400050_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA �
Department of Environmental Qua'.

IN1,1%
IOP0N
Lo]
rr•K�}f 3y IRVT'

y
0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
400050
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS400050
Denied Access
Inppection Typo:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County:
Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
0812212017 Entry Time: 02:00 pm Exit Time: 2:50
pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Rachel Moye Farms
Owner Email:
matandtaysma@embarc
Owner:
Rachel I Moye
Phone:
252-746-6356
Mailing Address:
2836 Ormondsville Rd
Ayden NC 285139605
Physical Address:
2836 Ormondsville Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35° 27' 37" Longitude:
77' 32' 47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel I Moye Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s)'.
On -Site Re prosentative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rachel I Moye Phone:
On -site representative Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 412015
6-16-17 = 1.80
2-23-17 = 1.59
12-5-16 = 7.09 - sludge - need to balance IRRs for 11/2016 removalll
11-23-16 = .66
IRR records are complete & balanced through April 2017, need to balance summer irrigation events.
Reviewed: crop yield; sludge survey; freeboard/rainfall; calibration 9-2016
page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/22/17 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 31840 3,756
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518.400
Waste Structures Observed
Disignated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
40.00
Lagoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
43,00
page: 2

y Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: O8/22/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Ng Ng
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)
❑
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)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
0.1111
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No No 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
❑
MEI
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
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: AWS4QQQ50 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400054
Inspection Date: 08/22/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
WasteApplication
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
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
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E0
❑
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,
❑
E ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO 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 / 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ❑ ❑
page: 4

■ Division of Water Resources
Division of Sall and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
400050 Facility Status:
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Date of Visit:
08/04/2016 Entry Time: 09:00 am
Farm Name:
Rachel Moye Farms
Active
Permit: AWS400050 [] Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
County: Greene Region: Washington
Exit Time: 9:40 am Incident of
Owner Email: matandtaysma@embarc
Owner: Rachel I Moye Phone: [phone]
Wailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 285139605
Physical Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: M ❑ Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1400
Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
Latitude: 35` 27' 37"
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Other Issues
Longitude: 77° 32' 47"
Waste Application
Certified Operator: Rachel I Moye Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rachel I Moye Phone:
On -site representative Rachel I Moye Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 2015
7-26-16 = 1.01
5-13-16 = 1.03
2-22-16 = .84
11-13-15 = 1.12
8-10-15 = 1.20
ERR rescords are complete & balanced out & PAN remaining.
Reviewed: crop yield; stocking; calibration; sludge survey due in 201711 & 201812
page: 1

.4
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/04/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Fi—swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 4,000
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
29.00
Lagoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
28.00
page: 2

.e
I
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/04/16 Inpsection 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?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the Slate? (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)
❑
❑ ❑
El
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
1111
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 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 (Led large
❑
❑ ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑ ❑
r
❑
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 No
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?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/04/16 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yea
No Na No
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?
❑
1111
❑
Records and Documents
Yea
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?
❑
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?
❑
page: 4

,ie
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/04/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
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 1 Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
CAWM P?
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?
Yes No No No
11
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Y N_g� o No Ne
❑ 1113 ❑
40
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400050
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 071Q812015 Entry Time: 09:50 am Exit Time: 10:35 am Incident #
Farm Name: Rachel Moye Farms Owner Email:
Owner: Rachel I Moye Phone:
❑ Denied Access
Washington
mats ndtaysma@embarc
252-746-6366
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 285139605
Physical Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 27' 37" Longitude: 77' 32' 47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel I Moye Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rachel I Moye Phone:
On -site representative Rachel I Moye Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 412015
5.22-15 = 1.29
3-19-15 = 1.38
10-31-14 = 1.01
8-27-14 = 1.04
6-3-14 = 1.28
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: stocking/mortality: crop yield, rainfalllfreeboard & sludge surveys (due in 2017 & 2018)
page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 07/08/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 2,090
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Disignaled Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
#1 SMALL
05/24195
19.00
39,00
Lagoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
38.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 07/08/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection. Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yea
No No Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
01311
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)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 No 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 (Led large
❑
� ❑
❑
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 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry slacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yee 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?
❑ M ❑ ❑
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: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection pate: 07/08/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yea
No No No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
small Grain Ovemeed
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
Cl
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Waste Application?
n
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection pate: 07/08/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yee 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
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
Yes No Na No
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,
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWM P7
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
❑
❑
page: 5

r
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400050
Inpsection Type: Compliance inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 07117/2014 EntryTime: 02:00 pm Exit Time: 2:35 pm
Farm Name: Rachel Moye Farms
Owner: Rachel I Moye
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondswlle Rd Ayden NC 286139605
Physical Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Latitude: 35' 27' 37"
❑ Denied Access
Washington
matandtaysma®embarc
252-746.6356
Longitude: 77° 32' 47"
Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Other issues
Certified Operator: Rachel I Moye Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Rachel I Moye Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil tested 212013
Waste Analysis:
6-3-14= 1.28
3.27-14= 1.34
1-27-14= 1.48
10-18-13= 1.14
8-26-13= .81
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Reviewed rainfall, freeboard, stocking and mortality.
Remember to do calibration before December 31, 2014. NOTE:Sludge survey for #1 due 2017 & #2 due 2018
page: 1

i
R
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 07/17/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 4,200
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
Lagoon
#2 LARGE 05/18/94
19.00
page: 2

1
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility : Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 07/17/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharpes & Stream Impacts
Yes
No No Na
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
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)
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
■ ❑
Cl
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No No 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
❑
M ❑
Cl
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 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
MEI
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
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

0
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 07/17/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
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
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
M ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No bin Ntt
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
11011
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other? ,
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Hoes 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

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number:
400050
Inspection Date: 07/17/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yea No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and T' Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
0
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes No No_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?
❑
❑
❑
(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 Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

I
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AV400Q�Q t_.1 Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County; Region. Washington
Date of Visit: 09/09/2013 Entry Time: 11:30 AM Exit Time: 12-40 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Rachel Moye Farms _ Owner Email: matandtaysmai-emba
Owner: Rachel l Move Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 2@ 139605
Physical Address: Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'37" Longitude: 77°32'47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
© Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel I Moye Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rachel I Moye Phone:
On -site representative Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: _.-
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-26-13 = .81
4-15-13 = 1.59
2-7-13 = 1.41
10-14-12 = .72
soil tested: 2-2013
Date:
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard & stocking are recorded. Sludge survey dated 8-29-13.
Looks Good!
Page: 1

0
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Rachel I Moye
Inspection Date: 0910912013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400050
Reason far Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current (Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 2,906
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05124195
19.00
24.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
26.00
Page: 2

4
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number : 400050
Inspection Date: 09109/2013 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 (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■ ❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■ ❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No NA
ME
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

4
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Rachel I Moye
Facility Number : 400050
Inspection pate: 09/09/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
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
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
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?
ONO
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
11011
❑
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: AWS400050 Owner • Facility: Rachel I Moye Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 09/0912013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: 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?
❑
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

v
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Rachel I Moye
Inspection Date: 09/09/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400050
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 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit; ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: ComgjjBnce Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routing County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/15/2012 Entry Time: 08:30 AM Exit Time: 09:20 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc. Owner Email:
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsvillg RU. Aydga NQ 2855 39605
Physical Address: Ayden NC 285513
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Mur v-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: �5*27'37" Longitude: 77°32'47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood
Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative (a): Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name Rachel Wood
Phone:
On -site representative
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 12/2011
6-4-12 = .87
4-9-12 = .93
2-6-12 = 2.0
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard, crop yield & mortality are recorded.
Looks Great!
Remember to do the calibration & sludge survey in 2012,
Page: 1

Jl�
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 08115/2012 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number : 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,998
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier
Designed Observed
Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
22,00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/18194
19.00
23,00
Page; 2

Permit: AW5400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/15/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Discharges S Stream Impacts Yes No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ 0
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑ BOO
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)
❑ 0
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ S
❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑ ■
❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collectlon, 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
❑ IS
❑ ❑
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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
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? 11000
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

