine, : . Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
qp
5
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
'Holding'Popds / Solid Traps
Design Current' Design Current,
Poultry CapacityCipicity Pa ulation Cattle' Capacity Po ulation ,,
❑ Layer ❑,Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liouid Waste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
Lagoon Area `U Spray Field Area
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water or 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)
® No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
No
h '—
❑ Yes
® No
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
Strut urc 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: `-+ -° -
Freeboard (inches): .......1 ............. .........:....!...................... ........ .... .....................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes BNo
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
❑ Yes IN No
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: !�,7 _ _! S Date of Inspection s 17-99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes g_No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 9 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes [3No
Waste Anolication
I0. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,g-No
11. Is there evidences of over application?/� ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN • ❑ Yes ,9f10
12. Crop tYPc zeSCu Q ar", 'S'[v►. 4e--,.—
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 2r-No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes E9 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes B No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? , ❑ Yes E; No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Ej No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ��0�
❑ 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
allo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie(' i anon eeboard, ste analysr. & soil sample reports)
8 Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
0 No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ffNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Yes
O�No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑
23.
Did Rev iewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
O No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
S-No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
�Vcj viol;ar%io>r;s'oed fic�encies rvtrre nptea d rrtng thls'visit; Yojk ;will >�ee�iv16 li, fut�tho ;
. •
correspondence: a'btitif thi's visit. • :: • : • : - : - ... - ....... • . • ..: . : . ::.:.:...................:.:.: .
Comments (refer o' question #)„ Explain any YES answers arid/or'.any recommendations or any other comments: �J
rawii :' of facih to /better ex lain,situations. use additio Use d f ty p ( nal pages as necessary):
A4C,_41_ —JIV ,�- wry e"o
., _......_ .r. _
Reviewer/Inspector Name = °'� ', �
�,
v ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:�� `7
3/23199

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency d r.
In Division of Water Quality xj
® Routine O Com laint O Follow-up of DWQ ins tetion O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
F- Facility Number 7
Time of Inspection 1 a•30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
D Registered ® Certified © Applied for Permit ©Permitted 113NotOperational Date Last Operated: .......................
FarmName; .............. I..........."..1................F°.'^^.....................................,....... County:...................................................................
4
OwnerName: .........................01.:�...............s..11.� ................................ ....... Phone No:.......................................................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:— .......................
MailingAddress:...........................................................
Onsite Representative: .................. !!1.........Z.'..).1............ ......................
...............
Certified Operator: ......................... "•,............... I i..
Location of Farm:
PhoneNo:.... ...............................................
Integrator:......................................................................................
Operator Certification Number: .........................................
Latitude o•o� �" Longitude 0• �° 0«
r Design" Current Design ;, Current Design, Current
5 wine Capacity' `Population Poultry Capacity Population ' Cattle Capacity Populaton
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
IS Farrow to Finish Gl ri1 7 Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
r ❑Boars; Total SSLW
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes A No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes J[No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ O[her
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not,in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes DR No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes S No
❑ Yes 9ft No

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Siructures (LggoQn§jhlding�ish Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....,.., '':' ".I ....... ....... [,v„ i?^!...... .................................... ................................... .....................................................................
Freeboard(ft):.......... I.....3� 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 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 ....................................... ........................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes 19 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?
13. No :violations: ot• derkiencies: we're: Roted- du' rink this:visit.::Y.o4 4411 receive. iro_furth'er;
JeOrespQlii$etice. A00t tbis'vWt:::. , .... .:.: .
f `W 4v e. t ! m N, ,✓ 41/ V ,,44- q p 1s'�4
d
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes I,No
❑ Yes t,No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes 1. No
❑ Yes 15 No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes Jq No
❑ Yes ❑ No
7/25/97
Reviewer/Ins ector Name -- �° "' .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: (�� , Q ,k,✓—_ _ Date:1i- ��

s %-.
[] Division of Soil and Water Conservation ® Other Agency
❑ Division of Water Quality
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of IJNV2 ins action O Follow-up of DSWC: review 0 Other
Date of inspection - /-
Facility Number 15
Tinxe of Inspection f ¢� 24 hr. (hhanm)
D Registered ®Certified © Applied for Permit Cj Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated
Farm Name: .......PaU11..Me y...Farm.................... .............. County: ....... Cates ................. .... .......... .... .... ...... .GM.......
Owner Name: ...... :Pad ................................. ....... Ulley ..................... Phone Nw ..2.52-3,57mZ57..5...... ...................
Facility Contact: ....Paul... Lilley........................................ Title ... Owner Phone i\o:..25z.-. S..7.- .7.5............. ........... ......... ...............................
Mailing Address: .... RQu.t..e..1.Bo.x..A7................................................................................Ga.tesville.,....NC................,.....................2.7938.......
Onsite Representative: ...................................................
Certified Operator;...... Pau], Li lIgy.................
Location of Farm:
I ......... I ................ Integrator; ........ Independent ............... :..............1
....................... Operator Certification Number.....1.9.3.7.0 ..........
. . . .................................................................................I........................................... ,....................................................................... I............ I...... ...............................
J
NC...37...... 1./..2.. Mile,. North o.f...QA.���Y��..F...IyG................
Latitude Longitude �r 0 ®`
Ucs�gn Current
Swme F Citpacity Aopu6a6'n PnWtry, C
t
® Wean to Feeder
180
p
® Feeder to Finish
So
® Farrow to Wean
p
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
® Gilts
90
170
❑ Boars
=Current FE,,. ,Design Current
y Popula.. n' r `Cattle CapiAcity, Pgptilation ','
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
:
a
' Total Design.Ca�� ictty.-0. 740
t r� t
0. SSL' 74810
rNumher of �',10 Subsurface Drains Present ,J❑ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Fie
td Area
{r „. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes IR No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes KNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. Ifdischarge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? GLym notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 54 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes JR No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes RNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes CK No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 1K No
7/25/97
Cnrtliirucrf on hack

Facility Number: ,37 — IS-
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.11olditgPonds, Flush fits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(IQ).............3.................. .......... —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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes $1 No
Structure 5 Structure 6
......................................................
❑ Yes El No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste_Applicatim
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(if in excess of ;WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......t'1�a4!v...�4i� AAA.5.....................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certifiers or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems'noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
13 No.vialations or. de'rciencies. were: noted,during' this: visit..:Yoiu,4i11 receive ni o further, . ;
corres'pe>i�dehce abouE �tliis;visif.• : • . � . � .. - �. � •' • . �. � .:.. :. ; ..: ... • .:.
❑ Yes JRJ No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes KNo
i$ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes C$ No
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes C&No
❑ Yes JKNo
❑ Yes JR No
❑ Yes [KNo
❑ Yes JA No
❑ Yes Ja No
❑ Yes ❑ No
/le . W WO AIC",f r ,BE 4,0EAW Ta .SVoW PRDjP&t Ra4C' LNG CP4PJ*.
.,4hAZ1cA7-1d,V Ams cbuE o,v FAM1.6- TWE' 4 rr 17,"C. ,nrt. e-/U" WILL NVAV
7_,C6fN144L S1EG14.sr WriP AAF40 d p-
1 1 7/25/97 H

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 1, 1997
Mr, Paul Lilley
Rt I Box 47
Gatesville, 27938
Subject: Annual Compliance Inspection
Facility Number 37-15
Gates County
Dear Mr. Lilley:
wl'F,z
On October 1, 1997, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of (lie Division of Water
Quality conducted an inspection of your swine operation. This inspection is one of two annual
inspections as required by Senate Bill 1217. The Division of Soil and Water Conservation will also
conduct an inspection of your intensive livestock operation during the 1997 calender year.
The following comments are in regard to the inspection of facility 37-15.
The freeboard was observed to be approximately 4 and 4.5 feet for your two existing lagoons.
You are advised that you must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in each lagoon plus a
storage volume sufficient to accomodate the rainfall and any subsequent runoff from a 25 year
24 hour storm event to remain in compliance.
* At the time of this inspection your operation has not been certified in accordance with
15A NCAC 2H .0217. If you have not already done so, you must complete
certification by December 31, 1997.
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have piny questions in regard to this
letter I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208,
Sincerely,
Carl Dunn
��' Environmental Engineer
cc: �watt0 Files
DSWC - WaRO
Gates County NRCS
Compliance/Enforcement Group
Central Files
943 Washin,7ton Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27B89 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Frnployer

