400052_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
W
Department of Environmental Quaff

'� � r •tir.F:r,�� i� •1,e=r,.s� �i:,•x•si :� c� •'-0r'a�:+' r� �4_ �.
Lo.
a.�, ��� � �"'"_•'.,
�� � �c ,Iw.�;e;, +.«rna� �wamea.�s ��� nea:�y m,s i �,�:�.yq• ;��� �: w_.
s� `�.' :=rn�a"s :tt •:r;.�wasr 't'...;'.�. :� 'd. t,:s•— S :..

Facility Number: 400052
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS400052 El Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 08/05/2016 EntryTime: 09:15 am Exit Time: 10:00 am Incident #
Farm Name: Double C Too Owner Email:
Owner: Elmer C Norville Phone:
Mailing Address: 1288 Davis Rd Snow Hill NC 285808749
Physical Address: 383 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 27' 30" Longitude: 77' 47' 01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112
mile on your left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Washington
800-929-8215
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Curtis Norville Phone:
On -site representative Cindy Norville Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2013
6-29-15 = 1.92
1-12-16 = 1.51
8-25-15 = 1.05
6-23-15 = 1.35
IRR rescords are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed. caiibrabon; sludge survey - T=2.2, LTZ=4.5; stock inglmortality
frbord range: 37/2-7-16 to 2777-31-16
page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/05/16 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection .. Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 960
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Dislgnated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 131' 10/08/91 19.00 24.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/05/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yet 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 DWO)
❑
❑ ❑
❑
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
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Slate 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 (I.e./ large
❑
❑ ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
B. 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?
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/05/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Na
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 No
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

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/05/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yos No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility tail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
1113
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
1111
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑ ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yea No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑ ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑ ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
(i.e,, discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑ ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
page; 5

W,
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for visit: Routine
Date of visit: 0712812015 Entry Time: 0T.05 pm
Farm Name:
Double C Too
Owner:
Elmer C Norville
Mailing Address:
1288 Davis Rd
Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
County; Greene Region:
Exit Time: 2:40 pm Incident 0
Owner Email:
Phone:
Snow Hill NC 285808749
Washington
800-929-8215
Physical Address: 383 Hari Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Faun: Latitude: 35° 27' 30" Longitude: 77° 47' 01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6/10 mile, turn right on 1209, Go 1/2
mile on your left.
Question Areas:
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Curtis Norville Phone
On -site representative Cindy Norville Phone
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Marlene Salyer
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: Soil tested:312013
6-23-15 = 2.02
2-16.15 = 1.55
1-15-15 = 2.69
7-16-14 = 1.23
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: New COC, rainfall & freeboard; sludge survey @22%; calibration due in 2016.
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number 400052
Inspection Date: 07/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
k agoan 81 10/08/91 19.00 28.00
page: 2

I
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052 Facility Status:
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Active permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
County: Greene
Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 07/02/2014 Entry Time: 08:20 am Exit Time: 9:00 am Incident #
Farm Name: Double C Too Owner Email:
Owner: Elmer C Norville Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1288 Davis Rd Snow Hill NC 285808749
Physical Address: 383 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status. Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 27' 30" Longitude: 77' 47' 01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209, Go 112
mile on your left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Reprosentative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Curtis Norville Phone
On -site representative Cindy Norville Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil tested 312013. Now every 3 years.
Waste Analysis:
1.15-14= 2.69
9-27-13= 1.14
2-26-13= 3.45
4-7-14= 2.26
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Reviewed stocking, freeboard, rainfall, ss and calib. Calib-Cadman 2250=173gpm
11 3000g=242"
Sludge Survey & calibration dated Feb. 2014
page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/02/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
L Swine.- Wean to Feeder 2,538
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 131 10/08/91 19,00
page: 2

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/02/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Dischar es & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
0
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
N ❑
❑
Slate other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
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

0
Permit: AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/02/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fall to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
1 S. 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?
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Lease Agreements?
Other?
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
Weekly Freeboard?
Waste Analysis?
Soil analysis?
Waste Transfers?
Weather code?
Rainfall?
Stocking?
Yes No Na No
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
❑■❑❑
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na Ne
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
page: 4

0
t
Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility : Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/02/14 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
[]
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
[]
❑
page: 5

13
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052 Facility Status: 6gl'yg Permit: M340OQ52 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Rouyn§_ . County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 06/05/2013 Entry Time: 09:30 AM Exit Time: 10940AAd_ Incident #:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner: Elmer C Norville
Mailing Address: 1288 Davis Rd Snow Hill NC 285808749
Physical Address: �83 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murohv-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'30" Longitude:
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Curtis Norville Phone:
On -site representative Curtis Norville Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 2-21-13
3-1-13 = 2.47
1-3-13 = 2.39
8-29-13 = .75
7-3-1 2 = 1.16
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Sludge survey in 2012 @ 22%
Looks Good!
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville Facility Number : 400052
Inspection Date: 0610512013 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 2,500
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
[ag,,n B 1 10/08/91 19.00 23.00
Page: 2

1#
Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 06/D512013 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) ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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 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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
& Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
ONOO
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville
Facility Number : 400052
Inspection Date: 0610512013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Roason 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?
Cl
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?
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
1❑
Page: 4

4
Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 06/05/2013 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
Cl ■
❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville
Inspection Date: 06/05/2013 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Facility Number: 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon I Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additonal problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
in
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ®- �`o� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
..r
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emeraency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ' Q D Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name;_, r ¢� G ��� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: [ Jcr�v�J /L Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: ��_ p Certification Number: %
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dai Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the 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 the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ o
❑ YesVN
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes V�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
it
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): T
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ONE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes VfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment threat, notify DWQ
'7. ,Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
5/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(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
❑ Yes
[2(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
' Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
0 Yes
[2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or im r em t�
p ov en .
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [VINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): a)/� l � ir
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
a o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
N
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
� o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
Zo
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
VNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections []Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes d o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

A
Facility Number: jDate of inspection: — —
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? #A;- Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below._ /L �IP510
❑ 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? ❑ Yes 2fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes EJ'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes❑
F
NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations fuse additional napes as necessarvl.
ivy-c•`��
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
li I
Phone:
Date: 9 — r
21412011

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052 Facility Status: Active Permit: &W/ A4QQ52 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection -_ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene _ Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 01/21/2012_ _ Entry Time: 09700 AMT Exit Time: 09:40 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Double C Too Owner Email:
Owner: Elmer C Norville Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1288 Davis Rd Snow Hill NC 285808749
Physical Address: 383 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: [&fphy-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'30" Longitude: 77°47'01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge r3< Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, S Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Elmer Norville Phone:
On -site representative Curtis Norville Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspectors):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 12/2011
4-12-12 = 1.9
1-9-12 = 1.9
9-2-11 = 1.4
IRR records are complete R balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard & crop yields are recorded.
Looks Good.
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville
Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 01/21/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,000
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Data Freeboard Freeboard
agoon B 1 10/08/91 19.00
Page: 2