N
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/1512012 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 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Way)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
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? ❑ ■ ❑ 0
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: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 08/1512012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
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)?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
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: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/15/2012 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? ❑ M ❑ ❑
naL-__ 1......__ Van Nn NA NF
2& 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 11000
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.a,, discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31, Do subsurface Ile 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?
!
Page: 6

r
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400050 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit. 08/03/2011 Entry Time: 09100 AM Exit Time: 09A0 AM . Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms. Inc. Owner Email:
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsy0Ile Rd Avden NC 285139605
Physical Address: 2836 OrmondsviIle Rd Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm;
NCSR 1400
Latitude:35°27'37" Longitude: 77°32'47"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
On -site representative Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis:
6-10-11 = 1.3 soil tested: 11-2010
3-21-11 = 1.3
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Freeboard & rainfall are recorded, as well as stocking/mortality.
SS & caliberation due 2012
Facility looks good and bookeeping is great!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
inspection Date: 08/03/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Facility Number : 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Desiggned Observed
Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner • Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number*. 400050
Inspection Date: 08/03/2011 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 st
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
❑ Cl ❑ ❑
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? 0
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS40005D Owner • Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number : 400050
Inspection Date: 0810312011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applicatlon
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 08/03/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number : 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
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: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 08/03/2011 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? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Otherlssues 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 1 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the 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: 400050Facility Status: fictive Permit: AWS400050 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Vlsit: 10/22/2010 Entry Time:09Q5 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc.
Owner: Ervin Wood
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 2836 Orrnondsville Ind 6voen NC 2§5139605
Physical Address:
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: _
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'37" Longitude: 77*32-47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
© Discharges & Stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application -
Records and Documents © Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
On -site representative Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection pate: 10/22/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason forVialt: Routine
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
B-6-10 = 1.0
6-7-10 = 1.3
4-6-10 = .93
2-5-10 = 1.3
soil tested 4-2010 SS due 2010 Calib. 6-2010
Extension given on Bermuda hay fields until Oct. 30, 2010 by Louie H, Johnson, Ext, Agent - Greene Co.
Freeboard range: 4-4-10 = 22 & 24" to 44 & 46" on 9-26-10
Irr records are complete and balanced out. Looks Great!
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 1012212010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number:400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,110
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
sgoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
35.00
sgoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
38,00
Page: 3

r
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection date: 1012212010 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)
❑
■ ❑
❑
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 (I.e./ 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,
(3
■ ❑
❑
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 Ap Ilcp ation
Yes
No NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
Cl
■ ❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

0
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 1012212010 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 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
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 craps 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.
WU P?
❑
Page: 5

f
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 1012212010 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)?
❑
IN
❑
❑
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: 6

if
Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 10/22/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
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?
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 7

1
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400060 Q Denied Access
Inspection Type: Q=Hance„lnaoection
Reason for Visit: Rouline County
Inactive or Closed Date:
Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/09/2009 Entry Time:08:25 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms. Inc. Owner Email:
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd _ Ayden NC 285139605
Physical Address: 2836 Ormondsvillg Rd Ryden NC 28513
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: MuLy-grown, LLC
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1400
Latitude:35°271aZ" Longitude:77°32'47"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
On -site representative Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone.
Inspector Signature: Hate:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-18-09 1.0
6-14-09 1.6
3-5-09 1.6
soil test 12/2008 & lime applied 2008
Looks Greatl
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine -Feeder to Finish 3,840 2,178
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSI_W: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
42.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/16/94
19.00
43.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 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)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3, Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures tack 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

r
Permlt: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 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 soit?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal
Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

P
91 Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 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?
Cl
■
❑
❑
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 Q ■ Q ❑
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

I
Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 02/09/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Athar iaaima 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

0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active - Permit: AWS400050 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: j(yastington
Date of Visit: 10/14/2008 Entry Time: 11:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc. Owner Email: MatandtaysmaDearth)
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd
Physical Address: 2836 OrmondsviIle Rd
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Premium Standard Farms Of North �grolmna Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'37" Longitude: Z,Z°32'47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Phone:
On -site representative Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
10-02-08 = 1.4
7-10-08 = 1.1
4-16-08 = 1.4
Looks Good
soil test Dec. 2007
Page: 1
s

0
Permit:AWS400050 Owner - Facliity:ErvinWood
Inspection Date: 10/1412008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
W Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,859
Total Design- Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
38.00
agoon
Q LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
39.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 10/14/2008 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? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 1101111
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 (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
❑
■
❑
❑
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: AWS400050 Owner- Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number:400050
Inspection Date: 1011412008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P2O5? 0
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 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crap 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: AWS400050 Owner- FaclIIty: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 10/14/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit. Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NF
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 andlor 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

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 1011412008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewhnspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

■ Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400050 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comaliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine , _,...,___,...._ County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/14/2008 Entry Time: 11:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Eacin Wood _& Son Farms.,IRs. Owner Email: matandtaysm earth)
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsyiile Rsi„- ..,...__... Auden NC 285132Q05
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Premium Standard Farms Of North Carolina Inc
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'a7" Longitude: 77°32'47"
NCSR 1400
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Phone:
On -site representative Erivn & Rachel wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
10-02-08 = 1.4
7-10-08 = 1.1
4-16-08 = 1.4
Looks Good
soil test Dec. 2007
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 1011412008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,859
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
38.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19,00
39.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 10/14/2008 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?
❑ MOO
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ MOO
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 (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑ ■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑ ❑
dry slacks 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 1011412008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
You No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
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
OMOD
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure andlor 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?
❑ ■ ❑ Cl
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: AWS400050 Owner- Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 10/14/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yos
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 rainbrLaaker 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 lass 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

Permit: AWS400050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 10/14/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
Q
■0
Q
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
0■
❑ Q
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Q
■
❑ Q
Page: 6

r
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: AZ§400050 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Region: Wshinoton
Date of Visit: 09/13/2007 Entry Time:11:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc. Owner Email: matandtaysmaQearthl
Owner: Ervin Wood Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Avden NC 285139605
Physical Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1400
Latitude:35°27'37" Longitude:77°32'47"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Phone:
24 hour contact name Rachel Wood Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: —
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
B-2-07 = 1.1
5-25-07 = 1.1
3-14-07 = 1.8
1-09-07 = 1.2
soil test 4-2006
Looks Greatl
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 09/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,748
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifler Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
19.00
50.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/18/94
19.00
43.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number : 400050
Inspection Date: 09/13/2007 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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. aid 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 (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 ❑
■
❑ Cl
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)
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
14. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
130
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: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 09/13/2007 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 manurelsludge 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?
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(May)
Small Grain Overseed
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 09/13/2007 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
Cl
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 00011
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 09/13/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
ALL _.- I__.__-
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?
Facility Number : 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
ONOO
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400050 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA240050 __ ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinoton
Date of Visit: 03/22/2006 Entry Time:09030 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc. Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 2836 Ormondsville Rd Auden NC 205139605
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
NCSR 1400
Latitude.35"27'37" Longitude:77°32'47"
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Rachel M Wood Operator Certification Number: 16605
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Phone:
24 hour contact name Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil test April 2005
Waste anlayses:
2-15-06 =1.5
11-22-05 = 1.1
8-24-05 = 1.1
5-20-05 = 1.8
Keep up the Great Jots!
Page: 1

Permit: NCA240050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number:400050
Inspection Date: 03/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
5wlne
Swine -Feeder to Finish 3,840 3,552
Total Design Capacity: 3,840
Total SSLW: 518,400
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
#1 SMALL
05/24/95
i9.00
26.00
agoon
#2 LARGE
05/16/94
19.00
29.00
Page: 2

Permit: NCA240050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 03/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
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 ❑
MOO
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
❑
0011
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: NCA240050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood
Inspection Date: 03/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400050
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA HE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 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
Bermuda Grass (Hay,
Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA240050 Owner - Facility: Ervin Wood
Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 03/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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

Permit: NCA240050 Owner -Facility: Ervin Wood Facility Number: 400050
Inspection Date: 03/22/2006 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? ❑ im ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ im ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

191
IType of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation k
(Reason for Vlslt 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification .O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 50 Date of Visit: 3-t0-2o04 Time: 4:00
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .....................
Farm Name: ErviKt.Wo.o.t.&.S.QR.Fa.rm:s..Iutc............................................................ County: G.r.0Itc............................................... Wadi?.........
OwnerName !]CYIjl ....................................... 1?V9.tt�l........................................................... Phone No: 251-1464156 ...........................................................
Mailing Address: 28.3..6.Arm.9adig.Y.iile.Rd..................................................................... AY CM.NYC............................................................... 20.5J.3 ..............
FacilityContact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:..................................................
Onsite Representative: Raghdatld.Eryirt.................... ................................................... Integrator: 1!.rgmium.btundard.Faxmc.af.Noxttl...........
Certified Operator:Rache.1.1.l't.............................. W.Q.Qd.................................................. Operator Certification Number:1.0605 .............................
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry [I Cattle [I Horse Latitude 35 - • 27 37 �� Longitude 77 • 32 47 ��
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population . Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JF1 Layer
I
Dairy'
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3725
JEI Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
3,840
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
518,400
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 2 Subsurface Drains Present Spray Field Area
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 24 22
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 40-50
Date of inspection 3-10-2004
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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ® No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
[]Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN []Hydraulic Overload ❑ Froxen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
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? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N No
16, is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N No
19. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes N No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments (refer to question,#)::Explain any YES;answcrs and/or.any.recammendatians or'any other,comments
Use drawings,of facility.to better egplarn situations:;(use additional page's as.necessary):. ❑ Field Copy ®AFinal Notes
Reviewer/Inspector Name Marlene D. Salyer
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection 3-10-2004
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ 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
® No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®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?
❑ Yes
® No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
® No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
®No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
[:]StockingForm ❑ Crap Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
[3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
p Natural Resources Conservation Service
p Soil and Water Conservation District
p Other...
Facility Number 40 - 50 Date: 124103 Tlme: 1 1300 Time on Farm: 55 WaRO
Farm Name Ervin Wood & Son Farms, Inc. County Greene
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 2836 Ormondsville Rd Ayden NC 28513
Onslte
Representative Ervin&Rachel Wood/Michele Christensen Integrator 1Premium Standard Farms
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
I ❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
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
3840
3840
Response to DWQIDENR referral
Response to DSWCISWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacltv 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 IN no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier large small
Level (inches) 27 27
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay mall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL- TYPES NoA
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 IN no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier large small
Level (inches) 27 27
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay mall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL- TYPES NoA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ 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 IN no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier large small
Level (inches) 27 27
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay mall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL- TYPES NoA
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