❑DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review �.
M DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site inspection
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of DS%VC review 0 Other
facilDate of Inspection
ity Number 37 IS
Time of Inspection �24 hr. (hh:mm)
©Registered O Certified 0 Applied for Permit ©Permitted 113Not Operational I Date Last Operated
Farm Name: P z11re: ..........r.;,/;* ............................... ....................... County:...,.,....Gv4,-s..,................................ ..................
....
OwnerName: (21H 1 Meg Phone `'o ........................./...................................................................,........................................,..............................................
Facility Contact: ........ !".�........ ��s .............. Title Phone No ...................................
MailingAddress.......... 4....Of .7 ...... L, ...L-.................�.,...3�............................... ................,. ..,.......,.,.............
`.......... .... �.,........I.... 2'
Onsite Representative .............. n" f y1%1 P.l ... Integrator:.......................................................
Certified Operator. ............. °1.^.�......., ,jre� .... Operator Certification Number,..............,.. ..............
........................................................
Location of farm:
Latitude • 1 61 Longitude ° "
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
Q
Feeder to Finish
�(
® Farrow to Wean
❑ "• rrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
qO
d
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer PONon-Dairyl
Dairy
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds �^'_� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
J9 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ONo '
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
El Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d, Dees discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
O No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
bfNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
1KNo
mai ntenance/i mprovement?
b. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
19 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge'?
❑ Yes
*No
7/25/97 Continued on back

M �
Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes KNo
Structures I.a goons Ifoldin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes X No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �1!K!!11 �%� 01�
Freeboard (11) ............................................. .......................... o .,............. ............ ...,......... .............................................
......................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 0 No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes b,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 X No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type CL?,!'.!^,
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW,IMP)? ❑ Yes KNo
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?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Yes
IgNo
Z Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies rvere'noted-during' this:visit.- .You,will receive no further
correspondence about this visit:
Comments (refer io question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any.reco
Use d'rawtngs of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as
15
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
ons or any other comments.,,.
NqA t. cL, p r� too ?ss we.
Mr. l,'!I a� i`s ►�-�►.��� on ..y X
G�.a,�k o� ►-c�'��,li�� A !!A.. 1 1 n
v iolry. �Efu o(Tyri'� 1 S Yr. �j�.� !('I�nsf, 0,Jy 0 S..O ,l^- 6"
iZsta a C to 4\ 7/25/97
w .....
Reviewerlinspector Name : 'fir JD 4n
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /0-/ - L%

® DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Reviewn wAs�rfA��Q C
❑ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection : s aUGsr ,r
10 Routine Cam llint 0 Follow-up of DVQ inspection jnh.a-llow-u .o,()SWC review O Other -x 16.4 ,r►, l
�,.m, Date I& Inspection -18-97
Facility Number 37 1S Time Orl' lospection / TO 24 lir. (lib :nim)
Total Time tin fraction ot'hours
Farm Status: ® Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (r,r-: L25 for 1 hr 15 mini) Spcnt on Review I L•_ 1 t
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or 1wpection (includes traveland processing)
113 Not O )eralional Dale last Operated: .....................................................................................
Farm Name :.........PA.U.1........ Z-.,./L..C.v..........,F.:ff,1124,1 .......................................... Cnnnt}': /4�_S 7 ....... ,./LiC�........
u.L........ ./. Y....................................................................... Phone No: ...... �.!.. ..(....-. `57. ..............,....,,.....
Facilit} Ccmtact:..,.,{�f�lr1.........1..L,LL Y..............................'F'it1e:............Alt.lrll.F 1'ItorteNo:. !` ..�s ! ?-ZT7.r
Mailing Address:....../Q.T..�....... ............................................................ ...05i9..iz-.Tw4C.C..........................
Onsite [teprescnt:rti�t:...... A(.. ... ... Integrator:.........................................................
Certified Operator:.........A.Gl..4........... �-/�t;��Y........................ .. 01wrator Certification Number: ....... t.g12� 2...........
Location of Firm:
.�
�V..7.............i..!......1�oRr.!....�1...CT.r1i.� r..-.ur.sr..,.v-...Q.F...N...,,.7...............
.....................,.......................
.... .
Latitude ° :' Longitude ' 4 "
Type of Operation
Swine
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
sv yScJ ❑ Non-1_:ryer IE3 Non-Dair•v
9 Wean to Feeder
to Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wcan
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
® Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds / ❑ Subsurl ice Drains l'resen❑ 1
t .aFn❑ oq Area Spray Field Area I
(rC`IlCral
1. Are there any hutfers that need ni iinteii ince/iiiiprovenient'?
2. Is any discharge observed frorn any part of the operation:'
Di<LharE�e originated al: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If cfischar,,c is observed, was the conveyance tnan-made:'
h. It'discharge is Observed. did it reach.Surfacc Watrr'.' (lf tics. notify DWQ)
c lfclis�har�c is observe.d. what is the esli+nated flow Ill gafiwin?
d. f)Ue5 disch;u'<'e bypass a Itig�irc1n sy5tent'.` (if' yc.. ttrtify 1)1�'Q
3. Is there evidence of past discharge front any part of the operalion'r
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than froni a discharge?
5. [rocs any part of the waste nianagenient sysicrn (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improcenient7
4/3tv97
❑ Yes tK No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes CK No
❑ Yes tKNo
KYes ❑ No
Continued on hack