IF
Permit: AWS400052 Owner • Facility. Elmer C Norville Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 01121/2012 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 (Le./ large trees, severe
CEO
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville
Inspection Date: 01/21/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400052
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
Soybean, Wheat
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?
DEO
❑
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Elmer C Norville
Inspection Date: 01/21/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number : 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists? .
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below. •
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 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?
00013
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400062 Owner - facility: Elmer C Norville
Inspection Date: 01/21/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Facility Number : 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
00110
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?
10
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Q2Mpliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: RgUtene County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 0=412011 _- Entry Time: 10:00 AM Exit Time: 10A0 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Bamow. Nursery Owner Email:
Owner: Robert Barrow Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 351 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 285809451
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -grown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'30° __ _ Longitude: 77°47'01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine crossroads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
© Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Elmer C Norville Operator Certification Number: 28274
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Curtis Norville Phone:
On -site representative Curtis Norville Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: 5-2-11 = 2.0
1-29-11 = 1A soil tested 2010
IRR's are complete & balanced with a few events waiting on current analysis to finish balancing.
Crop yields, freeboard & rainfall are recorded.
S survey due in 2012 Caliberation due 2012
Lagoon looks good!
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/24/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 2,600
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
lagoon 81 10/08/91 19.00 49.00
Page; 2

N
Permit. AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/24/2011 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? 110011
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, Cl ■ ❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application 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: AWS400052 owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Inspection Date: 08/24/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400052
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
Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Winter
Annual
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
❑ ■
❑
❑
Pian(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/24/2011 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?
Cl
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 fall to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

M
Permit: AWS400052 Owner • Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number; 400052
Inspection Date: 08/24/2011 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?
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
In
Page: 6

r
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052 Facility Status: Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/25/2010 Entry Time:09:30 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Barrow Nursery
Owner: Robed Q@rrow
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 351 dart Rd Snow Hill NC 285809451
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: , 5'27'30" Longitude: 77°47'Q1"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Nannie M Barrow Operator Certification Number: 17665
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Danny Hamm Phone:
On -site representative Danny Hamm Phone -
Primary inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested 2010
7-13-10 = 2.0
3-31-10 = 1.6
1-29-10 = 1.4
freeboard range : 219110 = 24" to 60" on 9/17110
IRR records are complete and balanced out. Looks Good!
Date:
Page: 1

r
Permit: AWS400052 Owner -Facility; Robert Barrow
Inspection Date: 1012512010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 2,854
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deslaned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
�agoon B1 10/08/91 19.00 42.00
Page: 2

r
Permit: AW5400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 10/25/2010 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?
1101111
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
S. 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

if
Permit: AWS400052 Owner- Facility: Robert Barrow
Inspection Date: 1012512010 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Facility Number: 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 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
Soybean, Wheat
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?
❑ ■
Cl ❑
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

j
Permit: AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number; 400052
Inspection Date. 10/2512010 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?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
^4L. 1..........
Van
Nn NA NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? 1101311
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 10/25/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherissues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

ti
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 4QO052 Facility Status: Active T- Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qgmplianoe Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 07/23/2009 Entry Time:09:00 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Barrow Niggery -- .- -- ----
Owner: Robert Barrow
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 351 Hart Rd _ Snow Hill NC 285809451
Physical Address: 351 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 28580
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murohv-Brown, LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°27'30" Longitude: 77°47'01"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Nannie M Barrow Operator Certification Number: 17665
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Rep rose ntative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Danny Hamm Phone:
On -site representative Robert Barrow Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s)-
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
3-2-09 2.0
9-3-09 1.5
soil test 3-30-09
Everything Looks Good!
Phone:
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07t2312009 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
W Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 2,843
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
lagoon
B1
10/08/91
19.00
36.50
Page: 2

M
0
Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/23/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA
NB
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
Cl
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0013
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
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.eJ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are'not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Inspection Date: 07/23/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400052
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 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 e 1
Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Cover
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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07123/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? Cl
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 fall 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. bid the facility fail to property 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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 07/23/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
31, Did the facility tail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
■
❑
13
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
■11
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■
❑
❑_
Page: 6

0
Division of Water Duality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 490952__ Facility Status: 6ptjya Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ - „- Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene- _ _ Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/26/2000 Entry Time:10130 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Barrow Nurs,ry
Owner: Robert -Barrow
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Malling Address: 351 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 285809451
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: MurQhv Family Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: 77°47'01"
Farm location: take Hwy, 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210.go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 1/2 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Nannie M Barrow Operator Certification Number: 17665
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Danny Hamm Phone.
On -site representative Robert Barrow Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:,
waste analysis"
4-16-08 = 2.0
1-14-08 = 2.2
soil test 4-15-08
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/26/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 1,026
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon B1 10/08/91 19.00 52.00
Page: 2

Permlt: AWS400052 Owner -Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/26/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yea 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 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?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - FacIIlty: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection bate: 08/26/2008 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 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop 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?
Small Grain Cover
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
U
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 08/26/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
Q
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
Q
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?
❑
■ ❑
Q
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

I
Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow
Facility Number:400052
Inspection Data: 08/26/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400052 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400052 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 10/17/2007 Entry Time:08135 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Barrow Nursery Owner Email:
Owner: Robert Barrow
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 351 Hart Rd Snow Hill NC 285809451
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35"27'30" Longitude: 77"47'05"
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6I10 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 112 mile on
your left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment © Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Nannie M Barrow Operator Certification Number: 17665
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Danny Hamm Phone:
24 hour Contact name Robert Barrow Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-20-07 = 1.9
3-14-07 = 2.2
Lagoon had sludge revoal in March 2007 and all the records are complete and balanced outl
Looks Greatl
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility. Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 1011712007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Feeder 2,600 2,633
Total Design Capacity: 2,600
Total SSLW: 78,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
B1 10/08/91
19.00
49.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 10/1712007 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? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a 11000
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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑ ■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
8. 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: AWS400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Bartow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 10/17/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application atlon Yes No NA NB
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 Com, Wheat, Soybeans
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?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW5400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Data: 10/17/2007 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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
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: AW5400052 Owner - Facility: Robert Barrow Facility Number: 400052
Inspection Date: 10117/2007 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? ONOO
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ Q ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
=Facifityumber 5a- O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- - - Q Other Agency
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: w�L6-
Farm Name: i 64a4ur_ ,z2-"jJ Owner Email:
Owner Name:.S R ,,alA.'d?� Phone:
Mailing Address: r
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
��// Integrator:.���
Certified Operator: LVi IVXI.t -, JL{.Irt.t,tY Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = d 0 Longitude: = o = d ❑
ti
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedej
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream )impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Daily
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: =',
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 the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes J I/io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo
N El NA ❑ NE
El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(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 ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C -13YI/4424 /1(i ��d�)���1 `�� —AVAn 4,97_
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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):
Reviewer/Inspector Name I Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: —
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
El No
VNA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
174 NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Ea<
❑ NE
Otber Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
µJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
U o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
2'N' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
El yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
,�,/
Lid No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
;6-7 .
r
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
IReason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 S2 'late of Visit: 5-12-2004 Time: 7:30
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date least Operated or Above Threshold: ......•.......•
FarmName: 13exrow.Nurscry........................................................................................... • County: Gumc ............................................... WAR ........
Owner Name:RQbCrj..................................... Rarxow ....................................................... Phone No: (,ZSZj.Z.47: 3.95.b...........
Mailing Address: 3S.Uhrl.Rud...................................................................................... 5�19.YX. 111.�Y........................................................ MUM ..............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Robcr.t.Rairr.o..w.&.J) hilly,.Hamm..................................... Integrator: M.urphy.zflMi1y..k:8JLtUR.....................................
Certified Operator:Nanjaig..lki.............................. ftr.ra.,w ................ ............................ Operator Certification Number:176.65 .............................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6/10 mile, turn right on 1209. Go
t/2 mile on your left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 2711 30 ill Longitude 77 ' 47& F OS
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
® Wean to Feeder
2600
2013
JCI Layer
I
I
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
JE1 Non -Layer
I
I
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
77
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,600
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
78,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons C
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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 Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
® No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No-
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Identifier: ................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 39
12112103
Continued

Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 1 5-12-2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No j
seepage, etc.) -
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ® No
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
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ® 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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
[:]Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN [:]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground . ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Small Grain Overseed
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? E] Yes ❑ No '
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or 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 ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ® No
Air Quality representative immediately,
Comments (refer to question #) Explain any YES:answers and/or any recommendatioris''or,a'ny other comments
P
Use drawn s of facali ssa Field Copy ® Final Notes _
ns: use ad1
g �' ty to better ex loan situatao { dataoual pages nece ry). ❑
AL
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name Marlene D. Salyer
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
a�ra�ns:
i `ir `i vs %-UrI1111"Cu

Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 5-12-2004
I
,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 ail components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ 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, noes record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection'After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional.Comments and/6r Drawings:
on site,
it test on 4-11-03 & 2-19-04 with no lime needed.
analysis: 3-17-04 = 1.9; 1-8-04 = 1.6; 9-3-03 = 1.1; 6-5-03 = 1.5; 4-10-03 = 1.4
freeboard and rain events are recorded weekly.
irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
12112103

r]
.r
+�
Water Quality
t
O.Divian es'of
0 Division of and water Conservation
�
Soil
Agency
Type of Visit i Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O goon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint p Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: d
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
13 Permitted © Certified M Conditionally Certified Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: .019i .. . r_....................................................... County:. r,rGV! ^,,1..................................................
OwnerName: -- [�,t(...................... . ..................................................... Phone No: ..rl��.� r�3�.�P............................................ .
Mailing Address: ,,...r11z5., ........W, ............. ............................................ ..'f'f.-D4i*~' . 1 �N� ....� C ............ 2�sl`�.... .
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
OnsiteRepresentative:........................................................................................................... Integrator:........................-----........................
Certified Operator: %���rti,�J....... ..... . ............................... Operator Certification Number: f 20rP.,':g ........................
Location of Farm:
aSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �` �"
DeS1gi1S' t CUrrentl! h ti i :Design aCiirreni
.�.,-'�ES r !:: t.
rrri�
Swine �,; ;l 1 I Ca aci .E,Po
nlatzon
Wean to Feeder
Q
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
k;Pa ulatia
❑ Layer
r
i Non -Layer
h
❑ Other
II
]] 1
a �
A
Longitude �• �' ���
C
��" ❑ Dairy
❑Non -Dairy
t-
1
i. °. ,. ,[t m,ltns tr
Total°,SSLW
9'
r�l Hi{liy93 1 !
P� �"sEl YIFYI r r'L3LI 38
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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 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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........................................................................................................
Frecboard (inches):
12112103
❑ Yes OX01
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Po
❑ Yes 010
❑ Yes L4o
Structure 6
Continued

` Facility Number: Q —
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 11r1'No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes Rio
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? El Yes H o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes To
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes M40,
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes EW10
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L To
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc ��P3
12. Crop type 1.:?A' 1,41W Ili 2 X' L-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes R
14. a) Does the -facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Mol o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M110
❑ Yes 01,140
❑ Yes [flo
,SE,€€r, FEE an 3 flier comments =4
rrnrnents {refer to,queshnn #) �,.9xplazr� anY154ar�swer and/or, any recomendat~ans or>. . y , > H r € �;,
tolly
se drawings'of facility to better explain'sttuatrons. {use additional pages as necessary)s,i!€. field Cop ❑Final Notes9''
4h.x,}i3 j:
i. , { t: J, ...cE,afie€. €. z... :.u.f'SS.'L� ,... ,. �i i. }t �_i�-'u ; • _ ��:53'S�. a �.�:: e..... .?.ru".:.. is �� .....i.. � } a r:. r. 1... ? 1 'i i ...1i:
x, Sn ,,...,, �,-• . •-�vr,;z�.� , ,�°c�- ,.,�; ,�Y �ri,�-�-�-t, ,{ �7a'-*',�-r+ u � �'; s rr *s.
ReviewerllnspectorName S .i
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
12112103 v Continued

` Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes E''ro'
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ WIT, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes GKo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ®ro
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ tVaste Analysis WRICI Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[+ <o
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
i<o
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
�,�
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
2<0
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
H<o
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Qi
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
L3'<o
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
El,o
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
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
SWI td.. X 4:.:nW.'­_. .' {._ '..A, „-..itiS:'t1i:_".I
44.
V
4,0;tt�
.» .. .�.... . . ..,. .- .. .: nF
#///d 3 f - kl� —led
y/�afa3;l•`f
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 40 - 52 Date: 10/22/03 Time: 1 900 1 Time On Farm: 45 WaRO
Farm Name Barrow Nursery County Greene
Mailing Address 351 Hart Road Snow Hill NC
Onsite
Representative Robert Barrow 1 Danny Ham Integrator Imurphy Brown
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑.Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
U NO Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® 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
2600
2574
Phone: [phone]
Purpose Of Visit
O Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
28580
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?
6• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structures Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier I
Level (Inches) 47
CROP TYPES Corn soybean Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES . ExA AyB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
28580
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?
6• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structures Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier I
Level (Inches) 47
CROP TYPES Corn soybean Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES . ExA AyB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
28580
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?
6• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structures Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier I
Level (Inches) 47
CROP TYPES Corn soybean Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES . ExA AyB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 - 52 Date:
10/22/03
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 recertification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (POA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El
❑
El Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
Date:
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating Improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION'
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage workievaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsolling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater dlverslon, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer Improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
'
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 _ 52 Date: 10/22/03
COMMENTS:
*Waste plan amended 8/26/03 to include tract 1502 fields 2 and 3 crop corn and soybeans. Leased third party land for 5 +
ears. WUP completed by Carl Dunn, DSWC. PAN deficit 567X1000 gallons
"Waste analysis dated 9/3103 nitrogen is 1.1 Ibs/1000 gallons
6/5/03 nitrogen is 1.5 Ibs/1000 gallons
4/10/03 nitrogen is 1.4 Ibs11000 gallons
12/4/02 nitrogen is 1.7 Ibs11000 gallons
818/02 nitrogen is 1.5 Ibs11000 gallons
"Keep records available for 3 years.
*Soil test dated 4/11/03, Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines. Remember to secure soil test for third party land if waste is
applied to crops.
*Commercial fertilizer applied to corn was deducted from IRR2 PAN balance for corn.
"IRR2 records are complete and balanced.
'Farm is well maintained.
'Lagoon level is recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/28/03 Entered By: Imartin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