40 - 50 Date:
9/24/03
FFacilitymber
ER
O No assistance provided/requested
ste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
2
5. 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)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >=10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re-certlfication
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient Irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. 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:
❑ Other...
43. irrigation system deslgnlinstallatlon
❑
❑
Date:
44. Secure Irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating Improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
9 .
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
purchased new irrigation reel
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3.
52. Buffer Improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 - 50 pate: 1 9124103
COMMENTS:
*Waste analysis taken on 9/10/03 no results
`
Waste analysis dated 717103 nitrogen is 0.89 Ibs/1000 gallons
3127103 nitrogen is 1.7 lbs11000 gallons
12/3102 nitrogen is 1.2 lbs11000 gallons
7/18/02 nitrogen is 1.3 lbs11000 gallons
COC dated April 9, 2003 and on site.
Soil test dated 10/17/02 lime applied 118103 with receipt on hand. Cu and Zn within guidelines. Remember to take soil test
or 2003 and follow lime requirements.
IRR2 records are complete and balanced.
Lagoon levels are recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
'Facility is using new IRR1 and IRR2 forms, stocking and yield records.
Farm is well maintained.
Installed rain stop switch on irrigation pump.
Irrigation reel calibrated on 5/21/03.
Coastal Bermuda fields in excellent condition.
Need to lower lagoon as soil and weather conditions permit.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhom
SIGNATURE
3 03/10/03

Division of Water Quality IV.
c3 . 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation'
p Other Agency
(Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of visit: 2/13/2002 Time: 14:00 am
ONot Uperationallp Below Threshold
Permitted ■ Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.........................
Farm Name: Ervin Wood & Son County: Grrenc............................................... .W.aRO........
Owner Name: (Ervin
Wood
Mailing Address: 2836.OrmondsYill:e.Road.................
Facility Contact: ..........................................................................'....Title:.......
Onsite Representative: Rachcl.Woiad............................................................
Phone No: 252-746-6356
Adext.NC............. ....................................... I.......... 2851.3 ..............
....................... I ................... Phone No:....................................................
Integrator: Premium.Stamdard.Fartns°.of.North...........
Certified Operator: R,aehelM .............................. Waod ................................................. Operator CertiDcation Number: 1.66.Q5 ............................
Location of Farm:
— - -IV
®Swine 13Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ©• ©� © Longitude ©• ©s ®64
DesignCurrent Design . Current i • Design : Currents.,,.
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity' Population : Cattle Capacity Population
j3 Weanto Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
[3 Layer I I p Dairy
E3 Non -Layer I p on- airy
E3 Other I
Total Design�Capacity 3,840
Total - SSLW 518,400
Number of Lagoons
®Subsurface
Drains
Present
p
Lagoon Area
® Spray Held Area
Holding Ponds Solid Traps
[3
Noicluid
Waste
.. _.
Management.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: 0 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) 0 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 13 Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 17 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................................... ..........................................................................................................:.:................................ ......................
,I
Freeboard(inches): ...............33................................12...............................................................
F

J ,
ace y, y Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection
f}
-5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 13 Yes ig 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 w
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid, level
elevation markings? p Yes N No
Waste Application rt
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload p Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
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? s p Yes p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents 1
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
I8. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ig No
13Yes ®No
p Yes U No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p o vio a re noted urmg this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about is visa .
'Comments (refer to question #): ,Explahi,a4yYE$ hswers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
p ( nal pages as necessary)- Use drawings of fs�cility to better explain situations. use addition ''y)� 0 Field Copy p Fi a Notes arm 1yj
Records available for review.
Waste analysis - 10/4/01 = 1.1 lbs.; 7/12/01 = 1.4 lbs.
Soils analysis up through 2001 - available.
Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
Freeboard levels are recorded weekly as required.
Vegetation on dike wall is established. A few bare spots noted.
Small grain is well established. (SEE PAGE s)
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison, :: entered. iy Attn"yndall" -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

0510310I
Continued
Facility Number: 40_50 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
13 Yes
p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
p Yes
p No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
p Yes
p 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
Cl 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.)
13 Yes
13 No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
13 Yes
p No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes
p No
Continue to address weeds in the sprayfields.
Records and farm are well managed. y .
If you have any questions, contact your Technical Specialist or us at 252-946-64$1. ;
I,
f
f..
�ar
S.
1.
.
i'
[I

_7t� 11
23— rw t
.7
A
am' ts LMJIGM
ch
iV
0
N,
LAK` Is
"COM
901
Is
-702-
raondsville
7 -0
4;> �Z
1, Woo and. San .,'l
4
IM
C
Grave
C 3m
46
01;
rry
Ce
.,k
14 A
N,4 It-
CEMI
A-,
J
I -:ZEN,
cv,
�
'y
1_4
-OFT) 0 4
curns
N111 CeM
C9M i1dGd
". " . I . 0 1 , :, -
Aidk.Ch j,V H C
Zi, I Lam`ti ;'q=
!P
Name: HOOKERTON Location: 0350 27'37.5" N 0770 32'46.6" W
Date: 10/29/102 Caption: Erwin Woods and Son
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet
Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc.

y
IL
1
t

® Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency !Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 400 Date of Visit: 7/4l2001 Time, 1300
2--J
Not Operational OBelowThreEl shold
Permitted 0 Certified ® Conditionally Certified ® Registered Date Last Operates! or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Erxim.W..t].as1A.S.an..................... ......... County: Gl"ate............................................... W..aRQ........
OwnerName: FrYilol..............:........................ 1iV.Jm d...................................................---.---. Phone No: 745.-Q5f....................................................................
Mailing Address: Rf.j.Djux.38j:A ......................
Aydem.NC............................................................... 2A5.13.............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:..............,................................................. Phone No:..............,....................................
Onsite Representative: Rae W.W...t).Qd................... ..................... ............ integrator: C,aroliAta.I±Arnu........................ .... ...................... .............................
Certified Operator: d3,autn ml.................................... %PA.........
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:,16.605.............................
KCSR 1400 A.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 27 4 3766 Longitude 77 ° 32 4 47 66
Design Current
Swine Canneity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3840
❑ Farrow to wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ I - arrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ other71
Total Design Capacity 3,840
Total SSLW 518,400
Number of Lagoons L2 ® —Su bsurface Drains Present ❑ Lug(wn Area is Spray F'ieErea
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharpes & Stream Imnacts
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. II'discharge is observed, did it react► Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the csiimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier: ... .........s hall..........................lux:................. I...................
........... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): ........... ?..C. ..2A...................
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
? ❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
....................................

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection 7/9/2001
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
® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste: Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
IL Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Flay) Small Grain Oversced
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) "fhis facility is pended for a wettable'acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Renuired Record~ & 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/ WLIP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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
® 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
*Soil lest dated 11/2/00. Lime was applied at recommended rates with receipts on file. Remember to take soil test for this year and follow
lime requirements
*Waste analysis dated 3/12/01 with nitrogen 1.7 lbs/1000 gallons
8/03100 with nitrogen 1.4 Ibs/1000 gallons.
*New waste analysis taken on 7/05 01. Results not received. Need to rebalance PAN for coastal when results received.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit.
*Discussed IRR2/waste analysis schedule.
*Several irrigation events on small grain overseed that was not covered by waste analysis. No over application.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Martin McLawborn
Reviewer/Insvector Sianature: Date:

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 40_50 Date of Inspection 719120tl1
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?
t ona omments an or raw ngs:
*PAN balance for small grain needs to be balanced for fall of 2000.
*Need to mow lagoon inner walls to allow for routine and visual inspections.
*Small amount of trash needs t be removed from lagoon
0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
[-]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes - ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
YJ