Facility Number: 37 —
6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (La sons and/orHoldin Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Frechoard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 StnEcture 3
y�
❑ Yes IM No
❑ Yes E4 No
❑ Yes JKNo
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 19 No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes D§ No
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 2 No
of 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 ............. C,a"........ ........................ ......... ............................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes 0 No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
M No
18.
Does (lie receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
54 No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
$K No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
DI No
21.
Did Reviewerlfnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
J9 No
For Certified Facilities Onl
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
,do S&ASuAFACE AMAAt/ACre ON .Tf7Y P6( A)AGL AtGLEY.
S: 90 �4m1*tA1S oisu aru DAY Lo7X6AouvD. At4. AIU,47 /s CUAteurly cJ "14, Wrr4 IVRC
AND TNE' GArss SWc,r) f Y/Wmra 7NOSE My tors 7a M6Er caenz14ArAOA1,
13. N07- /QEQUrAED Ar 7-MA6 of rQEdtEttl.
4 SO 41-IMA1.S AAE IV CaNFiAMFMCNi OV MS Oi,-A4-rr opt . 14 SECaAvD 1A600w IS A)e C SSAAY
/j9t:Er Y/fE SSLu1 S,tteuly dAr PA66' t C7yI gib,, 11R. uLtEr NAs /4 ,vAcs ber*,v Fob. TNAr
7a In, Art7- A SS4W LC►v7�/1CT, We S�WVD 446coN W14C BE CavSrrluc7F4 /w 11doet7- 7WO
(A)MKS. /f k. 41Lt_,CY MIS A41441 6ED Nt3 PAes6A1'r /.. 680A) Pay WALL ,4uD TJlE7Z6 Arm No
DiSeNARGEs 6A PAVB�S, 71je14+erMALS pN THE 6 ou+vD &LX" ArSLuSf6D IA/ �7rAS".
Reviewer/Inspector Name iV/y/S_ uJ,u_+ ` w��.+. § t x „k{ 3s�
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: A-97
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Facility Namber:,,j 7 — /S
Date of Inspection I W-/J-9
x a
Addition�f Conunents ancUat Y]rawings v , ' ° fr : ;
W�"
/Ytk. klLlxY uEEvS 70 ce,v7Acr D&RZ iA) 411elGN 7-0 C AA&rcr THE AIUMIERS
T/�AT )Vr //AS VaSus 41114T is iN TfI�F- l),gr,4 B,4SE lj44, 41UCy IIASsa[ofJ ArC-Crrs
44711Au4 BAc..,C /6 YMAS To V61,1PY h"S Nu.""AS,
4/30/97

Site Requires Immediate Attention: Alo
Facility No. 3 d1 fs—
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: lb, f , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: PO
Mailing Address:
County: G A �E.i
Integrator:
On Site'Representat ve:
Physical Address/Location:
.Phone:
Type of Operation: Swine 1_ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 44o No. of Animals on Site: �7
DEM Certification No.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No P
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: I- Ft O Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or
Was any erosion observed? Yes or P_
Is adequate land available for spray? 4J02- or No
Is the cover crop adequate? -o
Crop(s) being utilized: celao
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? dw-or No 100 Ft from Wells? No
Is the t�j
waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or
Is animal waste n applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of 'the state b n-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes os
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
LZ
In pector Name S ature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
{Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

DEM.
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Tuio
Comments:
Sketch:
r