WATF9
QG
r
`nip 4
To:. Producer
vw�
From: Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2002
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
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 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified
Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, whirr are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the
General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
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
(p An analysis of the.liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least
within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p The following records are required off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsoil analysis and land irrigation records.
These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three years.
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant Available
Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given application,
cp All glassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet can be
another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
q) It is s est not a r uiremen to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan. You will
ri . . years of drop yield d= ore "your plae ran be updated ...._.......
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. if you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-6481, ext
321 or your Technical Specialist
Cc: aRO
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mail Washington, NC 27889 252-946.8481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Division of Water Quality
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation 3 iJ,y .
p Other Agency
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit G Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 111G12002 Time: 10:35 am
0 Not Operationalp Below Threshold
Permitted E Certified la Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Barrow Nursery County: Or lm............................................... W..a}ZO........
Owner Name: Robert Barrow Phone No: [phone]
Mailing Address:.35.1..Har:t1load ...................................................................................... Stun:.Hill..l C.............................................I.......... 2,85811..............
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:.................... . Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Rxilxert.Barrow/.,edam.Tirg,en,.Daniiy.Hamm........... Integrator:Murphy-F.amily.Farms.....................................
Certified Operator: Nalinla.M............................. Rarr:ow ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 1.7.665 ............................
Location of Farm:
,arm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on I ZlU go, mile, turn right on 1209. o
/2 mile on your left.
® Swine 13 Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ©• ©� ®« Longitude ©• ®�
Swine
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population' Poultry Capacity ,,Population, 'Cattle Capacity Population
p Dairy
q on- airy
® Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Finis1i
13 Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
13 Gilts
p Boars
p Layer
I
I
[3 Non -Layer
El
�i
p other Il +'
Total Design'Capacity 2,600
Toiei SSLW 78,000
Number of,Lagoon p u sur ace ramsPresentp Lagoon Area p pray Field rea
�1
�.
oltlmg i
Pnnds/Salid;Traps �', p o tqu� Waste anagemen = ys
H . -.
uma�ca i Vail a1111jaL a
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: 0 Lagoon 13 Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? 1
a
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? I] Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway p Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
.....................
Freeboard (inches): ................4Q.

aci i y Number: 40_52 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, [3 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 g No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an ,
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes g No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? El Yes g No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? p Yes g No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes g No
11, Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload p Yes g No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Small Grain Overseed
�a
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes g No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? p Yes p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? p Yes p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ` p Yes g No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? p Yes g No
Renuired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
g No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
p Yes
g No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
g No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
g No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
g No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
g No
24.
°f
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
g No
25,
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
g No
In No violations or deficiencies were noted urmg this visit. You will receive no ur er:correspon ence about is visit.
Comments refer tQ. question # ,::.Ex lam an YES answers and/or an recommendations or an other comments
( q, } P Y YY
a
.Use drawn s:af facilit to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)':
g.a Y Field Copy p Final Notes
b,
Soil analysis 5 10 01 - no time required.
Waste analysis 9/24/01 - 1.3 lbs/1000 gals
Freeboard levels recorded weekly.
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance with no overapplication noted. "E
Waste utilization plan amended with small grain (overseed) with 50 lb PAN rate.
.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1D-Ap'-li`ne B:u11om'erttered`by Anp',Tynda'Il`"'
�( „i„''
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

cc rn
v , •
i�1. j{4'��f:jj' l�l � �}�� ..•" o• � S
Grow r, 1,
ur,
—A
'70
30 1—Z
is
nn�
Ni i j
x
Zj N
M1
J!4.0
V Seymour r
cq
•'.� '—_...... G.:atih.. "}'i€l' i'' +' Ptl' �j r r� 4nt�er-• !p��rtl �{ J"m"�..,.-,wA; "w,_ // 30
j�
J.:
Vl- I-V
04,
A
71
ti,
4
j,
. VV
z
A 1
<
P/
L
co"M
1 3v
arrkWu
•
! Epp117 .. . ..... So ,Z� y
j
rP Ut 6 ean
Q
T V ;4=7_P I - ­�,)]� "�- I
j 'Al,
C;,
—77
.ToM 11 Ch
V'ci, Rd Cam f
Ch _*0 132 1205 Q
ing
Ftvo;l kfr
PU in T > i,
nJ Sta
Name; JASON Location: 035' 27'42.7" N 077' 46' 55.3" W
Date: 10/29/102 Caption: Barrow Nursery
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet
Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc.

_ ! j

Type of Visit O Compliance inspection Q. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilitv Number q0 52 Date of Visit: 8115l2001 Time: lOW
Nut O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ftrrom.Nmerx...................
County: (artr&tllr............................................... WAR.0........
OwnerName: R► hert.................................... AaKrm ....................................................... Phone No:(252)147-19.66 .......................................................
Mailing Address: 351.Hartt.Road..........1................ UaWxHUINC........................................................ Wso .............
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:............... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �nAe.�.arxa�l�ir�.Ti��a:........................................... Integrator. out b .1aall .Ew .......................
..............
Certified Operator:,NAUj3k................................... Barmw ............................................. Operator Certification Number:,17.665.............................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: take Hwy.13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6/10 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 11
mile on your left. +w
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 27 30 Longitude F 05 i�
Design ::Current Design.. :.Current :Design . ;:Current
1
Subsurface Drains Present 11❑ Lagoon Area 1❑ Spray Field Area
No Liquid Waste M
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ i,agoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance nian-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Stale'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Irves, notif DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there, any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
ldontifior......................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):...............42................ ....................
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6