�rf Kchaei F. Easley
r { sa�'� fit* k ���1.,.,s.. / o' j• r t i r — •� governor
"t! �$. J:.�••
- Department dnwronment and Natural resources , .
k�_ '�rhs yst-e.
�,� `'� ��,- r�pu •' ++4xT �y"Ft'. j 41 i-' F f" ;.- r' i� ,� + .5..r f'. C j'. �..,ir�a; �e ;,Kert.
rTevens,....: ,
j ppdh t 3wyyy - ♦L r Gtf jrl 7. �s� f_.W i '�^ +.y,..V - ~ i� ^i '•1 ~ _ y{.-. L 1 ' t��W�(� Water ��1= '
Apn'116, 2001,
To: Prodocer
From: DaphneB. Cullomlli'.
Environmental Specialist '
' Washington RegionaWffic e
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2001 -
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2110217, Senate Bill I217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm. operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or nmoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit,; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(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/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
q) An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
9 Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p 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.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land wlication rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given application.
cp All grassed watar-aeys shall have astable 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 smeM4 not a reguirement to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management. plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data befareyour plan can be updated.
Foryour information, any swine facilitythat has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply fora National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: ✓W RO
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Type of Visit (+� Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review U Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Q• Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visir. 3-t4-2Mi1 Tine: 11:i10 gun
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold : ............
Farm Name: map..WQotl.A.$.Qm......................................- ............................ County-: Grurte.................................................W.,aRQ........
Owner Name: Fnjjx...................................... Won&.. ..... Phone No: .7.4J".. 3.5h.
Mailing Address: �.ST AIR]GdS.Y.la11.RA,�d.......................... ............. ..... ....... .... ...... .FA.A.CiRM ............................................................... 28.513 ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:..................................................... . Phone No:
Onsite Representative- Enja.&.RagW...imd........................................................... Integrator:Px.emIum.5tandarA..............................................
Certified Operator: )( chel................................... Wood ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 166.05............................
Location of Farm:
Vcsx lauu
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 27 37 K Longitude 77 • 32 47
:. .::::Design .. Curneot..
.::....:.' :..... .:.:.Design ....`•Current ;: ;
Smne..:.: Ca acrtv..:Po dlatton
PoulfrY: Ca aeity
.Pa ulatton : ';Cattle.,
a act ::Po uliiteon :'
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Laver
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3840
I❑ Non -Laver
I❑ Non -Dairy
I
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Dmign, Capacity.''E_
3,840
(] Gilts
,.. Total SSL* .
518.404
❑ Boars -
Number of Lagoons 0 ® Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ®Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds;/ Solid Traps '� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischar,,es & 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 con evance man-made? El Yes ❑ No
b. lfdischaree is observed, did it reach Waler ofthe Slate? (If ves, notifi- DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/niui?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon sil aem? (Ifyes. notihi DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes X No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the Stale other than from a discharge? [-]Yes g No

U1/U1/Ul
Facility Number. 40-50
Date of Inspection 3-14-2001
Continued
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Strucnire 2 Structure 3 Stricture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........... ..luga....... ..... ............ MUR............ ................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inclic;s): ...............� ._..........................33...............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage. etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
9 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
17. Are rock outc7ops present?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. is there a ivater supph° well within 25.0 feet of the ;praifeld boundan'? [f Unknown
❑ Yeti
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records & D(w.uments
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
X No
20. 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
21. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
®No
22. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No '
23. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
25, Did Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
X No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
odor Issues
2& Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
9 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properl<, within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
19 No

1 r,
01/01/01
Fac40_50 Dale ilit�Number. 3-14-2Q0]
Continued
Printed on. 4/9C2001
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. 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)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Reviewerllnspector Name Dapbute B GuUom r x 1urn'— ., .. -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: t4 —q — 0 J

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit S Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilitv Number 40 Date of Visit: 8/15/2000 Time: 13311 Printed on: 3/9/2001
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
KIPermitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............•.
Farm Name: lE'J1rvm.Wn:ad.&..San................................................ County: C�t� .................. .................... .nQ........................--..---.---........................
OwnerName: Ervin ....................................... W0uud........................................................... Phone No: 252-146.-.056 ..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:................................................................ Phone No:
Mailing; Address: R11.1.8t1d 8:A►.......................................... Ayden.N.C............................................................... 28513 .............
Onsite Representative: Raclue.1.. .wd/-Ervin,W..wd................................................... Integrator. CArolloaEarim ....................................................
Certified Operator: RacM.M.............................. W.oQd ................................................ Operator Certification Number: .16605.............................
Location of Farm:
VCSR 1400
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 27 37 Longitude F 7-771 ° 326 F 47 [L
`.:.:',..?., g...ai
..:................................ _ _. C
[3 Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3840
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2 � < >r`.< >=I® Subsurrace Drains Present Iio Lagoon Area IN Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste
Dischaey & Stream Impacts
l . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Diseharge originated at, []Lagoon ❑ Spray Ficld ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. -what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Ideutifter:................................... ..........
Freeboard (inches): ...............43...............................43..................
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Stweture C

5/00 Condnued on back
Facility Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection 8/15/2000 Printed on; 3/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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 N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops ditTer 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? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Require! Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�. N6 violations' 6r'deficienciei- Were' doted'du'ring' this roisit ' You will:receive no 'fdit'h tr.
-' Correspondence About this.visit.'. -
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
*Waste plan dated 1-2000. •
*Irrigation system is hose traveler.
*IRR-2 calculated by pulls.
*Waste plan includes amendment for chronic rainfall practices.
*Waste plan includes small grain overseed at PAN rate of 100 lbs/acre signed by tech.spec.
*Waste analysis dated 8/3100 with nitrogen at 1.4 lbs/1000 gallons.
*Soil test dated 5/7/99. Lime has been applied at recommended rate. Remember to take soil test for this year.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name ��� € �{{ € lI `�{ ."flE l 1� �r €
„€a- I,..-..M �;i :`t� Il:., ] ...I.;�..� l..! .,€ €3.,, ..,.. -: ,i-. €�I i�l.:., 1........:.....'..', li

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 51001
Facillty Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection 8/15/2000 Printed on: 3/9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
3 L 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 pernianent/temporary cover? [:]Yes [:]No
*At time of inspection, hay being harvested.
*Records are well organized.

Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
[Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other p Denied Access
Facility Number �4�— 54� Date of Visit 5/10/2000 Printed on: 5/18/2000
Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 10 Conditionally Certified C1 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
Farm Name: 1.xYiAI..W.1RR1d..Scl1A..................................................................................... County: (;.regJac ............................................... WARO........
OwnerName: E1ry.11a....................................... W.QQjd ........................................................... Phone No: ...........................................................
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: Z, .Axmaf�dsYklle.RA.a ............................. .. Ay.dca.N.C................................ .... 28.51.3..............
................................. ...........................
Onsite Representative: Eryla.W.Qg.d.,.RAI;Jhgl... .A.Aft ................................................. Integrator: f«Ar0.ji.pJj.F4. Ma........................
Certified Operator: R4.0.9.1.M.............................. W.Qpd,................................................ Operator Certification Number:].fiAQ5......
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 27 G 3766 Longitude 77 ° 32 4 47 (f
Design Current
Swine Canneity Panulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3800
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Non -La er ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,840
Total SSLW 518,400
Number of Lagoons IS Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: . LO51 f113A.(S m �........... k L arge�.........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 23 25

Continued on back
rFacillty Number: 40-50 1 Date of Inspection 1 5/10/2 000 Printed on: 5/18/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain (Oats)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 i�1a violatio�is:or deficiencies rveire:noted :d:uring this visit:: Ytie1: will:receive nb i r, ther
.. correspondence abort this.visit.... ...
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #). Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance.
Well -maintained facility, including freeboard levels during the year. id:t
Reviewer/Inspector Name IDa . Cullom Entered by Ann Tyndall

Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
_Facility Number: 40-50 Date of Inspection 5/10/2000 Printed on: 5/18/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ®No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:

.0 Divislon of Soil and Water Conservation- Operation Review
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
4,
E f i� O�Di 6i4n of Water,Quality Compliance Inspection s
., s ; ;r f
•• t
0 Other Agency , Operation Review
10 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 4POther
Facility Number 40 50 Date of Inspection 2-18-2000
Time of Inspection 11:35 AM 24 hr. (hh:mm)
09 Permitted © Certified ® Conditionally Certified ©Registered JE3NotOUcrational Date Last Operated.
Farm Name: )w1C1 bx.Wiwd A.&QU............................................................................ .......... County: Greciac ............................................... W. ARO........
Owner Name: Ervin ....................................... wood................. ................................ Phone No: 246-056.................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:
Mailing Address: .t..B.,:t�...........................................................
Onsite Representative: P cache . rxxn..l�f?aQ.d ..........................................
Certified Operator:$ah,e.1.M.............................. WaAd........
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
A,Y dcn. N.0............................................................... 7.85.13 .............
... Integrator..carolixtaxQlt7tils......................................
I ................ Operator Certification Number:16.605 .............................
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
.CS.R..1400.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. -
............ ..... ................ ...................... .............. ................ ............
--------------
Latitude E 35° Longitude 77 ° 32 f 47 46
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
N Feeder to Finish
3840
Unknown
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
I
❑ Boars
��j
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity. Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dain,
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,840
Total SSLW 518,400
Number of Lagoons 2 N Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 119 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps � ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pail of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (II'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypa a lagoon system? (II'ycs, notify 1)WQ) ❑ 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 stonn storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stnicturc G
Identit ter : ...................................
Freeboard (inches): ............... i.9................... ... ....20.................... ........................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ❑ No
Continued an back

Faei�iity Ntimber: 40-50 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
Printed on 2/2212000
2-18-2000
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
No violatibns:or:defit iericies weere;nat.... .ii. . t . .vis . .. will;receive'no farther:.'
correspondence about this visit.' . ' ' - - .... ' . ' ... • •
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Site visit to confirm frceboard level reported to WaRO on 2-3-2000 and to investigate complaint of a discharge into ditch from an
rrigation event on 2-16-2000.
rite investigation revealed adequate freeboard and an inspection of the sprayfield determined that there are no ditches around the
;prayfield where the irrigation event took place on 2-16-2000.
V,
Reviewer/Inspector Name fDa hni`s B Cul1o'm'f II it a, I r, u �� , I
�2nvinwnrllnunE.rtnr Cianatn p.. '' I (1 � , • llatr.4 , it ,� .',d{ �� It 1, .�

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
July 13,1999
Ervin Wood
Rt I Box 383-A
Ayden, NC 28513
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Compliance Im
Facility Num 40-50 40-154
Greene Coun
Dear Ervin Wood,
On July 7, 1999, Carl Dunn from the Washington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
conducted an inspection of your animal operation. Please review the enclosed inspection form. This
inspection form should be maintained as part of the records for your facility. Please note any items that may
be marked with a yes answer and make every effort to correct these deficiencies. You are advised that you
must maintain a freeboard of at least one foot in your lagoon(s) plus a storage volume sufficient to
accommodate the rainfall and subsequent runoff from a 25 year 24 hour storm event to remain in
compliance. You should consult your lagoon design for the exact freeboard requirement. Please remember
that you must follow your waste management plan at all times.
Thank you for your cooperation in this inspection. If you have any further questions, in regard to this matter
or if I may be of any assistance, I can be contacted at [phone] ext. 208.
Sin��c]]erelly,�
(.c JLJ,}�- -f
Carl Dunn
Environmental Engineer
cc: WaRO V
Continental Grain
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]

Facillt)Number Ooiv of, hispecrion
Time (if 1nspec0r0t1 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted p Certified ■ Conditionally Certified p Registered 10 Not UperaMm—ii-q Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Ervitt..!?kbad-.Farm .............................. CnuntN': Greene WARO
Owner Name: Er -yin .......................................
Facility Contact: ...........................................
Mailing Address: 13t.1,. Biax.383A..........
Onsite Representative: Em,,in,Waod.....
Phone No: 9J.9-.7.45-.63.56..........................................................
Phone No: .........................................
Aydria..NC.............................................................. 28sil ..............
Integi-atar: Continental..G.r-airy...............................................
Certified Operator-:i ache1..M............................. Waoid................................................. Operator Certification Numher: M60.5 ............................
Location of Farm:
NCSR.] .4.Qa..from..klvux.2(� k a rna,x$_ nn..th�o.ielt........................................................................................................................................................................ —
::i
Latitude ©0 © ®� Longitude ©•
a
Design , • urrent ; . esr n:: urrent. g - „ esrgnH �_urrent
Swipe Capacity capacity;Poultry Capacity _P0palati6n Cattle t_'Capacrty Po'prJlat]on
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ arrow to can
p arrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Ftnrs
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
p ter
Total Desigii;Cap#ity ` 3,840
_. Tof41 SSLW-t1 518,400
�Number�ofLagoons L3 Subsurface
rams resent p Lagoon Area pray Held Area
!�� °! _
�Noldt�ng Ponds'I�SaltdlTraps - ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System�� E ,'
F,.tE�,iKn,=;➢,,ii.rlf: „p .�: a s ,, 6_
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) [3 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? p Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Idenrifier:
Freeboard (inches):........;r;�3.................................................................................................................................................... — .........
..
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
3/23/99 seepage, etc.)
p Yes ® No
Continued on buck

aci ity um r: 40.-154 Pme of hispeclion
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 ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintentince/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes R No
12. Crop type Bermuda Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
' 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
fy
(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 Revi ewer/] nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
C[ : No.vitil tion�........cres.w. ........ g. this .... i . . •>�e�e ....further : .
••:corres�o�ndence:aboir#this;visit:• •.-:-:-•-• . ••••••• :•. • •••�.: ••,�:�. • •�;�.
Continents"q(r�effer taqueshon #) •Eiclain,any YES answers and/or say recommends__Mons€or�an� other cominents:'� �` < ;a
,Use ;d aw ngs ovaacilrtyAo'better
plam?situationr
e additionalYpages-asrnecessary),
Reviewer/Ins ectorName .�ram.' ••".`
P Carl Dunns.. , t F ., r Entered byMAnn Tyndall } ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

0
3/23/99
D:11C (11' III-qiectien
Facility Number: 40_154
Odor issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
p Yes
® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
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?
❑ 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
® No
-t�

0
Facility Number 1)'tlt. of iion
Tinl�' rff fn"nc'rtioll 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted p Certified S Conditionally Certified p Registered I, Not Operatioi Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Eryin..load.&.Solt.................. ............................ County: Greene WaRO
........................................ .
Owner Namc: Rrvin....................................... Wond ................................... .........
................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:
Mailing Address: Rt.1..Box$3-A........................................................................
Onsite Representative: Erxin..W.aod..................................................................
Certified Operator:Rachc1.I1:1...............
Location of Farm:
.... Waod....................................
.. Phone No: 7.4.6-:056....................................................................
........................................ I'iione No:................................................
Ayjdcxl.NC................................................................ 2,851a....... I......
i n teg r,,i i o r: Gn:ati uenta l.G.rair................................................
Operator Certification Number:lfi6fl5.............................
Latitude . ©6 L. Longitude ©• ©4 ®64
Design urrent esignCurrent esign urrent
Swine Capacity Population,,
.Poultry Capacity `Population '',Cattle :Capacrty';'Popul'atron
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finis
a
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to ee er
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ 71lts
❑ Boars
E3 Layer I p airy
p on -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ ter
Total Design'Capacity ' 3,840
Total SsiW...: 518,400
ti
Number of Lagoons' 3; .' ®Subsurface rams resent ❑ agoon rea pray ie rea
Holding Ponds,/ SolidATraps'.0 . ❑ ° Liquid Waste Management System
m Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [3 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in -a]/min?
d. Does dischar-e bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection &. Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 StruCILII'e 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ................ a2 ................ ............... a6 ............... ................................... ..................................... ....................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, p Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 40-50 D;Ile of Inshec!tinn
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste A lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes U No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Bermuda Small Grain
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
I S. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily -available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same�agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
p Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
Cr No.viulations'or. deficiencies.were.nbted'during'Aisvisit':You''wvil!•re'eeive'na further.:.'
�
ckrs'pkdek , a oitf t1iisMsit,. .
Comments (refer.to goestion #)"Explain"any YIES^answersand/or,anyurecommendations'or any bther!eomments yR
lLise drawings offactltty to=betierexplam;sttusttons i(use addittonall'pagesfasrnecessary)
,fir
...�;��w
• - � � �,i PVii � c _� etf r 7�' '�y-.
Reviewer/Ins ector Name r'"-'ram' iF �+ w- ..^ht i.e Al"
p Carl,Dunn •r � ..� Entered'by Ann.TyndalI
-..; .....-o=fit:... ,•
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date:

3/23/99
Facility Number: 40_50 l):iir >f' JLI�Jlt•rlitol
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
p Yes
® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
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
IN 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?
p Yes
®No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
p Yes
®No

■ Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
D Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
© Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
0 Other Agency - Operation Review
10 12outine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
w
Facility Number 40 50 Date of Inspection 4/1/99
Time of Inspection 800 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted 0 Certified ® Conditionally Certified 13Registered Not Opera Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: EJl'xjA.W.Q.Qd.&..SQA................
.............................. County: G.r.e0jc............................................... 1?IraRQ........
OwnerName: FA"1'Ili....................................... SIRS?jd........................................................... Phone No: 252-T46&35..It..........................................................
.
FacilityContact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: lit.1..RX.#3r.A.................................................................................... thyderx.lY.C............................................................... 21J51.3 ..............
Onsite Representative: tXAp. k. a1Gbp1..W..A.R1�........................................................... Integrator: CACAIUIt> . RalfllS.,....,........................................,....
Certified Operator: RaOW,M..............
Location or Farm:
W..QQd................................................ Operator Certification Number:J,6fiQ5 .................
Latitude 35 • 27 + 37 {[ Longitude 77 • 32 4 47 [L
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3840
3800
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry capacity Population Cattle Canacitv Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,840
Total SSLW 1 518,400
Number of Lagoons 0 ® Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JIN Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Li uid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identifier: Large Little
Freeboard(inches)...............22...............................26...............................................................................................................................................................
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 back
Printed an 519120o0