05/03/01 Conttnuerl
Facility Number: 40--52 Date of Inspection 81I512001
5. Are there anv_ immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®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 N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? N Yes ❑ No
I
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 ®No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N No
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Crenerat Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ® No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) Yes N No
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance ofthe Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
[3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
w ... .. a.i,.. . .T-...IE['._-'.."J:4:.,;.4.____...,...,..,,�uF..................4...,...f.....,..........�.,::3::^:7��s:�';�S:C�:Cf:CEfa;:i��r:t:C::0:....:;�.E...,.,.,.,...,...,,...,.�.:p.d:6;i�.6CGAL'
❑ field Copy ❑ Final Notes
*Waste plan dated 5/7/01. _
*Waste plan has been amended to include corn with PAN rate.
*Soil test dated 5/10101. No time required. Suggest keeping lime receipts.
13. Waste plan needs 10 be amended to include small grain over -wed with correct PAN rate. Consult tech. spec.
*Waste analysis dated 618/01 nitrogen is 2.2 lbs/1000 gallons
2/13101 nitrogen is 2.3 lbs/1000 gallons
*Discussed IRR2/waste schedule.
*Lagoon level being recorded weekly as required by permit. ,r
Reviewer/Inspector Name V
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
Date:

05/03/01 Continuer!
Facility Number: 40-52 D:1te ol'.lnspection t3115I2001
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 them 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.c. 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/ternporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
'Addit na trmtnents an or ra n si rG t tir t, .�....
,.t.._.� ._
*Commercial fertilizer was applied to tract 1524 field 41A. Amount was deducted from IRR2 PAN balance.
*Records are well organized.
*Completion of underground irrigation by Crockett Irrigation. Irrigation design to be completed by Crockett Irrigation. "Phis
information should be in record book.
v

' �0 W A rFR p
>_
5 1`C
To: Producer
From: Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Michael F, Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
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 aH other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following continents, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
cp 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 ral freeboard.
cp An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lune is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
cp The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsod analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during anygiven application.
(p All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is supgested, not a requirem to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, exL 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: .aRO
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 278139 252-M-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for VisitO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification ()Other ❑ Denied Access
Date at Visit: 4-17-2001 Time: 2:05 arrt
Facility Number 40 52
Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified ® Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Naime: BA117CQw.Aursexy.....................................
Owner Name: Rt1bgjd................................... MalM.W
.................................. County: firmu..........
........................... Phone No:
.W.ARO........
MailingAddress:S�.Hart.t�a......................................................................................nlQw.i11.C......................................................... 2858.Q ..............
FacilityContact: .................... ............................................................ Title: ............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative:Daliny..Hatm,.Rohert.l3,nrria5x..A►datm..Tingca.......... Integrator: Mltrphy.FAWy.Farms ..............................
Certified Operator: Ka auie................................... Rarmw ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 176.65 ............................
Location of Farm: _
Farm location: take Hwy. 13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6/10 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 11
mile on your left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 OF 27 ' 30 Longitude 77 ' 47 05 �4
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Suhsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag
Area [:1 Spray Field Areas
Holding Ponds 1 s
Solid Tra
p ❑ No Liquid Waste :Management System
Di4charl4es & Stream JmVacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
1). I.f discharge is observed, slid it reach Water of the Strata? (117)7es, ❑oi6- DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the L,sllmated flop' in gal/ta]lll'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (lfyes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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

i.ontinuea
Facility Number: 40-52
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection 4-17-2001
1
f
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); ...............14...............................................................................................................................................................................................
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 yea, 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 wastemanagement system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[] Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
17. Are rock outcrops present'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. 1s there a water supply well withiu 250 feet of the s-praytield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Ott -site
Required Records & Documents
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
®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? (iel 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 Pernsit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
25. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Z No
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
Odor Issues
28. 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?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No

I
OLVI/01
!� Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 4-17-2001
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)
3 L 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?
Continued
Printed on: 4/18/2001
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
S No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permaneut/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �, �I 1p, i G r o f l ri
Da" hne}S ` Cullom!. I i f ;, ''
Reviewerllnspector Signatu Date: 4 — k Q -Zee I

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 ❑ Denied Access
Facilitv Number 40 52 Date of Visit: $/3112000 Time: tiElS
L- ------------ Q Not O erational O Below Threshold
ElPermitted EBCertified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Barrox.Nttmxg..................................................................... County: GMCDC ............................................... WaRQ........
Owner Name: Robeta.................................... Borrow ......................... .............................. Phone No: 252:71.47 3'16f...........................................................
Facility Contact:..................................................... ................ Title: ............. Phone No:
Mailing Address: Rt.S.Brea A S.......................... .............. ............................ Sttow millNC........................................................ 2.85.80 .............
Onsite Representative: fat!]ui�Halonuq.lY�nxlte.Ba�R»Tl(................. Integrator: �,+[usphy..�8Jt dlj-Fa.17u><9.................... ....................... .......
Certified Operator: XWWje l L............................ BUKO.R..................... ........... Operator Certification Number: ................
Location of Farm:
Farm location: take Hwy.13 north of Goldsboro to Shine cross roads, turn left on 1210 go 6110 mile, turn right on 1209. Go 1/2 A+
mile on your left.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude
Longitude
77 ° 47F 05
Design Current
Design
CuirrenY
Degn Current
S!e......':: .......:....:..Ca sett 'Po...�ilation.'.....Pau1t !3.... .'.
Ca pacify.:Popula
tion:; 'Cattle
66
,.Capactty.:;ii'opulati, .
® Wean to Feeder
2600
2535
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharues & Stream Im�tq
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 tees, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. lf'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 Stntcture 5 Structure 6
Ideulifier: ............................................ RX133ag ......... ....................................................................................................................................
freeboard (inehcs):................50...................................................
...............................................................................................................................................

5/00
Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 8/31/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Continued on back
❑ Yes ❑ No
[-]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
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, reaps, etc.)
I9. 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?
N6vioIn' tious;tir:deticieucies�ivere;noted;dui'ing tliis•visit:. You rvill I:receive'nof i0, he'r: ;
.correspondence about this. visit...
Lagoon level records complete - General Permit on site dated 6/2/00
Soils report dated 7/19/00 - minimal lime needed on one field (0.3 tons/acre)
Last waste report dated 8/21/00 at 1.3 Ibs/1000 gal.
Previous report dated 3/24/00 at 2.5 Ibs/1000 gal.
Waste plan for soybeans and wheat - will need to secure plan for year #2 for corn.
IRR2 records complete.
❑ 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
�
Reviewer/ins ector Name FI
p i'

Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 5/00
Facility Number: 4Q-52 Date of Inspection 813112tf00
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)
24. 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 permauent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
.�.. ;.:;:.: :;: .;;s...
.s.. :edd 8s. .�::.::
thon ;Cowmen#s:an or:� rawm s:. €"s �•�;� i.
.g.. ;:awl:;
a
v