Printed on 5/9/2000
(Facility Number: 40-50 , Date of Inspection 4/1/99
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
® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
®No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
®No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
®No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
® Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
®No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
u' No•violatiotis:or:derici,bnbi6s were:noted:duripg-thiswigit::Ydu_will:reeeive uo further
correspondence about fhis: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):
*Recommend signing up for Neuse Rule options by 8/l/99 with Greene Soil and Water. +
*Given Int. Reg. card.
*Waste analysis dated 3/18/99 with nitrogen 1.7 lbs/ 1000 gallons.
*Soil test dated 5/21/98. Soil test not received for 1999. Lime has been applied.
*Lagoon freeboard levels kept weekly as required.
14b. Operation flagged for Wettable Acre determination due to acreage in excess of 75% rule
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1Pat Hooper 252/946-6481 Martin McLawhorn
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

t
[) rivision
'ision of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
of Water Quality17
88
Zoutine O Complaint Q Follow-up cif DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number .
13 Registered Certified �rA_ppl(plied for Permit 13 Permitted
Farm Name:v� lJ
............................................. I ....... ...r,....?. !.................................
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
..... County: .. ....... ........................... d
OwnerName:....!..........................o............................................ Phone No: `Y4 �o...`...�i...t...............,....................
Facility Contact:.................................................................. . Title: .. Phone No:
Mailing Address: �{..:...i . t: ] AaC............................. .... P.�:1/.I,.,...... �G.......................... �g........�.�
I.. S
Onsite Re resentative:. , 1 ` n l,1 n ^� - --
p i �!1..1f1 1.Q.:1t ]1...:........ !!.............. Integrator:...•?1O t-'C�..M S
Certified Operator;..._RC.. ...... .. ... .. Operator Certification Number,.....t. e. O.S............
Location of Farm:
1 ......................V4.0........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude Longitude ©• �° ©�
Des..gn ;Current
X.Swine 'Capacity Population
❑ can to Feeder
L2Teeder Finish
Ll Q
(o
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
. Number, of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds',
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Subsurface Drains Present II❑ Lagoon Area Q Spray Field Area
No Liouid Waste
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. 1f 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. 1s 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 io
❑ Yes (] KO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,❑ No
❑ YesLi,.,d'I��vo
❑ Yes 01No
❑ Yes Eal4o
❑ Yes ER"N"o
❑ Yes GKO
Continued on back

Facility Number: tIp — CJp
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes 1 °o
Structures (La2oons.tiolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2 `o
Stntcture l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:r
Freeboard (ft): .....1;;PLJ �� atr? �t................. ....... I ........
...
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes [ae�()
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers'?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess ofnnWMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......1��L4 ........ .......................................... ..................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in t e Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMI))?
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 Reviewerlinspector 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?
0 No -violations or detieieneies.were-noted during this.visit.-:Youmill receive no further
correspondence about this, visit.. ' .
❑ Yes R�;,o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ®'NVo
Cl Yes a<i Jo
............. ...... I ... I ...... I........
❑ Yeti VNo
❑ Yes Lvf No
❑ Yes ulfVo
❑ Yes Q-Ko
❑ Yes Q`0
❑ Yes O NO
❑ Yes 21go
❑ Yes Gy�o
❑ Yes ❑ No
.omments-(refer ta.question #i): ,Explain any Yi3S answers and/or-anv recommendations or any other comments;}
Jse drawings or facility to better explain situations. use additional pages as necessary):.. �y ,
6 3-q-q 8 3• q- l�-9 7 �.
fin• �
�t
08 -� e i C.t t +1 C Co ✓� m-v� .
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 4-aq - Q 6

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr. Ervin Wood
Rt. 1, Box 383-A
Ayden, NC 28513
Zw�h�'A
NCDFWNFt
NC>R-rH CARC>LINA CaEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRQNmF-N-r AND NATURAL RESdumcES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
August 18, 1998
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Ervin Wood & Son Farm Fac. No. 40-50
Ervin Wood Farm Fac. No. 40-154
Greene County
Dear Mr. Wood:
On April 29, 1998,1 conducted a Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the
referenced facilities. Overall, the operations were found to be in satisfactory condition. A
copy of the inspection reports is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the
State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being
kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspections can be found in the
comment section of the attached inspection forms. It is very important as the owner and
Operator in Charge that you address any noted concerns, as soon as possible. For
assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil & Water
Conservation District Office.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone 252/94M481 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page 2
Ervin Wood & Son Farm
Ervin Wood Farm
August 18, 1998
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspections. Should you have
further questions or comments regarding these inspections, do not hesitate to call me at
[phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
'P
� .
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist H
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
David Moore, Carolina Farms
OWaRO

Division of Soil and Water Conservation: - Operation Review
z! Division of'Soil and, Water Conservation = Coinpliaoce Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
tine p c:ompiamt p I ollow-up of t)WQ inspection p
Facility Number
p Registered E Certified ® Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Eruin..W..00d.&.Son...................
Owner Name: Erxin...................................... Wood ....................
ow -up of DSWC review p Other
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Not Operationa Date Last Operated:
County: Greene WaRO
........... Phone No: 9.19.-.7.4.G:.b35fi.........................
Facility Contact: ................................................................ .....Title: ... Phone No:
MailingAddress: RU..R.ox.383::A.................................................................................. Aydem..NC .............................................................. 285ia ..............
Onsite Representative: Er.yJa.&..RachelW.aod........................................................... Integrator:Car:alina..F+arms.....................................................
Certified Operator: Rachel.M............................. Wakod ................................................. Operator Certification Number- 1660S.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0 ©� ©�� Longitude ©0
i Swine,.. , Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finis
p Farrow to can
p Farrow to ee er
p Farrow to Finis
13Gits
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p ayer p on- ayer p airy
p Non -Dairy
113 Other
Total Design Capacity 3,840
Total SS
LW 518,400
Number of Lagoons I Holding Ponds p u sur ace rains Present p goon rea p pray Field Area ,.
p Liquid Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ®Na
2. Is any discharge observed from any park of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes Cl No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ®No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ®No
7/25/97

t
aci i y Number: 40_50 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures (Lagoous,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...............#.1............... ##2................ ................................................................................................................... ...............................
Freeboard (fl): 1.8 ft. (21 in.) L9 ft. (23 in.)
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes ® No
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p 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? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes H 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)? p Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q .. wviu ions.or tcien.cies'were.nua -during is visit;. You will.receive no'further., .
. • : �o�'KeSjE]tix�dene� .. .
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
A�omments,(peierto; Use drawing of facility to better xpltiin`situationsa(use addit onal pages as nmenaacrons ar any,o[nercommenrs:
9.
y
Y; e
ecessary):
Please note the following comments from the inspection:
18. Receiving crop well maintained.
2. Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance.
3. Waste analysis 9/16/97 - 2.6; 3/4/98 - 3.3; *Reminder - A current waste analysis is required to be conducted within 60 days
(before or after) of an irrigation event. Soil analysis 3-12-98.
5. A permit application was submitted to the Division on 2118198. Once the facility has been issued a General Permit and a
Certificate of Coverage this information should be maintained with the existing Certified Animal Waste Management Plan. Please
e advised to become familiar with the conditions of the General Permit and ensure that these conditions are being implemented at
his facility. 7/25/97 -
Reviewer/Inspector Name Daphne 130Cullom
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: o Date: L{ — .-J—G — c1�

• Facility Number: 44_54 late of Inspection
Additional'Comments and/or'Drawings:
If there are any questions about this inspection or the requirements of the General Permit, please contact me at the Washington
Regional Office [phone], ext. 321.

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation _ Operation Review
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Coinpliance Inspection:
❑ Divisi {of Water Quality -' Compliance Inspection
p geucy- Uperation Review
19 tcoutme p c ompiaiw p ronow-up of uwy inspection p f<o
lil�l
Facility Numbcr
p Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name:.F.,ryin..Wond..Farnx.........................................................................
OwnerName:Ervin....................................... ..ond.............................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................`Title:...........
-up of 1),'3wl: review p Other
Date of Inspection-98�
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
10 Not Operatrona bate Last Operated:
County: Greene WARO
........ Phone No: 9.19.7.4G-63.5fi..........................................................
.1.......................... Phone No:........................................
MailingAddress:.I;.t:.J,.Box.383A..................................................................................... Aydria.,NC ..............................................................
Onsite Representative:Er.vijt.&..Raclie E.W.00d........................................................... Integrator: Caxoliu.Farms..........................
Certified Operator•:Rach,&M.............................. .Wstod................................................. Operator Certification Number:lbr6.0S..
Location of Farm:
28511.
cmtu. xvu... arm .ts. an.t t>~. a t........................................................................................................................................................................
...............1,:::::::::::::::_:::':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.::::::.:::::::::::::::::::..:::::::::::::::::.::::..::..:::::........................:::::::::::..:::::::::...........................w......................::::::'.,_
Latitude ©o ©4 ®�� Longitude ©0 ©� ©64
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® F ee d er to Fj 17s i
p Farrow to can
13 rarrow to •eec er
p Farrow to Finish
© Gilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer I I I p airy
p Non -Layer [3 on- airy
p Other
Total Design Capacity ,
_ Tota1SSLW 518,400
Number of Lagoons / Holding. Ponds L�
❑
u
sur ace
Drains
Present 1jr-I
Lagoon rea JE3 Spray re rea
p
o
Liquidas
c Managemen
ys em
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ® No
Discharge originated al: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. 11' discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. lf'discharge is observed, did it. reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If'discharge is observed, what is the estimated now in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? ([fyes, notify DWQ) Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes M No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

racTrty um er: d0_ 154 Date of Inspection'-98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (L,,i000ns,hfol(linp_ Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l
Identifier:
................................... ...
Freeboard (fl): 2.1 ft. (25 in.)
SICUCtUre 2 Structure 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes M No
p Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
..................................................................................................
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering; waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...... CCoastal-Bermuda. kia............................................................................................
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 Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility tail 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?
q..:oyicr �ttions.or.c a .ttcrencies'were.no a during this visit;. ou wI .rereive nofurther.*.
�o�`�es.j�ti�1 c>>c!✓ �t[.ut t�i �S Y�s��:. . • . . . • . . . - . . � . .
Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
............................
❑ Yes R No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
El Yes ® No
p Yes N No
(3 Yes ® No
Comments (teferEto question:#) ,, Explain any Y€ESIanswers and/or any.. reeommendaIttons.o H'uy oth['er.comt menits�;'
i.: I ° ? € 33. i3 E'i i ¢ ��'..iE
:Use drawings 6I facility to better explain sifuattojns (use addttlonAl,pages;as necessary): g.
.,
to :ttsp.
Please note the following comments from the
<r inspection: .
5. Grassed waterway improvements should be completed within the next two months.
18. Receiving crop well maintained. New field sprigged in Coastal Bermuda.
22. Irrigation records need to be changed to reflect actual wetted acres per irrigation event. Total all pulls for a specific field before
calculating nitrogen balance For example: Field #2 has 50 acres and it takes 5 pulls to cover the entire field. Take the total of all
the pulls to calculate the nitrogen balance. Do not calculate the nitrogen using 50 acres for each pull, because 50 acres has not been
irrigated during one pull event. Another option is to have your waste utilization plan (table 2) amended to reflect each pull as an
individual field. Waste analysis - 3/23/98 - 3.3; Soil analysis - 4/14/97.* DWQ was notified of irrigation events during the month o
February due to excessive rainfall events. 7/25/97
Reviewer/[nspector Name '.D'aph—"e" .,Culls
E
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: V
U _nLl _Cr A

WRRZ
State of North Carolina 1�
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr. Ervin Wood
Ervin Wood & Son Farm
Rt. 1, Box 383-A
Ayden, NC 28513
NCDENR
ENVIRpNMENT ANr> NA-rURAI._ REsbuRCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
January 21, 1999
SUBJECT: Animal Feledlot Operation Site Inspection
Ervin Wood & Son Farm
Fac. No. 40-50
Greene County
Dear Mr. Wood:
On September 10, 1998, I conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the referenced facility.
Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection report is attached
for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate
Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management
system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator, (4) the required records are
being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment section of the
attached inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted
concerns, as soon as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil &
Water Conservation District Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have further questions or
comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely, U6
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
David Moore, Carolina Farms
WaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

N1, � 1' °% fi+ �ar•,� ,raw k■ � �+in�si�-P� ��`a +�u��c9�!£` '�' e " '* ° � + � i " ,s r�
i7`aa . a era '4 nce�In "c ,i
Ise .j �r f � x CCU yy I� ;rat � u�`�" '� la I�+� 1��'M.,���! t � �y�,•� ���
'�e�T��s��'""��a�i��e� f ..r7�H i1t" @'i�1`t•,��t�.�'I 'l.:k��'..,, s � ... .;A s,=s,�4.�-`.e, 1I3'S�I.,�ti, ,. ,•ii;:.;
JO rcoUtIne p uompiaint Ig meow -up of uwtl inspection p roiiow-up or vsw(; review p Vtner
Facility Number Date of inspection
Time of Inspection 1 103ii124 hr. (hh:mm)
o Registered 0 Certified o Applied for Permit ■ Permitted JU o perationa Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Er.Yin..W .oad.&.Son...................................................................................... County: Greene WaRO
OwnerName: ErYin.:................................ Wood .......................................................... Phone No: .7.46-.63S6...................................................................
FacilityContact:................................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
MailingAddress: Rt.1.Ros.381A..................................................................................... AyAca.NC ............................................................... 28513 ..............
Onsite Representative: Ervin.,..Rachel..W asd........................................................... Integrator: CaralinxEarlms.....................................................
Certified Operator:RachelbL............................ Wa6d ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 10115.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• ©' ©'
CapacityPopuliton
=y gi
rl Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
13 arrow to Wean
[3 Farrow to Fee Mer
13 Farrow to mis
13Gtts
p Boars
Longitude ©• ©6 ®44
., Poultry w:�
`Ca aci Po elation;. Cattle•
fYr ' p
Capacity Population - .
.
_P _ z �
.m
k ..
k 17 Layer
33
0 any
a
,i,
13 op- ayer
E
p on- auy
ka-+NGLF�,..i31X •d•.+�-�. =c... ..,� 4i�C ....i:.tc. �1.. ,iL1.�-
�.y�ik'�6 6es. Y �i��i1 1� ,� 3',�I "5'".� L -' 3 i �;.
poffier:
iri ,
,
l
`I..
T,830
otal Design'�Capacity` ,U
—
4
y
Total SSLW
1. Are there any buffets that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
13 Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
13 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No

11. acility Number: 40_50 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures a oons Holdin ponds Flush fits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): 2.6 ft" 2.7 ft.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p:Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? + p Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p 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? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? 13 Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
1S. Crop type......CoastalBermu,da.Gms....... .......................................................... ........................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?' p Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
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 Yes
®No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
®No
® Yes
p No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
®No
p Yes
®No
via ttons.or ereacies were.na a during is �rtstt:. oa m .receive nofurther.,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �� ('IkLuank, Date: a_ k 0

'-r•'�"':� F1i '?1>r ';:� �1's:-�—r �'j�� /, ja j+�.I�,.F 1�1����1 �."{�7 F•,t�•'��1�y�,•. 'r�'
1 1 II,n�A9! •1 11 ..l �ti...er. C�'.�11 11 7' '[y�.N;1 .-11 F���11/� i;� �P
\7b'li
..i '
} I aaNrl�.E2 �N (y(yi(yM ���i1 �f;.'�E'~ � »'1j 1 f n Wy rp �f ] i 5r � �'.1" ry+rv,�`� E ru.A t • ��, �x ��!
':`� � �Sp�J.�1!''^s "l •`fi.LC, *F`E �?�a rf 1' '` t1i II�,�' r'1��5 'r i a �r + r=-,.,.,,5 }� �r F ,y r ,�, ,�.{'S�� r{ t q �.
., �., •�.�iF a .;y,�LS yy� * ;� . v ,,t �•t �j y 1 � .� ia �� tt,
'17{r���l� t.���!�,.�AF.fI' � lt�� 1�It4 il[-1[tl�x+l='`�IdVC/�n�+,l �� ��� i�.L,(�1.1ti14L411�J ZS�I i��i111Mt1♦{�l;
� T. L fir ? I .l♦ 4 Y l f] 5w
�S �L � �Al?t uh S i ,p + .r•k,L _ ��' ,� �liv 1i� 4 ': 1 �y���W
��. i .e�'�'i 11"4,1 �.,3�-r� J i. � ! t ; rF •k � 5l 1.
° 7s.° 11�5 � t1 S. rt� L ` V. �`4Rr � i�''r p 3; '.nl f�f� '"t �.j�f ��-•:�'
its• +Y «r fFTa
J�`; Str'j ' '�';' z r •'1� 1t �1� s
d
t. Sit
"k�L b "4
rid}� {5,�.��` nl l Tta il£•.` n {� _ �� 5 :i-,s
L• >s r .r�eh � i� �I �x,,�ydyniv
A a'rir ; yLy. +t t
�ftS`�rA:'�1� 14V4.+��'� d....:. .. + s 'J"e:_':b �">,FF '{�"l'•��'��_ jY_���(f�xJ!
1