• 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
for Visit 0° Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 g2 1)ate of Visit: 5/1$12000 Time: ®Printed on: 5/23/2000
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.. ..................
Farm Name: HarrllTli-Naracry...................
.... County: Guam ............................................... 1'. ARO........
OwnerName:RQberl.................................... J).8KX.R.W........................................................ Phone No: ...........................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: fit.S.j3ttX..lr,4S.......................................................... ............... $M'Q '..klill.MC............................. ......... 2jj5AQ .............
..... ......... ..................
Onsite Representative: RQb9x1.13aJC.rQW................................................... .... ....... Integrator: rAUrAbly..k:pMjly..l�.a.M&............................. ......... ... ........
Certified Operator: NaxlAllie..lY.l.............................. U0LrrP.jy ............................................. Operator Certification Number:1.7665 .............................
Location of Farm:
>?.a�arx.laca�tlam:...lsake..kL�xya.�.�.�nnrth..af.Gnld,�fxar.A.ta.chime.�r.Qss..raatlSa.klr�ra..lefk.Q�n..t2�.lA..�.�/.�Q.mile..>`ux.�.xight.a>�.l�Q�,...�n. �'':
al2.naife..atx..au�r..l�it.............................................................. .... ........... .... .. .....
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 27 30 Longitude 77 47 ' OS
Design Current
Swine Cnnnrity Pnniflatinn
® Wean to Feeder
2600
2600
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design. Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity population Cattle Capacity Population
ElLayer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,600
Total SSLW 78,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ 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 S Structure 6
Identifier: .................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 51

Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 5/18/2000 Printed on: 5/23/2000
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
(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 ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
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 vioIatiot s:or :deficiencies wer"e:noted:d:uring this visit:: You: wiltl:receive ;no ftirther
.. correspondence abouf thiis.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):
Soil analysis 7/99; waste analysis 3/24/00 2.5 Ibs./1000 gals.
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance. All other records of the CAWMP are complete,
including freeboard records.
Freeboard records and irrigation records indicate wastewater is well managed.
Reviewer/Inspector Name (Daphne B, Cullom Entered by Ann Tyndall
'_ 5 rZ3 --00

4I�Revicwer/inspector Signature: Date:
Facility Number: 40-52 Date of Inspection 5/18/2000 Printed on: 5/23/2000
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? (Le, 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
it

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
0 Other Agency - Operation Review
�� Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 40 52 Date of Inspection 1 1218/99
Time of Inspection 11:00 A M7 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified (3 Registered 113 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: Ba3.rro x.,Nuracry................................................. County: G.rt~Vint~............................................... WARO........
OwnerName: tioberlt.................................... Jjm rx.Qt3....................................................... Phone No: 2,52.-7.47.-3.966 ...........................................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address:Rt.$.lBux..b.kS........................................................... ...................... Sino.w..k1.11 AC........................... .. Z8.5aq .............
Onsite Representative: �Q�?kXt.SOX.CQ.Y}......................................... Integrator: ll!�urpbly..FatllAly..Fjr.>aS.....................................
.........................
Certified Operator:Xqajt1p..% ............................ jja r.ro.'A...................... .. Operator Certification Number:,1.7§.{5......................
..................... .......
Location of Farm:
!?.axln..I.a+ratAalac...ka1C�..H�:yr.�.�.�n�rkh..af.�Aatis.bar.Q.ta.Shti�atti..er.Qss..roa�tisa.kuxn..Itrt'k.tag..12.1.A.�a.bla.R.xttll�..ka�rn..righ.t.al�.t2A��...G.u. �
,12.naUe.22. a9r..UL................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude Longitude 77 • 47 05 '
Design Current
Swine Canneity Ponulation
® Wean to Feeder
2600
2456
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,600-
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present jjoLagoonArea ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 29.
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 0 No
Continued on back
Printed on 12117/99

Printed on 12/17/99
Facility Number: 40-52 I Date of Inspeclion 12/8/99
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 Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
IN No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
®No
12. Crop type Corn, Wheat, Soybeans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 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
IN No
Nti yiolatiolns:or:defit:i ncies We emoted during•this visit.:You:Will:receive h6 furthee
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):
Waste analysis 10/12/99 = .90 ibs.
12/6/99 = 1.1 lbs.
Pumped on beans October 1 per conversation with Lyn Hardison.
Plan calls for corn, wheat, soybeans. Rotation did not call for wheat this winter, but wheat was planted per Greene
DSWC to allow for winter pumping. Farmer has signed up for emergency BMP's.
IV
Reviewerllnspector Name Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date:

Facility NumberQ I.)ate of Inspection a-ly
Time of Inspection 1 l %aD 24 hr. (hh:mm)
El Permitted © Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not Operational I Date Last Operated: .
Farm Name B.".1. �� C:ounty:........6reefL_.......................................................
............................s.../l.......................................I......................
OwnerName:........................°...'[............&'°.......................................................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact:...................................................... ................... Title: .. Phone No:
MailingAddress : .................... ................................................................................
Onsite Representative; .............. R°� ........,...... ................. Integrator: ........... . ..`/ ........................ ..
Certified Operator:.. �-A`1- " '.... ....�... k *. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
......................................................................................I.............. .........................................
Latitude Longitude �• �� �«
.Design Current I . Design Current Design Current
Swine ; Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
10 Wean to Feeder 2Gav 2'{ rL ❑ Layer I [3 Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑Gilts, Total Design Capacity
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area 1.
Holdin .Ponds / Solid Traps
g p ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System +
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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 Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/ruin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifycs, 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 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): .................................................................................................................................... ...........................
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 M No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]Yes 129 No
❑ Yes '® No
❑ Yes V No
Structure 6
❑ Yes 48 No
Continued on back

Facility Number: i(D —45,A Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 9 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 1A 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 Anulieation
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 Gar ►.,L. �V,5
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
R9 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
KNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by'General Permit?
(ic/ 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
�'4o yiolafioris:or Mcier�cies *t re jnO e(1• 00-ring ibis:visit' • ;Y:oft will -receive fi futrthetr
corres�oridence. about. this .visit. • -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations.aES:answer's'and/or an recommendations ar:an other comments. ,
( q ) p y y
,.
(use' additional pages as necessary)
w� �r•lyrs 1oJu/aq � ,�D J1,�
IZJv�a°t = ►-I IDS
IPLI -peA on �a. ��a+�r>>•c'JfpA V��}� �7� )�1d,s� t. /� j f'
E Gyp ["115 TO- cdrfnN � '�' 7L�S rCo Yk ln/� V`' t�lri d'b/ ✓^O�crr- •f�f%
I.,,t 4, AII�1+ tvi4
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. - iH—v- Date. I'l it 9 q
3/23/99

j ®D' ston of Soil and Water Conservation Other Agency
AE `."Mn N • eY
y
F �5 ivisionofWater Quality _.._.._ r• .-
Date ofInspection ID-13t1@�
Facility Number O Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Registered ® Certified E3 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:....... 1V Count .......................
OwnerName: .1..,, 6 SJc. .................... Q.4A 1.................................. Phone No:.......................................................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Tille:................................................................ Phone
No: .........................................c..........
Mailing Address:. i.,.S....... &.?�...... ................................................... G\G?tL)�!ix..�..�.�..7.lYw ........................a
Onsite Representative:..`6.4—+L......1G.i@.h.Lt..Q.S.A................................... Integrator:... .. .......?.., :ls
Certified Operator;....\ tn.1.t.A.l Ak.... A.11 �............................ Operator Certifrcation3itmber;.....�..J7�r .(o ........
Location of Farm:
Latitude °®0 Longitude ©° ©` 0«
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
S ' e
Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
[YWean to Feeder
9_(g00 a%IS
❑ Layer I
❑ Feeder to Finish
ILI Non -Layer I I IE] Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
. ❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Others,
❑ Farrow to Finish
'. Total Design Capacity
00
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Totai, SSLW
'
-76600
Number of Lagoons Holding Ponds
❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area
ID Spray Field Area
ra"
;�,
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
a
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
[1}'1'0
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
I33N0
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? Of yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑NNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
I _ KO
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
EJ No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
ErNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
�/
hd N
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97

�Faci6ty Number: d — 5
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Laupons,Noldinc Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
❑ Yes E N
❑ Yes M'No
Structure 6
Freeboard(ft):....... e...i.n..:....... .................................... ...... ............................. ................ .............. ............. ............................. ............... .........��....,..l!.....
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes [91 o
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E2"No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 931I 0
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes MA-0
Waste Application �//
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? O'Yes ❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...............W. .............. � .............................. .................. t!�5........................................................................................................,
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Anim Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes B'ivo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 0No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes 'l�O
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? El Yes. Gk o
20. Does facility require a follow --up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes �'No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes [/NNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes [�No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only �,/
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes E9. o
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes BNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
E3• No.vialations•or deficiencies.werenoted during this:visit.- You.will recei've,no further,:
. corro "06de * aliout this:visit.•:
O V ✓-tap,/? L i Cow s� Q r� U+ v--
ir�,.,._��P� .� cam. ar.. cur �� � 0�
_4(Q't_ LO� �'
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: n-�t_ _�p , Vi AiL2!1 NNI— Date: to —1-g — Et

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency
0 Division of Water Quality
I* rtounne p Complaint p rouow-up of uwt2 inspection p Poitow-up of ubwe review p utner
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered E Certified E Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not pera ions Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Rarr w..LN=&".y.................................................. County: Greene WaRO
Owner Name: Robert .................................... BarrQw ....................................................... Phone No: 9.19.-117=39.66 ..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
,. Phone No:..........
Mailing Address: RLS..Box..645.......................................................................................... Snow.HiANC ........................................................ 28.58.0 ..............
Onsite Representative: .......................................................................................................... Integrator: Zl' arphy...Fam ily.Earms......................................
Certified Operator:Nantue.M...
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©0©6 ®46
Barron :............................................. Operator Certification Number: 1.7,6t;S.............................
sign urrent
Swine Capacity : Population
® Wean to Feeder
2600
p Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to ee er
p Farrow to Finish
pGits
p Boars
. ....... .. ...
Lagoons J iWding Ponds
� t Ecru
Longitude ©+ ®1 ®44
General
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. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) rl 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 p No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes p 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 N No
7/25/97

aci i Number: _5
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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
.......................................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): 3.5
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
N No
13 Yes
® No
15. Crop type .......Corni.(S.ilage.&.Gratin)...........................Soybeans.................... ...............................................................................
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 ORI
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 .. p:viaLiitions.ordeUtiencies,were.nu a unng this visit. Npa will .receive na Turt6er .
OrresponOdce bad* x is-OAL ; :::.. .
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes p No
Comments (refer to . uest on, Explain an answers and .or apages
n g,recommendations or any other comments. '. E
( q, }Y
Use dra'win s'of`facili to better ex lain situations. (use additional a es as necessa
areas o are spot. On y exposure w en a uent is pumpe own - ovate on inside slope - No Problem.
Subsurface drabs, in spray field area: Manhole with underground line to open ditch to move surface water from operation - does
of interfere with spraying field.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Donirian,T ngen
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

_.-_-_�_'---.-�-.-..-�--.-.,.. -... .._ ........ _ _ _....._. _ _�.................. ..•--_ ... -.- _...,_,.._ _. �. . ... �....
xw.�, ❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Op:eration Review
h
,_ C:� -
a
�
k fit"`. ,
LL
Q Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection 4
�5
,,.
k
" u
Routine
0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 >~ ollow-up of DSWC review
0 Other
Facility Number p
U Registered Certified 0 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted
Farm Name: 6P7& C W K3.9. r b Q
......................
Owner Name: , .Q� C—A-At Uj
............................
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm) I
13 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
County: ... L..............................
Phone
Facility Contact:....................................................................r........... Title:
i4lailittg Address: '�" a (0 ` S
.............: .............
Onsite Representative.:....
Certified Operator
.....1.,.1Jff1.V1J!.R-............... ....C.....1L4..........................
Location of Farm:
................... I........ Phone No:.........................
.+�a. ... .�..i.�...,.. ........................ a:. , ..............
Integrator: ..... &X-C....... ..... FT14
Operator Certification .
1
.lz,�O. n. ...................................................................... ..... ... ... ................ .....
Latitude
Longitude
�•� ����
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current b
Swin Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
can to Feeder
a600
7 &p6
JE1 Layer
1
10 Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
JE1 Non -Layer
10 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
10 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
0f.00
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Y]S ppO
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds JE1 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Magoon Area ID Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General '-UO 6d\C>6V,r
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance m:tn-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Sud'ace Water'? Of yeti. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systein? Uf yes, notify DWQ)
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes 0.1.4
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 2-No
❑ Yes GrNo
❑ Yes 01 o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ;;No
Continued on hack

Facility Number:LjO -- S�
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.11olding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft) ........ ` ..:.�.. :......................
4-11; .% .
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes B
❑ Yes 0;�<
Structure 5 Structure 6
... .................................... ...... I ... .....,...I ... .... ...... ...
❑ Yes Mwo
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 A lication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
(If in excess of Wrunoff 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)?
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 ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement`?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes ELJPi
❑ Yes a. o
111111�1111 111s
❑ Yes [[,11ro,—
...................................................
❑ Yes
k fo
❑ Yes
21�o
❑ Yes
[R<O
❑ Yes
[9,1qo
❑ Yes
R<O
❑ Yes
[�o
❑ Yes
[a'IQo
❑ Yes 1_d, <0
❑ Yes 0
4A ❑ Yes ❑ No
0 No.violations or. deficiencies were- noted- during' this.visit.:You.will recei've-no further
' correspondence A oat this: visit:.:
Comments (refer to question If): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendationsf or any other comments.
Use.drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessairy)
5oi1S r si,S (oil �Q{o
�U 5� s b/ r 1 4 7
All
CLAD-
oLA t_.k .
i 5 vn.l&1 '`"L[r ' a-L'I 1U�[1 t,+ -tu �Q 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
MAN
Date: ct — i $ —et-7

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Washington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 19, 1997
Mr. Robert Barrow
Barrow Nursery
Rt. 5, Box 645
Snow Hill, NC 28580
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Barrow Nursery
Facility No. 40-52
Greene County
Dear Mr. Barrow:
06-0
On September 18, 1997, 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,
C��6-WOAA%—
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist II
cc: Greene County SWCD Office
Mike Regans, Greene County NCCES
Dr. arth Boyd, Murphy Family Farms
O
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NC 27889 Telephone (919) 946-M1 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

0
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not Up=
Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Balrrm.1. ursexy........ ............................................ ............................ ...... County: Greene WaRO
OwnerName: RobaL................................... BaLrraw ....................................................... Phone No: 9.19,147-39.66 ..........................................................
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
MailingAddress: RUBox.6idS.......................................................................................... Snow.Hi1LNC1........................................................ 28580 ..............
Onsite Representative: 111Jr..At3dMrs.1Wher1.H&rrjtav..................:........................ Integrator: J.!'1fxt:p►by..Family.k'arm.....................................
Certified Operator:LYawile.M............................. Burr= ..... ....................................... Operator Certification Number: 12665............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©•©' ®" Longitude ©• ®' ®"
esign , CurrentDesign ,prren • 7 ; Design . Current.
Capacity 'Population 'Poultry _ Capacity, Population"' Cattle .' _ Cepscity°Population
®Wean to Feeder
[3 Feeder to FORE—
[3 Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to ee er
p Farrow to mis
13Gtts
p Boars
Number of Lagoons /Holding Poods, p u sur ace rains resen p LagoonArea 113 Spray field Area ;
y
�3 Ti '�� i:l's i.�k°x
f E = r.JE3 No Liquid Waste Management System
General
L ,Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? 13 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. 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 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 ll No
S. 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

aci um er: _
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (LaPoons,Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier: ,......�_�. _..
Freeboard (ft): 2.1 ft.
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes N No
13 Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
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 ...... Corn.{Silage.&..Graini.............................................................................................................................
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'viv lons.or dendes,were.na a during. Is visit., . ou w1 receive ncr further .
cei'[esiiope>ac about x�ii� visit::
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
13 Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes R No
p Yes ® No
p Yes H No
oil�.vtaly L5' 496 { r �» 4 7 :f '.r• 'E a : �t a L Y. i .?�� . E t iRt L rr 1Y1yFc i k
Ts-*tt yriart�' i r=„Tcx
a ag stiCuR' },y ya w r
aster � 4W 1 I:'r w `+a Ni Y `nosy 4r�S�a�S si y 1 y a^H is 4"�i�'" ?vyyfy� i ryM zk yu a fr .isr psi
is 5�, `� (tF•C" 37cc r 'i-t•j f,
. =R a ¢ �.4� �a�^•1`�` .a a. r.. r � ,�}��4� y� Y7. r >G' i^ '��.. �id� rl �. �,.#' „^'Yy s•'.' �. e
-
�T�:.;�,�r
,om nnr�eatyatioftheclerttfed atumal:wastemanagementplan are.cttrrent and wellmatatatneii.~i
�"ViV.T"'ii.—�t�"�.NeJ'b 6r.. _r T�i4v --J.r -�A i:•eC —3 t, f. rY.>�;_� Sic 'R fYi �.:.F;�-ri..1... �f4 ,j,e�� s
attoA rpcozds 1 cgrpp7etew tb;Aiirogenalartce�
����•,�
arm is ,well
� •%i YS'� S e '7
..�, :...
why � � �5.3 r� r i �• �-.y4 � e �wt ����• a, f ➢C'� �ti' x� r-� J -
=�,N..S
:a .�.� �` dl.`'"` �f�•'` Y+-Fk {ril. !iy...,a'r:.�'" 7 'lsc�� ir...c1� ,1 .,� •a w` ,ca, r.,+a F. �y t17
>4�+�>•. rsi��ti`.s: Yk,: r.`...:..r.Te.e.r�.9!rtrILiv :S�a'F7 -x _%ILS�1.,. 7
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu

Site Requires Immediate Attention: 1�1
Facility No. 40 - ii�
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: Q -�9 , 1995
Time: 2, 70
Farm Name/Owner: E-vo►.) �Lc1�S�rV 6f �_'-- - 1, VOL")
Mailing Address:
County: W ree.:a.
Integrator: Ph o e:
On Site Representative: /Ota4d 4n -/44- hd!^ k Si t.Phone:
Physical Address/Location: d f2O9 aQogrox o.S Ir::/dT P.s•:f
g /t r a.Ia
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: .2606 No. of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification No.: ACE DEM Certification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient,freeboard of 1 Ft + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately 1 Ft + 7 in) es or No
Actual Freeboard: J.. — Ft 0—Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or Q
Was any erosion observed? Yes or(O-, -
Is adequate land available for spray? Q or No
Is the cover crop adequate?
Crop(s) being utilized:
or No
Does the facility meet SCS nimum setback criteria?
200 Ft -from Dwellings? Y e r No 100 Ft from Wells? Ye or No
Is the' al waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or o
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state b man-made ditch, flushing
system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure,
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
T. -�gaCP4 i L.
K .�&� 'e,
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments & Sketch on Back of Sheet

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page.Two
Comments:
Sketch:
• =14-ovse L
*Tl D

County
E!!e
caner
IRohert IBarrow
Manager
Address
Location
Certified
Farm Name
I narrow iiurscry I
one umber •• •
M-747-3966
essee
Region
• , * ► ►' • `
Farm. ota on:. a e• • wy. ' . no . o o s oro . o ine'cross. roads, ruleft. an: :gb -mi ei .
to •�right.oh :12409 - .Ga �f� mile ea your:left:
Certified Operator in Charge
Backup Certified Operator
Comments
annie M. Farrow Certification # 117665
Certification #
�� kX�:pe• �Q:;: �Q�pS Date inactivated or closed
■ Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Sheep p Horses p Goats p None
Design Capacity
Latitude Longitude

<::::
7711I .............
. . . ..... . ...
�........:..:�I
p Request to be removed 0 Removal Confirmation Recieved
Comments
Registration Date 0�379:
Cecation Date �I
DEM Reply
Certification #
Conditional Days
Conditional ❑ Irrigation!
Requirements ❑ Higher Yie
❑ Vegetation
❑ Acreage
m Other
Basin Name: Buse
Regional DWQ Staff Date Record Exported to Permits Database