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency
p Division of Water Quality
ou ine p Complaint p Follow-up ofDWQ inspection p o ow -up of DSWC review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 113 Not peratj`ona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Fz.yim.WQftd..&.Son....................... ............................................................... County: Greene WaRO
Owner Name: brim...
Wood.......................................................... Phone No: .7.46:63S6....................................................................
Facility Contact: ..................................... ,Title: .. Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt:.l..l ox.3$3-A..................................................................................... Ayden.NC................................................................ 28511 ..............
Onsite Representative: Ervin.&..Rachel.Wood........................................................... Integrator: Car.oLiu. arms...
Certified Operator: Rachel.N.I.............................. Waod ................................................. Operator Certification Number: MAWS .............................
Location of Farm:
NCNJK.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude ©• ©6 ©« Longitude ©+ ©6 ®«
esign Current esign Current`,3.,; esign. current..
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
can o Feeder
ee er to mis
arrow to ean
[13
arrow to Feeder
p F arrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Number of3Lagoons /Holding Pnnds,�©.i ❑Subsurface rams Presentp agoon rea p pray ie rea
EI No Liquid Waste Management System
"i A4
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [3 Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`? p Yes p'No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes © No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) E3 Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
p Yes
® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
13 Yes
® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
p Yes
IS No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
H No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
13 Yes
® No
7/25/97

aci i y umber: 40_50
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures_(Lap,00ns,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): 3.7 3.6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type............CmasW.B=muda........................................................................ ..........................................................
.
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 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?
Q.. o.via ions. or c encies'were.nn a uring is visit.. You ..ret�eive nofurther.,.
�or>�e's�io�de�ic� about 1k>}i is •vi'si�:: ...................... ' ; .... � .
p Yes
® No
0 Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ig No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
(i ,q,{ nn #).,Xxplain, any answers and/or any�rccommendati6w or•.any4thericomments omments refer to uesti � Y1ErS� �": �a'`
Use drawings of facility to better explain s�tuahons. (use additional pages as necessaryJ,._
. .e.. ..:...I: ..1.E .,.:.�- fEe fik E � ..n.r..� 0.•i € 1 .�<.< .f', •ESP. ..i. 3 ! _ � §:_ ,ei 1 — f��t'3s 3 ' Waste analysis 9/16/97
11 records are up to date
All'components of the Certified Animal Waste Management plan are in place.
n
t
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name nit; Tingen nnieredby'aope�r--''
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

w
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment ����
and Natural Resources "^
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor 4PRIL M
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary *` E q+" '
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 23, 1997
Mr. Ervin Wood
Ervin Wood Farm and Ervin Wood & Son
Rt. 1, Box 383-A
Ayden, NC 28513
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Ervin Wood Farm and Ervin Wood & Son
Facility No(s). 40-154 & 40-50
Greene County
Dear Mr. Wood:
On October 17, 1997, 1 conducted an animal feedlot operation site inspection at the referenced facilities. Overall,
both operations were found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection reports is attached for your
review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 21-1.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated
properly under the direction of a Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of
seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspections can be found in the comment section of the
attached inspection forms. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted
concerns, as soon as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil & Water
Conservation District Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have further questions or
comments regarding these inspections, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
'e,. ►�.
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
David Moore, Carolina Farms
—N9kO
'943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity AffirmatNe Action Employer

19 Kounne 0 %-ompiamr 0 roiiow-up of uwt2 inspection 0 rt
Facility Number
p Registered U Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Erscan.Woad.&.Sota..........................................................................
,up of ttawu review 0 utner
(late of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 of perattona Date Last Operated:
........ County: Greene WaRO
OwnerName: Erscin...................................... Wood .......................................................... Phone No: .7.4&.6355....................................................................
FacilityContact:...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
MailingAddress: Rt.l.Box.3.81A..................................................................................... Aydeit.1SC................ ............................................... 28513 ..............
Onsite Representative: ErvinAJ1aGheL.]3lood........................................................... Integrator: :CarallmaTarms.....................................................
Certified Operator: RacheL.M............................. Wood ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 16605.............................
Location of Farm:
I&
Latitude ©� ©� ©�� Longitude ©• © ®
Swine Capacity Population Poultry
p can to Feeder
®Feeder to Finish
[3 Farrow to Wean
c3 Farrow to ee er
Farrow to Finish
[3 Gilts
E3 Boars
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds
enera
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Dairy
p on- airy
[3 Layer
p Non -Layer
p Other
Total Design Capacity 3,84
Total SSLW 18,460
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. lfdischarge 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
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

act t Number: 0-
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier: ...................................
Freeboard (ft): 4.8 ft.
Structure 2 Structure 3
4.6 ft.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...... oastalBezmuda.Grass............................................................................................................................
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 Certified or Permitted Facilities Only,
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which.cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
.. o•viar , tons.or cieneies•were.no a during:thisvisit.,. You will.receive no further .
coot6odoftlieo ONO tide visit::
............................. •.
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
E3Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ❑ No
PHI
ments;( er•to:quea on'#R)- rExplain,any onsw,ers'aa or any•t�ommen tions'or.'any�other comments:
rawit r of raeillty to better expltiin situations. (use additional pages as necessary): 7, -97
na1 i*W. 1997 - -
compone� oftht certified attirual waste'managment plan are complete and maintained on site.:=;
on riecords complete with tiitrogen'balance.-
e following items are conditions of the Certified Atiitnal-Waste Management Plan, and the general permit, thereforeithese items
ust begmplemented:. ,k .. • ._ -- ...... .
lCaep lagoons/storage ponds free of�foretgrt`debrta�tnchiding;,but not limited t6.ttres,`battles, plastic products, light bulbs,
r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewerAnspector Signature: 1 ' C Y1 Date:

r
RONNY Number: 4 _5o DMe of Inspection
na 1; omnaents an OI'
�:.. n�i��'e,$r�.NiY•W�d�'-F`J�..'�:7E5�"iv'bl�c. M - r '>°'YiWiJJ r ffitiflX�A. 1IR a"�`w1+5.`i n.n. - , r
es organ Omer souas wastemi
pes disaliarging wastes' into-the`lagoon soulTbe' extended'beneath'the surface'of the'iagoon to avoid releasing gases from
wastes.. -
:"Itie"lagoon�reas shotild'i a kep i owed`or otherwise controlled And accessible. High grass does not allo you'to conduct a
s'Oro . :.'oa-of the lagoon area -for seepage.'-'rodent'damage, etc.. y- .
An r close'to the time
was .0o ligiud atimal te fro_m;tlie'lagoon shall.be conducted'as me of apple n as practical and at
sst within d y(before or"aftec) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following -parameters: Nitrogen,
_' osphotvs' inc'end Copper..
"Soil analysis is required"annually.
The following records are required: lagoon level data, off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste and soil analysis and
d irrigation records. 'These records should'be maintained by the facility owner/manager'in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
. ="•.ire ��':{ _
..E,�.��:y.i �ry�r� r Y _:dam �:"•:'GY6 A . ... - �, - ..
.:y :.'+�'S...rY�: ... � ti: • . .. -._ e � � r - SL - `.`• -'SY•'r.- _ •�•A'
.iyr" -��'"7 i�s"Ra. x.�srs�. r .a _ t -:.� .. • . - r- ' .....""' r ��•j.a`;W
141
"�• - .......,..an.. :..a. `Z� ��•« -Y` �.. '�f'4-. Ey. - �.x c"'�."'- r .r-
mv
_ ..v,-. k"w,,..i+AP' i„�ri M'' � � -• i�,� �S W r � r- �,:dw a � - .. _..

W.
Site Requires Immediate Attention: !R
Facility No. ^q6-50
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT -OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date:, 1995
Time: ]¢
Farm Name/Owner: Eaw )nj L_� Oo 1® _
Mailing Address:
County: �P_
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location: _ Aj"C - 00 �1
Type of Operation: Swine J(PS�fa Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: No. of Animals on Site:
DEM Cert. No.: ACE DEM Cert. No.: ACNEW
Lat: 3 S Z7 Wo Long: 4-1 _� Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Ft + 25
year 24 hour storm event? (approx. 1 Ft + 7 in) Yes or No
Actual Freeboard: 2, Ft Inches
Was any seepage obseryed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or 4� Was any
erosion bs @s rued? or NQ Is adequate land available for
spray? �.�Lor No s the cover qrqp adequate? or No
Crop (s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS�mum setback criteria? -
200 Ft from. Dwellings? or No 100 Ft from Wells? Y or Na
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line
Stream? Yes or (&�- Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated
within 25 Ft of'a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or <&- Is animal waste
discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditctL, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes oroj'
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records
(volumes of manure, land a ied, spray irrigate on specific
acreage wit cover crop)? or NoA-��4
_Z1jDC C�_ Q
Inspector Name Signature
nit
Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

W-
DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
Comments:
Sketch: