400131_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H CAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

INSPECTIONS.
INSPECTIONS
I
INSPECTIONS

16
4
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active
Permit. AWS400131
Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County:
Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit: 08108t2017 Entry Time: 01:25 pm Exit Time: 2:20
pm Incident #
Farm Name: Red Mill Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr
Phone:
252-531-2689
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude:
35` 28' 09" Longitude:
77" 30' 33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side
of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903,
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone
On -site representative Evans -Taylor, Lauren Caudle, Ti Phone
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Marlene Salyer
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested, July 2017
9-12-16 = 1.43
12-5-16 = 1.65
1-19-17 = 1,51
3-29-17 = 2,08
7-25-17 = 1.50
IRRs are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: rainfall/freeboard; sludge survey due 2019; calibration
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 inppection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 4,310 3,610
Total Design Capacity: 4,310
Total SSLW: 495,650
Waste Structures
Oisignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1i T i ED
page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Dale: 08/08/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
01111
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
[]M
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (i.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Appilcation
Yes No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
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 Ibs,?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

i
Permit: AWS400131 Owner- Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number:
400131
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
01111
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yea
No Na No
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Crop yields?
120 Minute inspections?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Otherlssuas
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
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No Na Ne
❑■❑❑
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
I
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na No
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
page: 5

3
■ Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region• Washington
Date of Visit: 08/11/2016 Entry Time: 01:00 pm Exit Time: 1:55 om
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Ayden NC 28513
Ayden NC 28513
[e-mail]
252-531-2689
Facility Status: Compliant Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 28' 09" Longitude: 77° 30' 33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side
of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903. _
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested: 7/2015
8-14-15 = 1,28
10-2-15 = 1.94
11-25-15 = 1.40
1-12-16 = 1.85
4-21-16 = 1,55
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: rainfall/freeboard; stocking/mortality
NOTE: "hole" is still in lagoon dike, outside wall, will fix soon now that he has a truck.
Freeboard range: 2-26-16 = 12" to 36" on 6-24-16
page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 4,310 4,073
Total Design Capacity: 4,310
Total SSLW: 495,650
Waste Structures
Dislgnated Observed
Typo Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 31.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
[]
[]
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑0
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
MEI
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
MEI
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
■ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yea No Nj Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
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 Ibs,?
❑
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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number:
400131
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Sudan Grass
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
C
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yea
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. It selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 sifucture(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
E ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
01311
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
❑0
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
N ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number:
400131 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS400131
[] Denied Access
Inssection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
08112/2015 Entry Time: 11:00 am
Exit Time: 11:45 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Red Hill Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner:
Charles L Stokes Jr
Phone:
252-531-2689
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Facility Status:
Ayden NC 28513
Ayden NC 28513
M Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 2B' 09" Longitude: 77' 30' 33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side
of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, S Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis: soil tested:2015
9-12-14 = 1.52
11-18-14 = 1.89
1-29-15 = 2.93
3-13-15 = 1.95
5-26-15 = 2.32
IRR records are complete & balanced out on overseed & fescue.
Reviewed: Wup 612015; new COC; Sludge S. at 15%; stocking/mortality; freeboardlrainfall.
page: 1

A
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 4,310 3,751
Total Design Capacity: 4,310
Total SSLW: 495,650
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 37.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner- Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Na
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? Of yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storaae & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 Cl
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manureisludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page 3

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Sorghum,
Sudex (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
M ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility tack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No No Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
�]
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
[]
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
�]
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
(]
page: 4

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number:
400131
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yea No No Na
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0011
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
Other Issues
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 DWD 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
CAWMP7
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No No No
❑■❑❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
page: 5

F
0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active
Inpsoction Type: Compliance Inspection
Permit: AWS400131
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene
Date of Visit: 08/1312014 Entry Time: 02:20 pm Exit Time: 2:55 pm
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Region:
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Ayden NC 28513
❑ Denied Access
Washington
[e-mail]
252-531-2689
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35" 28' 09" Longitude: 77' 30' 33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side
of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Reprosentative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil tested 8120/13
Waste Analysis:
8-20-13= 1.1
1-17-14= 1.93
4-3-14= 2.31
7-10-14= 1,55
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Red Hill C is part of R.H.A. and WUP will be amended as such.
Reviewed rainfall, freeboard, stocking and mortality.
POA was dated 818114
Remember to do a sludge survey before the end of December.
page: 1

I
Permit: AWS400131 Owner -Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 7
3.550
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon t
page: 2

u
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 1npsection 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes —No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 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

S
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

;/
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inpsection 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fall to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
1301111
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 _ _ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: RoWtjn2 County: Greene Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 08/15/2013 Entry Time: 02:10 PM Exit Time: 03:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm Owner Email: clsi580,amail.com
Owner: Chadga L Stokes Jr Phone: 252-5�1-26$9
Mailing Address: 782,LoWgr Field Rd Ryden NC 28513
Physical Address: MLpwer Field Rd _ Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: guntiag_Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'09" Longitude: 77°30'33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes
Secondary OIC(s):
© Waste Col, Stor, & Treat © Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 18513
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2013 due again in 2016
6-25-12 = 1.39
10-25-12 = 1.34
Avg.= 1.69 used for lost sample time
6-17-13 = 2.04
iRR records on Cotton (78) are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard, stocking & crop yield are recorded. On May 25
freeboard was at 37inches.
Sludge survey due in 2014.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Wean to Finish 4,310 4,275
Total Design Capacity: 4,310
Total SSLW: 495,650
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 25,00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Dale: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0
❑
❑
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 (l.e.l large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
dry slacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or 001111
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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
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
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 4
Soybeans
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?
1300
❑
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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number; 400131
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 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?
Cl
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑
■ ❑ ❑
box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge, ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
32.,Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
IN
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Agfjye Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinolgp _
Date of Visit: 08/06/2012 Entry Time: 09:00 AM Exit Time: 09:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm Owner Email: cls*5BQgmail.com
Owner: CharIQ§ L Stokes Jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 7§2 Lower Field Rd Ryden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farms,
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: 7,°30'33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator. Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Tltle Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Date:
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: Soil tested: 1-9-12
8-10-11 = 1.2
1-9-12 = 1.4
4-16-12 = 1.3
6-25-12 = 1.39
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard & stocking #'s are complete.
#19&20) Facility has switched to Wean to finish from feeder to finish, application for COC change was submitted to Raleigh on Aug.
15.
Page: 1

rr
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/06/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400131
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
1-0-Swine - Wean to Finish 3,767
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date start Date Freeboard Freeboard
kgoon 1
Page: 2

I
Permit: AWS400131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/0612012 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 ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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

.f
Permit: AWS400131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08106/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
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
Fescue (May, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/06/2012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number : 400131
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
1101111
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?
1101113.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/0612012 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
rUh- 1 --
Facility Number : 400131
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 ❑ ■ Cl ❑
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 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
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number ; 400131 Facility Status: Active _ _ Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance,135cection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene, Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08/02/2011 Entry Time:30*15 AM Exit Time; 11:00 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm Owner Email: clsi58j2gmail.com
Owner: Qharies L Stokes jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: &vcien NC 28513
Physical Address;
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 25°28'09" Longitude: 77°30'3T'
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges lk Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s);
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil sampled 8-2010 will pull soon for 2011
10-14-10 = 2.6
1-12-11 = 1.2
5-12-11 = 2.7
Rainfall and freeboard are recorded, as well as stocking/mortality, crop yield
Irr records are complete and balanced out.
NOTE: please watch/cut the woody vegetation that is growing on back side of lagoon.
Looks good!
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Facility Number: 400131
Reason for Visit. Routine
Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 2,994
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400131 owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated 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?
Cl 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large trees, severe
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6, Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑ ■ Cl ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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
Cl ■ ❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ m ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
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
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
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: 5

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspectlon 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? OBOO
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ROD
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?
❑ 0011
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the appropriate
❑ 000
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: 6

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report
❑
■
❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑
■
❑
❑
Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? (i.e., discharge,
❑
■
❑
❑
freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon/Storage Pond
Other
1f 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?
IS
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131_ Facility Status: 6gtjye Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance inspection _ _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 08I101201Q Entry Time: 10:30 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm .
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr____
Incident #:
Owner Email: clsi580.amail.com
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Auden NC 28513
Physical Address: 7VU-ower Field Rd „ . ,_.._., .—_ Auden NC 28513
Facility Status: N Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: guntino Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'09" Longitude: 77°30'33"
Fang is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903,
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Otherlssues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
8-18-09 = 2.1
11-30-09 = 1.7
1-25-10 = 1.8
6-18-10 = 2.8
Soil tested July 2010 SS July 10 Freeboard range:
2-15-10 = 16" -- 7-5-10 = 40"
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08110/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 2,957
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSI.W: 495,720
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon 1 34.00
Page: 2

I
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/10/2010 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑•
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page; 3

0
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Data: 08110/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
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?
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Soybean, Wheat
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
0
Page: 4

1
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 08/10/2010 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

I
0
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08110/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 400131
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?
❑
0
❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 5

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 07/2Q/2009 Entry Time: 11:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm Owner Email: clsj580gmail.com
Owner: Charleg LStokes Jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 7§2 Lower Field Rd Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'09" Longitude: 77°30'33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
2-2-2009 2.5
4-29-09 2.2
5-26-09 2.6
looks good
soil June 2009
Date:
Page: 1

e
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number. 400131
inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 0
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freoboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 31.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
01111
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other
than from a ❑
■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 ONOO
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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Winter Annual
Crop Type 3
Soybean, Wheat
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

n
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 07128/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vialt:'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 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: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss 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: 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: AW1400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Q[eene -_ Region: Washingtw
Date of Visit: 07/02/2008 Entry Tlme:09:30 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm Owner Email: LCHF]Qearthlink.net
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'09" Longitude: 77°30'33"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18513
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Lauren Hite Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Page: 1

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility. Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number. 400131
Inspection Date: 07102/2008
Regulated Operations
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Design Capacity
Reason for Vislt: Routine
Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,366
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifler Closed Data Start Data Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon
PRIMARY
10/04/94
19.00
42.00
Treatment System
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH.
et Stack
001
Page: 2

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Data: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No NA
NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0110
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)
❑
M ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■ ❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■ ❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■ ❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
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

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
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
Fescue
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Soybean, Wheat
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
18. 1s 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?
❑ lllil
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility 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: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewertinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 400131
Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 6

e
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 12/16/2007 Entry Time:10:30 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm
Owner: Charles L Stakes Jr
Physical Address:
Incident #:
Owner Email:
Phone:[phone]
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: guntina Farms -_
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'07" Longitude: 77°30'32" _
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18513
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
12-4-2007 = 1.5
4-24-07 = 3.1
7-2-07 = 2.3
9-14-07 = 2.2
2-8-07 = 2
soil test 5-18-07
37 bales of millett
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles l Stokes Jr Faculty Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 12116/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Populatlon
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 2,597
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
)goon 1 23.01
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400131 Owner -Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facl14 Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 12/16/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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) 11000
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
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

7
Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Date: 12/16/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total P205?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Soybeans
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
110110
Al
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 12/16/2007 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? ❑ n ❑ ❑
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?
00011
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?
❑
■El ❑
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 ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Duality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400131 Owner -Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 12/16/2007 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? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 0000
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency 11
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 Referral • Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County: XYAOlS. Region:
Farm Name: Q� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: a r G ` fal—
67
Mailing Address: 7���4,,.riY,.�_
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: LAuJk'PP/9 Integrator:
117oy, ,n �Ya�fiurk; �T�.s•,� Gy��fi47
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [=] e =' = " Longitude: = ° =' = "
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current .Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Lave
h❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ 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
❑
DaiEy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: El
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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
ElNA ❑
El Yes
,❑
L!?'No
❑ NA ZNE
Cl Yes
d1No
❑ NA ��NE
12128104 Continued

1
Facility Number: Yjq — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed RrIb6-ed
boar (in):
Vews'A l—it
94served (in): A-4--
❑ Yes 2 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
L"!'1Vo ❑ 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 D�WQ�
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
LC1'NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
RrNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
part ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
21C
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
�
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
2 E
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 l0 Ibs ❑ 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)
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
18. 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):
&AS V"X 0 a a o� ao /ss r
Reviewer/inspector Name / Phone: � �9����
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
1/7 I2128104 Continued

T
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA PINE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA i NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA BI�E
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
N'
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
�I_�JE
Id,�' EE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
L✓1NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
EJ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
M<E
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
El Yes
�,
LvJ'No
❑ NA
[3 NNE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Lld'N E
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
RrNo
❑ 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
ElYes
2<0
❑ NA
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
,�,�
El Yes Lf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comi Drawings:
AL
AW

1.
Facility Number: �f'� —�� Date of Inspection
i
0-�Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Doe a facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appro ate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeps need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking rop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain
22. Did the facility fail to install and main ' a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and 'ntain rainbreakers on irrigation a pm
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application eq ' ment as required the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required th rmit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator ' charge.
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss as ssment (PLAT) certi tion?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted ich cause non-compliance of the permit or C 1
29. Did the facility fail to properly ' pose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rate at were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the ins ion did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a re 'onal Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facil' ail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General P mit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Di eviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
3 .. oes facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes ❑ Ncy❑ NA ❑ NE
WIU Annual Certification
ions ❑ Weather Code
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 7-9%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No C&NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA-"-p NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
• J �� +n+4 �.9/�p ' apt
ate.
.;j:: t7i
FA c Leo V e- Po
12128104

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: AW1400131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine I County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/07/2006 Entry Time:03:00 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Rgd Hill_Fara) -. Owner Email:
D!=l111elaa..TiMl1&- -7. _
Phone: [phone]
I1'1 -31;41-Z4MI* I • • i ► e7! .T4
Physical Address:
Facility Status: E Compliant
Location of Farm:
❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Latitude:35°28'07" Longitude:77°30'32"
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Lauren Hite Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil test 12-05
Waste analyses:
12-5-05 = 1.8
9-13-05 = 2.0
7-6-05 = 2.7
5-9-05 = 2.9
2-25-05 = 2.9
12-20-05 = 2.4
Date:
Page: 1

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Vlslt: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,498
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
PRIMARY
10/04/94
19.00
25.00
reatment System
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH.
�et Stack
001
Page: 2

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles I- Stokes Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
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: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
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
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Sorghum, Sudex
(Pasture)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. 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.
Page: 4

Permit: AW1400131 Owner- Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 inspection Type: Compliance inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
WUP?
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
❑
_..
V__
W_
MA
MC
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?
Page: 5

Permit: AW1400131
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006
Owner- Facility: Charles L Stokes
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400131
Reason for Via It: Routine
Other Issues
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
Quality representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

c
4t
❑ Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: AW1400131 __ ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Operations Review Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene
I Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 09/27/2005 Entry Time.,02Q0 PM Exit Time: 03:00 PM
Incident #:
Farm Name: Red Hill Form -
Owner Email:
Owner: Charles L StgUs _
Phone: Q00-746-3664
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 359
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35028'07"
Longitude: 77°30'32" _
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream impacts Waste Collection & Treatment
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Technical Assistance
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number:18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title
Phone
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes
Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Chuck Stokes
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Martin Mclawhom
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
`PLAT completed 5/12/05 ratings low
`Sludge survey dated 1218104 thickness 1.4' LTZ 4.6' sludge exemption until 2006
'Aerway system uses flow meter.
'Reviewed IRR2 records. Complete and balanced.
"lagoon freeboard level recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
'Rainfall recorded daily with waste structure inspected after one inch rainfall event
'Reviewed SLD-2 calculations for waste applied to fescue. Calculations complete. Spreader contains 144 cubic yards of waste
"Reviewed crop yields, stocking and mortality records.
Page: 1

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit, Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 3,672 2,116
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Waste Structures
Type Identlfler Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
PRIMARY
10/04/94
19.00
25,00
Treatment System
ENVIRONMENTAL TECH.
Pet Stack
001
Page: 2

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operatlons Review Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges_& Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0000
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?
WastB 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
Cl
■
❑
❑
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
❑
000
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
14. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
000
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: AW1400131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Lumbee
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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
1 B. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to Install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)? Cl
■
❑
❑
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?
❑
0
❑
❑
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: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
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?
❑
E ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewMspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
Technical Assistance
Yes
No NA NE
Needed Provided
34. Waste plan revision or amendment
❑
35. Waste plan conditional amendment
❑
36. Review or evaluate waste plan wlproducer
❑
11
37. Forms need (list in comment section)
❑
38. Missing components (list in comments)
❑
39.2H.0200 re -certification
❑
40. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (POA)
❑
41. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
42. Organ izelcomputerization of records
❑
43. Sludge evaluation
❑
44. Sludge or Closure plan
❑
45. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
Page: 6

Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date. 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Technical Assistance
Yes No NA NE
46. Waste structure evaluation
❑
47. Structure needs improvement
❑
48. Operation & maintenance improvements
❑
49. Marker check/calibration
❑
50. Site evaluation
❑
El
51. Irrigation calibration
❑
52. Irrigation system design/installation
❑
53. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
54. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
55. Wettable acre determination
❑
56. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
57. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
58. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
59. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
❑
11
Page: 7

• Permit: AW1400131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 09/27/2005 Inspection Type: Operations Review
Reason for Visit: Routine
Technical Assistance
Yes No NA NE
60. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
61, Buffer improvements
❑
62. Field measurements (GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
63. Mortality BMPs
❑
64. Waste operator education
❑
65. Operation & maintenance education
❑
66. Record keeping education
❑
67. Croplforage management education
❑
68. Soil and/or waste sampling education
Cl
69. PLAT Assessment
❑
70. Other
❑
List Improvements made by Operation
Improvement 1
Improvement 2
Improvement 3
Improvement 4
Improvement 5
Improvement 6
Page: 8

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soli and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 400131 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA240131 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: Q5104/2005 Entry Time: 08:30 AExit Tlme: Incident #:
Farm Name. Red Hill Farm Owner Email:
Owner: ,Charles L Stokgg , Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 359 Avden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'07" Longitude:
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance Is on the western side of
NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Q Waste Application
Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18513
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
24 hour contact name Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Soil test dated 1-26-05, lime applied as needed.
Waste analysis:
2-25-05 = 2.9; 12-20-04 = 2.4; 11-4-04 = 2.0
The irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
The weekly freeboard and rain events are recorded.
Page: 1

r
Permit: NCA240131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Data: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Poputation
Swine
M Swine -Feeder to Finish 3,672 3,670
Waste Structures
Total Design Capacity: 3,672
Total SSLW: 495,720
Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deslaned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
29.50
Page: 2

IN
Permit: NCA240131 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
DischsWes A Stream [mpacts YPe No NA NF
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
moo
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■ ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
n ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
so
❑
3. Were there any adverse Impacts or potential adverse Impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
s ❑
❑
Waste Collection. Storage A Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, Is waste level Into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Iced large trees, severe erosion,
❑
N ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0 ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Nat applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0 ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
'
YPs
Nn NA_
NE
Waste A cation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or Improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of Incorrect application?
❑
130
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 P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Millet
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

4
Permit: NCA240131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400131
Inspection Date: 05/04/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NF
Waetil Annlloation
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Lumbee
Soil Type 2
Norfolk
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Sail 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?
❑
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?
❑
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 a 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a raln gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. if selected, did the facility fait to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑
❑
24. Did the facility fall 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 fall to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Page: 4

1
Permit: NCA240131 Owner • Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number : 400131
Inspection Date: 06/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
28, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fall 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 ❑ ■ ❑ El
representative Immediately.
31, Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ N ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss revlew/Inspection with on -site representative? ❑ E ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complalnt O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Qther ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40. 131 Date of Visit: 5 4-2004 'Time: �fl
Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted -0 Certified ® Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:..................
Farm Name: ltd M11.1 8xviL ...............................
Owner Name: Charjgs.L.............................. Stokcs.Jr .......................................
Mailing Address:78.Z.Lo..w.Pr.F1r1d.RQad.....................................
Facility Contact:
Title:..
County: Grcciae............................................... V+<'ARQ.......
Phone No: (2521.2.46:4182........
thyAlLAC............................................................... U.513 ..............
PhoneNo:.. .................................................
Onsite Representative:.Chus.k.Alud..LYE.JlardisQa.................................................... Integrator: 1111ntit gIArms......................................................
Certified Operator:Chorks.L............................ StAke,S............................................... Operator Certification Nutinber:18113 .............................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western +
side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 28 07 �� Longitude 77 30 32 «
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3086
10 Non -Layer
10 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
3,672
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
495,720
❑ Boars.
Number of Lagoons 1
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 40-131
Date of Inspection 5-4-2004
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
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 Apiflication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below,
[]Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
❑ Yes ® No
w
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Wheat Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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?
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 ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments {refer to question i):.,EXplaigan "'YES.answers and/or aay-recommendations;or any'other.comntents.
Use drawings of factllq. to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) t❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
Waste Analysis: 3-2-04 = 1.6; 12-18-03 = 1.4; 2-14-03 = 2.1; 4-21-03 = 1.5; 6-19-03 = 2.2; 8-13-03 = 1.7; 10-10-03 = 1.7 �
was on site and there is a permit for the innovative system.
freeboard and rain events are recorded weekly,
soil tests for 2003 and 2004 were in the records.
the new airway there is no caliberation available.
irrigation records are complete and balanced out until the beginning usage of the airway system and these events were recorded on
IRR 1.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Marlene D.'S
r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: A-- /I —
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 40-131 Date of Inspection 54-2004
(couired
Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
W
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
25. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ® Yes ❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ® No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall []Inspection After 1" 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.
12112103

Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 40 - 131 Date: 12/15/03 Time: 1 930 Time On Farm
Farm Name Red Hill Farm
Mailing Address 782 Lower Field Road
County Greene
60 WARO
Phone: [phone]
Ayden NC 28513
Onsite
Representative Chuck Stokes 1 Carl Dunn Integrator Isunting Farms Inc.
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated;
❑ Operating below threshold
OR Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Capacity Population
❑ Layer
El Non -Layer
El
Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
3s�z
cots
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS: .
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure4 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier primary F7 IF
Level (Inches) 20
CROP TYPES Corn So beans Wheat Fescue- raze JIFescue7hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES NoA Lu
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS: .
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structure4 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier primary F7 IF
Level (Inches) 20
CROP TYPES Corn So beans Wheat Fescue- raze JIFescue7hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES NoA Lu
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 40 - 131 Date:
12/15/03
PARAMETER
QQ 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
❑
Cl
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
El
29. Missing Components (list In comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30.21-11.0200
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
[117. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19, Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
36. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22, Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37• waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24, Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
El
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure Irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaivationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2•
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4'
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

V1
Facility Number 40 - 131 Date: 12/15/03
COMMENTS:
JUP dated 11/17/03
OC on site
oil analysis 3/3/03 Lime requirements were met.
Jaste analysis dated 10/10/03 nitrogen is 1.9 Ibs/1000 gallons
8/13/03 nitrogen is 1.9 lbs11000 gallons
6/19/03 nitrogen is 2.6 lbs11000 gallons
4/21/03 nitrogen is 3.3 Ibs/1000 gallons
2/14/03 nitrogen is 3.0 Ibs/1000 gallons
reeboard records are complete - 7/26/03 lagoon recorded at 16"
�rop yield records available based on scale tickets for wheat.
pplication records complete and consistent with lagoon levels.
.eminder that irrigation calibrations need to be completed.
ludge survey conducted 10/8/02 average depth of sludge is 17.6 in/1.4 ft.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn I Betsy Gerwig
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 12/18/03 Entered By:
3 03/10/03

Michael F. Easley
Governor
1 r . William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
j' ; ,.� Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Gl 'C Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
To: Producer
From: Scott Vinson
Environmentangineer
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2003
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
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 freeboard.
9 An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each'receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
cp The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
cp Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given application.
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suggested, not a requirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
cp The OIC has the duties to ensure that waste is applied in accordance with the CAWMP and General Permit by properly
managing, supervising, and documenting daily operation and maintenance. The OIC also has the responsibility to certify
monitoring and reporting information. The failure of an OIC to perform his/her duties can result in a letter of reprimand,
suspension, of certification, or revocation of certificates.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (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-
64 8 1, ext. 208 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: Bynting Farms
/WaRO Files
SAV Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

I
Facility Number Dale of Visit: 04/24/2043 1'ime: 8:30
- p o Operational p Below Threshold
E Permitted p Certified N Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: •••••••••••••••••••••••••
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm
County: lGrAen s................................................W4.lil0 ......
Owner Name: Charles L. Stokes Jr Phone No: [phone]
Mailing Address:.7.821.Law.cr..F.icld.Road...................................................................... Aydan.NC ............................................................... 2,851a ..............
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:................................... ....................... Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative: Chuck.Stokes............................................................................. Integrator: Buating,.Farms......................................................
Certified Operator:Charles.L............................. Stokes................................................ Operator Certification Number: 1Bi 1013 ............................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located at the intersection OU NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greefie Uounty. Farm entrance is on the western A
side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ©• ®C ®L& Longitude ©• ®©u
1.1-. 3F:.l �h +?. f,hn1. t I,
esi n .. urren =! r .
.:. n hn, n k?:�yr r ,.ra ; "tl' ry.: : iiidy �i:+,ale ii� ,fw3 i e$ign'�3j} UR relit .` 4y�� Ufa $� D�31 11 CUCCeIltt,1 :j
w SWlnea I n r'' CSsiBClt`vP a lLLlflflO;�pOtlltr�!.y"' ,3'� C8�8C1t� Po �u!�.5 i°LlBttlE
�y�,�„,..P_.._ Y, ..y�1?._ t. n,•.,...dPP,_,_„Yka. .P. lationkr-�.xCapac�ty,P�opulation
` [3 ayer ti ' ❑ any 3,3
!Ti; ; p on ayer !' p on -Dairy
£
7 rs
,`„gT.htalEDssgn Capac� 3,672
Ida�ailld'�r kkii{ "` 1 r10
°'Ir"'peso- r G�,�fi Total ►ESL495,720
wallro�llIhi4p'II�Iv I''�III GI1'dltii' ,�i^r 4�1 I III Ir
i" t] Spray a
u sur ace rains resen Lagoon rea ra ie re
0 Liquid 85 a Management System
i�$yH�nRi{�=1Pondsi`SoLd�iT`P,; I"xIE�'}4o
canto ee ere
g
er to tms
p arrow to can
p arrow to ee er
p Farrow to Finis
� Gilts
p Boars
Dischar>zes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: l7 Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes t3 No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p SpiIlway p Yes ®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ................ ai............... .................................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ...............................
....

act i y um er: 40-131
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8, Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes m No
p Yes ® No
p Yes m No
t3 Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ONO
p Yes m No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Wheat Soybeans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes m No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes 13 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes p No
p Yes 13 No
13 Yes m No
Yes m No
p Yes m No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes m No
p Yes Ig No
p Yes m No
p Yes N No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visiL You will receive no further correspondence about is visit.
. �, a sr € r n ti"nsr"rny ofi en co
&CCo',__,!,,n_entg :cferatofgaeslliait�Q: xplain'aiiYES�answean ldr4anyecQtt►,�,e rlat,ex aaiiisi�te °'�.000
iiisetlrawtn )afa t a bete cl` Field COPY Final Notes
r p p
* Final report for F ed Hill Farm dated 5 8 03.
* Joined onsite by Paul Sherman, DWQ, and Don Lloyd, Environmental Technologies LLC, to discuss the new innovative technology
at Don and Chuck are proposing. Construction is tentatively scheduled to start in June or July depending on funding. .
* Facility's lagoon level dropped below 19" in records dated 3/22/03 and 3/29/03 at 17" with a level of 4 1 " dated 4/5/03. Pumping
records correspond to lagoon level drop. Mr. Stokes has purchased a honeywagon to help add irrigation land as well as to add the
ossiblity of pump and haul to his options in times of chronic rain.
11) Has minor overapplication of 1.721bs N on Field#10, wheat crop, noted in records.
� + }� , ���1� �y�y� �iy r} y
Reviewer/Ins ector Name t', �� , Kb 1
p SCOtt Ylttso^ �k�g m ^F Y),I�i .1� Ji$�� W14 aV1Zpi
+ .
. .�e..r k . . a_"�.r..L�s�iir7�ltn_7"i':.ri..t'--. n-,,ae,Mwa6•kr.!�€�; rJ�rd?'->Y��s:Ya:,;..ai
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �� p

05103101 Continued
Facility um er; 40_131 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 13 Yes 13 No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes N No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes R No.
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Cl Yes p No
° ,.Y p`_ �`G> 7C`', r+I�. �y �i fy�4� Ire
9;t61�Tlfi?RzABF:,.iYi+idi i4&A.te Iu ',.'r...,. sf iN'7Y 'tY': `.".YialI'3� L�4�f•':17,k ��i u4'�3.° `i°. .&i N�k' ":4 .rkL r� :1. dr ;Pzr^i '.'SA`F...� 3 ,.
* Waste dated 4/21/03 with 3.3 Ibs.N/1000ga1 for Red Hill.
Waste. dated 3/22/02 with.N 32 lbs.
r'
s
..• . ,.. ..
I '
Waste dated 6/6/02 with 2.5'1bs.N
�4•FI �4ry i� ;
.Sit
-application
> pRy ✓ +F IY! F !i,Fl1 '-r�r iy ^LI
002' Wheat, Soybean & Fescure crops balanced with no over ngted E�Srr¢,r� u iysk 4 j;
''
�QCa1t�
* dated 3/3/03 time
Soils analysis vrtth no required::
4r,�r��
^vOV}H PI,. h l4 k^ 4d Lk45�lS.�nh 1%
-
September, 2002 freeboard level reached down to 48 for Red Hill Farm, with the levels dropping€steadily, over the fall and
inter to reach 19" in March 2003
sa! r� ha 'r tdAn
r�m9 ',
r ra u
- ..
lr�.qei�TNN,
Ien
..
-• •`7yo'i.L
r %t°��l'WliwJ+TI!
1 1' L 'f • 1 Ai"^N
ir15' 1 4
J. . ''.
rAhi
k"j 0s7 Vi�r! T rNiu !
f
AV* Op
h
1 ,(y
�4i
�fiiRr
1�7 w
ties.
l�
E T Jw�,1
.�•1 7e4
-
9�
4'
,�lR'�
�) ,
.
�.
- - !� �! �Y 4} tlVXy�r;'• Y jv d &°klLS4w��Wi�!' lg
ry
!..
�
ll�IgiSY'I'444ti�_1„l+G•'
��"�
P v 4�rr cl�t�lc M
'.. - - � • �
'-
�kryi '} ��������'r lw��� }sue
t
'�' f
.,
5
y�1 7•rl'e�Y.v1rW IIrry�
.., I�IjW'r�hlw%y
-'* +I
..
.. 1 mrr fir, ?'Y
tAlik �F�
•4
vV1) fly 'c,Axf�
•.
-
Na7'11�410}'11.1� FJyl
` S�Rh1n"l„ icw.c'.a3
'j1'1:
IY'C"'
� l N��>t�k,�'•�rn'E "��1¢'N�.
�,�
'gin � Y e,r.. -
Liiir rl e t�
lt�l
�;
1"�P
5
�/jgM�t�l�d��
.• fle ww*ri�C� cam,
10
11
-i 'r,
5wi'7r 1„i�.i
ji
. .,
_:t
�✓lr�r,. 4i1 srX�w.73�P,�.ld
•
a r�; of .i �. ,1
H,V
wS4'•r
h�:4jw - orf 5+ra sFd ,;

p Division of Water Quality ' y
*Division of Soil and,Water Conservation a; i
p Other Agency .�
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint p Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other p Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 112512fl02 Ti..' 10:30 am
p Not Operationalp Below Threshold
■ Permitted p Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Red Hill Farm County: G rzeim............................................... .W.ARQ.......
Owner Name: Charles L. Stokes Jr
Mailing Address:.7.82.Law.er..UeW.Road....................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:.........
Onsite Representative: Chiuck.Stokes...
Phone No: [phone]
Ay d exu. NC............................................................... 28513.
........................................: Phone No:.......................................
................ Integrator: Murphy..Family.Farms.......................
Certified Operator:Charles..L............................. Stakes ................................................ Operator Certification Number:l&SLi..
Location of Farm:
,arm is located at the intersection ot NCSR 1337 and NU Highway 903 in Greene County.: -Farm entrance is on the western K
aide of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Horse Latitude ©. ®� ®« Longitude ©• ®� ©
Design Current,
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to in-5
13 Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
Design Current 'Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer airy
p Non -Layer r
Non-Dairy
CI Other I Ii;
Total DesignCapacity 3,672
Totai SSLW 495,720
Number ofLagoons p Subsurface Drains Present p agoon rea p spray Field Area
Holding Ponds Solid Traps 0 0 LiquidWaste ManagementSystem
1
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. 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 Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) E3 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 13 Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ......... ......2b................ .................................... ..................... I ............. .......

T y;
aci y um er: 40-131 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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
p Yes
® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid; level
elevation markings?
p Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
[3 Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Wheat/Soybeans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ;'
p Yes
N 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
N 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
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ;'
p Yes
®No
p o violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about :s visit.
Comments (re er to question.#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations.inr any, other comments, ,
Ilse drawings of facility to better explain'situations. (use additional'pages,as necessary): I§EF:ie�ld��Copy p Final Notes 3
wrote ,
`
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance; no overapp ication noted.
Last irrigation events Sept. 2001 /soybeans.
Soil analysis for 2001 has been submitted to Ag. Lab for analysis. °
Waste analysis 2.01bs/l000 gals for 1/18/02; 2.0 Ibs/1000 gals for 10/25/01. 5
Samples collected Dec. 2001. Samples for 2000 show no lime required!
Freeboard levels recorded weekly.
Wheat crop looks good.
wer/inspector Name aphnB Cullom entered by�Ann.Tyndalwer/Inspector
r
Signature: Date:

`� - • '°e7` � t w"°+wQ..fl i3••.. .#; Y r €'A �� �t # -e f as li 'S } � J O 1 # °" I �. E
i t i
L �' y�� A •i� � , � � � �� � sYsd
'�J Syr-��'f �..✓ ", Cre 4: ...' \. € If) -�M slfd 4 i '.i -.'pt 7:i ti i � n '� .nf"�� - tp 1��
•� Y C_"'" 1 f� # b, I' t ,yy: IL 'i _`l .rb �L'y...�„�. - - .:�•
�`". ���.. § a t € `1 r t •�+.�H+r-# • _�i�i I ? r7� ��---v,r� !`"•� ; "rf
��� z 13:0 � } f�,.t @ ,#��a: � �S� r �'' a � •,cs r' ��' .% i � _ (• �� { E_,
�
! � 7 ' ;a ti. � - i � �� � r /� r �•"� �.t°"' 7}'-lir ✓ rttlpll«' 1 1 �."� f i E E'/.
'� # € y� i #ifh ! f f.�...' 7r r^4 � e'pi''�'°} cii€ I �r �� r �e€€ l � t7 i 3 � €�" tC € � � �° �I ��� - ._+.,�- �' " ' • ! y 7°'# �. �p di d7. ids 3'd �, rr � €f € ¢€Q € � Fh�€j7tt € € € 3 ' : I I # fit � Y- � \ r� r�• ti"� �^- •---�'..,....-'�
—jht
J f 1 D.l j I § E E< i i p r brirb ^" 1 M ✓` •(
f_c f� - ! r A�7 i � EI €is �w, ,✓`ti'..r�� 1"'r • �. r} 'r '� � .. � I� `Nw* kir # 1„�,,. '�/-l`''3 �' ��" jr ♦ ( ti�.f@i��. €q
a i 'a E `n I€ f .;i •i."",; t I E
7i r ,r 1.A' wg.,• a J - I " i f -• \� ` `. 1 1 #
`�-� =at ;�..d € 7iI{ 1,r,%�J,£ f °'t ,, `a�•'f ,:%f..�,.,;;-(f ijY f` p=,: /'' y':.:.+ �'' -��� ��' - '�.... #-. i► � '. tG r-.:ar_a:;..f'". tas.• Pf �� �. D pure
/{f{ f EFi #�r,:§"i J € ,jia. 1 �O �' !i "1'\\nl �^-+•�„I,y bJ \
M ,.E' ��r-.,F`{?rt
�
_ �..Y ' _ «.i...r- iF1 �'' ':! �y# � Y t 's � ��+,� � � � .f ♦ r"` 7 + ; � I � tpf 1 � ." � %y �",o •,
�E Pp#C F #_( 4.�# ' ai""ttt #i t tiEE �3 .l y}r"n;fE � ''� r •'^ I r.?rB # w� r.
EI .d 4 k 7. a r �r -s=. >aa a '7 t - i z; •wr "? ' � • E
`Y�' <7 N.1 sr •. E ! �1'.:..'+ `� 't&�1�� k� i�� � i � ' "�@ � "� r : ; � � ,+i '�5..�'�.� 1.�,-• � � � §
j sra'1.a�a• f'�
3i•d& nt,'p '�''! 3 r-s"1o� \'3 13ii 7'1 t i� f'ir- r.'�`te r' \ I �..3..---•-
_ .,,,, 3 a € r h t��„ `37. 'sw i! €i$ .,.% f `•''t..g .. ei }�f E � r �: ; � i
d
Li� / r,--r:,. ' f. r �� d , 3 ,��
�inos "BN1rf yt{(€ r ! ai 0`,,,
���k f�
~'"�,.t�'--�fj
er f f` � ' .d � E:`p i~t -vf '� at r �> f r r 7 .f i -Ya J..-�.•.y} `+�
iE�7 }-:. _af icl,au. ''#Eh, � € \,�.;r•-- !, � mot. ;,@�7�1.�i 4�� i l�-i�' E r f�.i r€ fY' y,t;f 3 '.t.l �,v �;-E�.cc,:'y� 1 \`��3
---�t'
�€If
-..� t� € ,3�✓'��� $� ; j ��I£d ] � E Y 7� � -.� Et,! ft 'I^'�.e+r ��� � ter;,!! �' as ��� I\.., �-� � p,' ,
4PT 3tj.
hl2 1<l11 f t I 94
brave,
._,_. �� }� �.@ i • e TAP ....,w�.i-ea".., ...a,., ;,. p _ i• "Jj]
Y... �� Z ! 1.1E ___✓' '.l # ie 1 --J�7r � �� 1 � �"',�,'I"':.
ceM
rs:o ,E. iT 1 r'3iTAl
l,
Ch
\—rf ➢ ! ( E .� 1 E : y_ p 11 v j` �CLL�ICt00 • AA . yyy lull F
rid F: %iRi 3 f t ....•d F .i `.,! 5 ��. 1
i ii E
a i f t ° ";^...1 _ v.,... d
Q E , nk •.. — : __»,_ S
re !
f 1,
pi ,>f � # t I �.; i p7@� f it.. E�;' is ;•: �v .r[ I s � �'-.;:...,..... i ..� fi p �t -yi', "" -�
s- t• ry C ,,t. ' � �[,!: j' � f i•r y �'.,,M.�14� if ; � .. � � ; : e r�< f��
' 'f ` t-� •J� `� �Y 2i � 1 � t 4,� pgr,,.. F7 4 �1f � E E ft f € c17',
i tM
1405
1�05
�# f 6• C.-'.„'"rl A� , /Y r �1'�r,r„x:_ 1' ✓ ��,' ,i f Ir @ y �s Y r - -:'1
1409 a `� i �G� + i�
Cams \�
" .:Cam ' I i #
\ sS �I
°��\ � �� r-;r€;i€.', #,'..i���„€#,'� €L.ir2; is�333i3 ,:,i3r" � �. '+''•,,�` � ! �. •�, ../
Name: HOOKERTON Location: 035' 28' 04.2" N 0770 30' 17.6" W
Date: 10/30/102 Caption: Red Hill Farm
Scale: 1 inch equals 2000 feet
Copyright (C) 1997, Maptech, Inc.

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilit' Number 40 131 Date of Visit: 8'28-2i)Ol Time: 8:30
0 Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted O Certified ® Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Rd.MILFArm ............................... ..... County: C�m............................................... W.AIiA.......
Owner Name: Cbarlies.. L..............................SLACAIr .................................................... Phone No: 252-.7.4.901................--........................................
Mailing Address: 2,R2..Lst:Ctc.J'jrjd.R.oad....................................................................... AYdeR.N1C'............................................................... 285.13 .............
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Clxuck 51okj.....
Integrator: ]. urpby..F.amatyFat'm ............................
Certified Operator: Charles .................................. Stigm ............................................... Operator Certification Number:,L0,5U.............................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western A,
side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
® Swine ❑Poultry [I Cattle [I Horse Latitude 35 ° 28 07 a Longitude 77 ° 67132
Des n
g
:Current Des n ...Current ':
g -
.. .
De§in'."Current:
fi .
Swine ..., Ca aci
Potation .;Popltry: i Cii �aci Po ` ulatioi Cattle
Ca acrt Po ulatic►n , ::
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
�] Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3600
;
0 IN
JE1
Non -Dairy
❑ Darrow to Wean
........ ::.. ........
[] Farrow to Feeder
❑ 01heT
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Dest �b n Ca aCi
P ty'
— 3,672
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
.. ...' Tota1,SSLW:.
495,720
Nurnber of Lagoops
1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110
Lagoon Area
10 Spray Field Area
HoldrngPond5l Sohd Traps
-._
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
X.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge rntiginated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Ficld ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance ❑tan -made?
b. If discharge is observed, diet 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? (i['ycs, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the Slate other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Struclure I Structure 2 Structure; 3 Stnrcture 4 Structure 5 Stnrcture 6
ldcu l d wr:..........priivaty................. ..........................
Freeboard (inches):...............3.0...............

05/t7/01
Confinued
Facility Number: 40-131 Date of Inspection 8-28-2001
5. Are there auv immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (i(./ trees, severe erosion,
[:]Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
Yes
®No
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Ycs
® 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 evidcnee of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) soybeans & wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMI')'?
❑ 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 or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
H 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? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Does .facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
* Discussed IRR2/waste sampling scheduling requirement.
* Last soils report dated 4-9-01 with pH, copper and zinc levels within acceptable levels.
* Last waste analysis dated 6-8-01 at 3.1 lbs/1000 gallons, Previous report dated 3-27-01 at 2.6 lbs/1000 gallons.
* Lagoon level records complete.
* Waste plan recently revised on 8-8-01 with an overall PAN deficit of 4,928 lbs.
* Waste applied on farm primarily in May 2001 - no waste applied since. IRR2 based on earlier waste plan.
15. Soybeans in pull 413 drowned in late March 9" rain and were replanted - some failure experienced in this pull - Mr. Stokes does not use.
Reviewerlinspector Name PatfHaupeir� ZS2 94b-G481 is},!i ii-entered,bylDella`Aofalilins ! ..: F� ;.;[ ,` E :, #E i ', k ` ri
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

ON
3i. !'�
ivision o`
a�"
and
Agealey 11
j
y e.s. f=ffi�:v IEk �r x.§Sr•,� z �. d.z .. t _ s r , wn �'; 'g,!9"> y . „`xes lm k7f�zr :.-i ,t S.`;}71f .zP.i y t k ; @Eia •ti�..,.8, ,-I:
Type of Visit Qr6ompliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Q outine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
FFacility Number D 13 f
Date of Visit: �-�^O I Time: I ��
Q Not Operational Q .Below Threshold
(Permitted ©Certified `O Coonditionally Certified ©Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
�[ l t- 1 \ �A�r 11-1 Count ....�..r.C--6
Farm Namc:............ ......................................................................................
Owner Name:.. ' tI4.144-...—..... ... Phone No:..... s�`J....... u l'P..'q.. f.2........................
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:.....................
Mailing Address: ..a ....... � �f �-�r,'�}„�.......................................
Onsite Representative: ,,,,.,! ++-L4............
Certified Operator:... ....... �: �,�...., �.......... Sk Uz
Location of Farm:
PhoneNo: ....................................................
-7 ............................... ................?-
Integrator: ....... NL(,+.a-� .......................... .....I..
Operator Certification Number:...... , „ .............
❑ Swine ❑ poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �6 « Longitude • 4 �fi
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ W an to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish 1❑ Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design ,Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑Boars r ITo` ASSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area I[] Spray Field Area
r 0
Hofd><ng Ponds /Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impact4
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 roan -made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. I!' discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
It
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ©'f�o
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes ff No
►v6-.,
❑ Yes a5o
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? RrYes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? []Yes R<0
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: — 13 i
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection -7-b/
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): .........9....................
❑ Yes 2N
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding` ❑ PAN
� ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type r-- S fA 1 I W +, 6"L.'
13, Do the receiving crops differ wA those designated in the Certified Animal Was a Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Are rock outcrops present? 07 ,
there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? --'�
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes �10
❑ Yes G?&o
❑ Yes Ur&o
❑ Yes (?Io
❑ Yes ►E No
❑ Yes ff�o
❑ Yes E?-Ko
❑ Yes
D-N-0
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
D_1
❑ Yes
,Q4"_
Rlgo
fit''
I9.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
2110
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
®duo
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigatiat"i, freeboeffd, waste analpnis & soil sannpTe- reports)
❑ Yes
ET90
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
allo
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[9-Ko
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
21go
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Rf4o
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Rf4o
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
[Ko
Odor Issues
28.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
GrNo
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
01/01/01
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Printed on: 1/4/2001
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes [*(No
❑ Yes [g NNo
❑ Yes E No
❑ Yes 2 No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
��� ,'.•�, � 1tN :��y lsi 39,ai�$, � « i , e-b-�r,' �L ,.i
]se drawing d facility to�better explain sEtuations: (use additional pages as necessary). ❑Field Copy El Final Notes
M
.rY �L4,a ` e� ra i . 1 i ��� i:k? s,`�s t �" 3 R 1 a"�r�s� , r ��.."t O.,�,lsli-z 34� rr..
bby /-L .v " C'-z
��r-- I D
/11 L 'b A-
OGAC
aAt-
�,..�.-o:�eEvd�i..�' 11�-c-Y•�4j � - ..%-.e- u"�~°�i' c.� �ra1
3 i oar���
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: ,'3-7-0 /
01/01/01

Q. Divasion of Water Quality,
QEDivisian*of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency "
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection OQ Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 131
Date of visit: 9/14/2000 Time: 10;55 Printed on: 3/62001
40
--- -- -- -- - - - O Not O erational O Below Threshold
EM Permitted 0 Certified ® Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................
Farm Name: l3,ed H.i11IAtA'u.................................................
Owner Name: QjAr ll.j,,..............................sXokcI.aK........................................
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:
County- GMtr]pR.................... w., RO.......
Phone No: 7.51:.7.4!6: ...............................
........................ P)rone Nu:...................................................
Mailing Address: liil.3.Bttx 5� ............................... ... .. Ayden.N.C............................. .. 28513 .............
........................... ........................... ...............................
Onsite Re pesentative: Ch jSlgk......... .................................................................... Integrator: Muphy-Family-Farm .....................................
Certified Operator: Chas'le&.L............................ sbj= ............................................... Operator Certification Number:19513 .............................
I-Awation of Farm:
Farm is located at the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the western
aide of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.2 miles from NC Highway 903.
M Swine ❑ Poultry []Cattle [:]Horse Latitude 35 OF 28 07 [L Longitude 77 ° f 30 32
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3472
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
3,672
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
495,720
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Are': ❑ Spray Field Ares►
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dkehar es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
Di eharge originaled at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Othci
a. II•disvharge is observed. was the conveyance niam-rru►de? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Slate? (lf yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. l.fdisuharge is ubstaved, whlsE is the uslirualud flow in ealhniiE'?
d. I)ocs discharge bypass a lagoon ti•stcni? (If yes, notily DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge' from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M 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
Slrs'clrtra l SErssct'u'c 2 Struciure ; S(nwhire 4 Slntcltsr.4 5 Strttchlre; f
identifier: .......... primary .......... ................................................................................................................................................................................
liefboard (liichcs):...............4K..................................................................................................................................................................................................

5100
Facility Number: 40 1131 Date of hinpection 9/14/2000 Printed on:
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?
([f 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 An)licatifon
Continued on back
3/6/2001
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance:/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence; of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Reoulrcd Records & Documents
17. hail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
9 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
IN No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25_ Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
g 'hisisit:.Yowher. -
No violations:or.deficiencies-were. n.o.te.d.:d. u. r.in.
corresvondence about this -visit.
Comments°(refer
Reviewerllnspector Name

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1/00 1
Facility Number: 4D-131 Date of Inspection 9/14/2000 Printed on: 3/6/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, E] 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 bells, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals Feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? O Yes 0 No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
A itional Comments -an or_
4

Division of Water Quality
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O+ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 131 Date of Visit SII712t100 Printed on: 5/19/2000
NNot O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................
Farm Name: Rs.d. H.1[1. Fu.IAA....................................................
Owner Name: ChArjp5..la......... %du.,lx.........,..
County: Grecag.............................................. 1?l'.t1RQ.......
Phone No:=-746.:3664...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: fit.1. .RX. ��.......................................................................................... kdoLAS ............................................................. MU .............
...........................
Onsite Representative: CJjvj&,5.tp.kps......................
Integrator: iYtu�r��y..l aatily..ka�rm�� .............................
Certified Operator:,CjWrje,5,L ............................ 51QUA ............................................... Operator Certification Number:j.$5.13
Location of Farm:
IN Swine ❑ Poultry. ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3S 'F 28 _TF__07__J11 Longitude
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3600
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Canacitv Po elation
❑ Layer ❑ Dai
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ 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/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 27
...,......., __ L F.

Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-131 Date of Inspection 1 5/17/2000 Printed on: 5/19/2000
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 ❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Fescue (graze)
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?
. NO-*'h) atiO,is:or defi,eien'cies'frere,notedduring•thilg visit::You:will:receive no ftirther
jcor•res�6ndence about this•visit.. .. - ........... • • • .
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Cl Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Soil analysis 5/99; Waste analysis 2/1/00 - 1.8 lbs./l000 gals.
5/11/00 - 2.3 lbs./l000 gals.
'lant analysis 4/18/00 indicated adequate nutrient application on receiving crops.
Need freeboard sheet!
rrigation records complete with nitrogen balance.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Daphne B. Cullom Entered by Ann Tvndall
•,_.-. 5 - Z3 -60

�_`wiewer/lnspeetor Signature: Date:
Facility Number: 40-131 Date of Inspection 5/17/2000 Printed on: 5/1912000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29, is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:

Division of Water Quality `
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation O Other
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other E3 Denied Access
Facility Number 40 13l Date of Visit 2-8-2000 Printed on: 3/31/2000
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 13 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: W.ki.1ILIFUM............................................................................................... County: Grcrratc.............................................. 1?NARI i.......
Owner Name: Cha1.11uL.............................. S>iukcs.Ar.....
Facility Contact:
Mailing Address: Rt..1..B.Q&.359....................
Phone No: 252-2�-�1�4...........................................................
....... Title: ................................................................ Phone No:..............................................
A►yd.t;ti.N..
A513..............
Onsite Representative:.CiA1l.Ck.S.t9.k.CS............................................................................. Integrator: Kurphy..F.ajMjIJ'.Fal.Mj.....................................
Certified Operator:.Cj Ar1CR.L............................$19.kn ............................................... Operator Certification Number:.t$5.1
..............................
Location of Farm:
IAUZ..StA.i.'.l1�rA7.iA.Aei�7. /..,tt A.U1f.11A117lkrsl..11e,h.Al1A1Xn'k.IJI.NAJl4..1.1 \...ICA1 17.Tx..,7.11.............................................................................................................................. I T
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Hor Latitude 35 ° 28 07 bi Longitude 77 O 30 4 32fit
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
—3672
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons I 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps JE1 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 gallm in?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 19

# Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-131 Date of Inspection 2-8-2000 Printed on: 3/31/2000
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 ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
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?
Cl Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reauired 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)
Cl 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
M) •viol_ations'or :defieienciet•Wiete:noted -during• this visit:: You_ will :receive no further
. corres� ondence about this.visit.... ........ ....... .....
Comments (refer to question ft 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 !Da�e B. Cullom
n s 5 —a I 045)0

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
© Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
13 Other Agency - Operation Review
14PRoutine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number 40 131 (late of Inspection 0-128/99
Time of Inspection 10:00 AM 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted © Certified ® Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Not Operation Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: lied..ti.ill.l~arm................................... ....... County: G.reemrr............................................... 1?htaRO.......
OwnerName: Clta.rk,$..L.............................&Qkcs.Jr .................................................... Phone No: 2 2-Z.9fi- � 4...........................................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title Phone No.
MailingAddress: B.t..1,.B.RX..35.9.......................................................................................... thydt,11.-C.............................................................. wn ..............
Onsite Representative: �A.�k.S.t9.kle ................... ..... .. Integrator: M.urphy..EgMjly..I:.".M5.................................
Certified Operator:CUr1e,5.L............................ SkS)ktz5............................................... Operator Certification Number:A.85.13 .............................
Location of Farm:
�axm..is.aQsal�d.a1<t..tll�.alller�st«cxiQn..Qi.�[C�ll�.a��7..Ind..N�.lii�hvr�..�A�.itl..G.r���t�..C�u�1xy�..�a�rna.erEt�calxrt«.ls.t?�.tfxt:.�:t:sX1Sr.�a... •
de.n : iG ,a 7„ I pra ;inn tely„R .�nahes..faann. C.kAigh a�. Q.............................................................................::..:::.::...................................... .
Latitude 3S ° 28 ' 07 Longitude 77 • 30 , 32 14
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3500
❑ 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 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons, ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ 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. li'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 I@ No
Waste Cnllection & Treatment
4. 1s 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): 21„
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed an 12121/44

Printed on 12/21/99
(Facility Number: 40-131 I Date of Inspection
1912$199
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ,
❑ Yes
® No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes
®No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue Beans Plan on 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?
N6-viblations:or deficiencies•Were:noted:duriing•this visit::You: Will'receive no furth&
.. correspondence about this visit. .. .. .. ..
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question 4); Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to lbetter explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Before Dennis - 40 inches
4fter Dennis - 27 inches ---------------- Freeboards
4fter Floyd - 3 inches
umped to 21 inches after Floyd per DWQ.
umped on soybeans. Reels were available on the farm. Three were available. Eight of eleven reels used by Chuck
ere Flooded.
SEE PAGE 3
ReviewerAnspector Name ;Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Printed on 12/21/99
Facility Number: 40-131 Dale of Inspection F 10/2$/99
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
❑ No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
❑ No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additibnal'Cominehts and/or DraWinp.
Records destroyed by flood. _+
Waste analysis 2.7 Ibs on 7123/99.
Soybeans had not been pumped on this year.
Fescue crop is probably drowned.
Pumped per DWQ to lower lagoon.
Printed on 12/21/99

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
0 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
O Other Agency - Operation Review
19 Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other i
Facility Number 40 13I
Date of Inspection 617/99
Time of Inspection 800 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted D Certified ® Conditionally Certified Cl Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: W.kliltYArmt .......................................................................................... ..... County: Gxwjatr............................................... 1?I'ARO.......
OwnerName: ChArI.O.J............................... SIQW.jr .................................................... Phone No: 252-I.46.664...........................................................
Facility Contact:..............................................................................Title:........
Mailing Address: Lit.l.ax�Z2.........................................................................
Onsite Representat ive:bp��Ipi{eS,,)�xja�1,
Phone No:
.... toy.dtwn.AS.......................... ..... ....... I .............. I....... 2013..............
Integrator: IYYNxF�ty..�AAl1d�Y,� ad [ills ........................
Certified Opera tor:.CbArj 5.Loy............................ S.tjQkfj ............................................... Operator Certification Number:j.$&3 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 ' 28 07 6y Longitude 77 ' 30 4 32 Ly
Design Current
Swine Cnnaeity Pnnulatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
3672
3200
❑ 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 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / 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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: #1
Freeboard(inches): ...............4Q...........................................,...........................................
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 an 51161200n

Printed on 6116/2000
(Facility Number: 40-131 I Date of Inspection 617/99
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
IN No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
® Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No ,
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
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 AW IP?
❑ Yes
® No
N,6•v.Mati6fis:or 4eiici6ncie-W0e;noted:d'ueing• this -visit:: You: will :receive na further ;
correspondence about this.visit. . :::::: ' :::::::::::::
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
* Recommend signing up for the local Neuse Rule options by 8/1/99 with the Greene Soil & Water Conservation District
* Given Integrator Registration card
* Last waste analysis dated 4/29/99 at 2.4 Ibs/ 1000 gal.
* Soils report dated 5/26/99 with lime to be applied this fall
* Keeping lagoon level records as required by General Permit
14c. Based on 75% rule, row crop fields under at 64% (includes 20 acres of rotated tobacco); unable to determine total acreage for
fescue fields. Operation pended for additional information
15. Currently allowing fescue to seed out
Reviewer/Inspector Name jPat Hooper 252/946-6481
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Printed on 5/16/2000
Facility Number: 40-131 1 Date of Inspection 6/7/99
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ® Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system. intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
® Yes
❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
26 & 32. Did not implement both RMPs due to possible malfunction problems. Mr. Stokes adding "TLB.Super Microbial' to
houses and lagoon for odor control
Printed on 5/16/2000

❑ Div n of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
tvision of Water Quality
10 Routine O Complaint O41�-ollow.up of IDWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other j
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of inspection a 1 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered alrertified 13Applied for Permit �Zrmitted IDNot O erational Date Last Operated . ...............
Farm Name:..�... [.•...u.......`l Lit.t!1 1.................................................. County:...... ................ I ........... .......u-...-5.�
Owner Name: .........L.✓...L1:1....... .V D S. Phone No:
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:.........................,,.,................................... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: t..Y' ................................ .....41LA ...... Q. C. I ............... ...
Onsite Representative:...0 ..!LtV .......................... .......................... :.. Integrator: .....0,b.V1.F �.. `...`..
Certified Operator ......... R........... .. .................................. Operator Certification Number;...{.F���.1.��.?..............
Location of Farm:
y
.... .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
..Cr:.s�.. �c.s..
Latitude 35 0 1 44 Longitude ©0 ©6 ©64
9 Desi n ry CurrenE Desi n Current Desi n Current z,
. r g g
Swme Ga acit P <.
P .. y' opulatiaia Poultry, ; : Capadty, l opulatian Cuttle Capacity PopulaEion
❑ W an to Feeder' - ❑Layer ,; ❑Dairy
eeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
07
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other a 9
❑ Farrow to Finish a Total Design, Capacity, 7�
❑ Gilts
m❑ :Tot6lSSLW: ��d
Soars
a.:
Number of Lagoons l Holding°Ponds'' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEJ Spray Field Area
f
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System :ak E3:
5
General ,
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
A Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/97
❑ Yes ,2,'0
❑ Yes Lam0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes E No
❑ Yes (<0
❑ Yes I.1T1VD
❑ Yes (,10
❑ Yes 9<0
Continued on back

Facility Number: Q — 3 1
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures Ira oons tioldin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
.............................................................................................................
I~reeboard (ft). ......... o......v\..x...
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4 Structure 5
....I ....................... .............................
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?
❑ Yes 2 <0�
❑ Yes 2<1
Structure 6
...................................
❑ Yes
to
❑ Yes
�
l�y� <10
El Yes
9<o
(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 , `o
Waste Applicat!on
14. is there physical evidence of over application? L,YYes ❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..............................................1................................................... ..................................................... ........................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes a o
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 2No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes a<0
19, Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ari o
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes Q'No.
21. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes j No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes lid'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 rNNo
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes [ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes No
0-No.violations or deficiencies.were-noted during this:visit.-.You.will receive no further
:�:•correspor>Idencealioutthis:visit:•:�:�: :: : ��.� :.� :. ��. �•.�� .��.:�.• �.- •.•��.�:�: .� .�
userarawmgs,oi tacutty to<netter exptam�sttuanons (use.a(jtnuonai pages as,necessary)
+0 "U V15►4 qe,4_ .O✓1� Vie_Aj CDtn16CUl�
�l
a_ tn�tlrvz -�-a �U�Q c)u c t`o r� o -
�ktVS 1 KJGt)l 1 ���fD✓�W� vt.o�w� 5� CCsv�dUC��
Y
t�c� Locpe-�.-1 it t�S�
�1 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
�, Date:

❑ D�'vision of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Q'DtA
lvtsion of Water Quality t
AL
tioutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DCVO insotetion 0 Follow-up of C?SWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 1
Time of Inspection O . 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered Certified GKpplied for Permit © Permitted JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
. I n E
FarmName: .... L1(� .�.........4.!..!.I,......-!n:1......................................................... County:...,.. ....................... .. ...... .....
n nn , `��
Owner Name:...�` ................ k :�. ........................ Phone No:..,. k.� ...- .....4 ..r..., .�Lt`1:................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: .:�4!, .a. ..,............................................................. ......... �!1 t...G..............................
Onsite Representative:..C.116.'�. ....,._.?'CC?.V-............ ................... Integrator: .... iiC{?�.1�.�.ILVL�.�k. lx1.11�Vt/LS
Certified Operator;.." ...... 1......... ...... ................................ Operator Certification Number:................... �' k.3...........
Location of Farm:
!..
Latitude ®a ®' ®" Longitude EHI• ®' ®"
Design,;, >CurrentDesign Current A F Design 'Curl
ie Capacity:;.P6pulatton Poultry CapacityTwulation Cattle Capacity Popul
❑ can to Feeder
[irFeeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish .
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area I© Spray Field Area
❑ No Liouid Waste
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If dischar�:e is observed, did it reach Surface. Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
A. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systerrt? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes :�a❑ YesNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes E2<o
❑ Yes ,Q NNo
❑ Yes 1"No
❑ Yes Gg"NNo
❑ Yes 63 No
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed'? ❑ Yes 5W
Structures fL.i2oons.I1oldin12 Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.l
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes V<o
Stricture l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): 3 +!j
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes [O/No
f I. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes N'o
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
l?No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers'?
❑ Yes
L< Noo
Waste Application
��
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
El Yes
93"No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .... LJl1�� .. 4t4N.5...... 1 SS�1.-............ t............... 1.........................................................,................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW;N111)?
❑ Yes
[� i<0
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
El yes
�G2
Lvl No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
(�No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�`o
21.
Did Reviewer/]nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
El Yes
,//No
NKo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Onl
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 53"No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes P<o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes No
0 No.vitilativns-or d'iciencies were nbte'd during this:visit.:y6u4ill receive no further
correspondence about this.
q r , any other comments Comtxients.(referto, uestion #): ,Explain any YES answers and/or tiny. recomi<nendattons or
Use dlr' gs of facility to better eaiplain situations. (usc additional pages as necessary)..
1i fit n
ut �c i � on r La�.A_ SkOUtd1 ,ntia r�� ; r,r� f/{/�{�1/y✓/{IW-''a� +(r_ca S G cif fps y
t J = V
Ca.t:.�.,. _Pig 1 l -tt-� PQ,�.� { �
` to ccGo Y S &J� Jt'O 6e_ lre''1-[, ?_Ck QA-3 %/ re,.s,=

Facility Number: QU— 131 Date of Inspection �
Addifiona' Continents and/or Drawings: F
. , ,..
ILIOZO
(4t fS q�.o-7
3g 13 S L.b•07
L i
cl /4.
to 4 . a -r
7/25/97

p Division of aon ana rvaiei
N Division of Water Quality
Cy
IS icouune 0 "Mpiaint 0 ronow-up of VWV inspection 0 P011ow-up of USWU review 0 tattier
Facility Number
Date of Inspection
'
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit a Permitted JU Not peratwnaT", Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Red.Hill.Earm..................................»».......................................................... County: Greene WARO
Owner Name: Charles.1 . ...... .................... S:takesAr................. ................................. Phone No: 9.19.7,.746.-366.4 ..........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
PhoneNo; ......................... ..........................
MailingAddress: RU.Box.359...... ................................ ................................................ Ayden.N.c ............................................................... 2851.1 ..............
Onsite Representative: Chack.Stukes.................. ...._................ .................................. Integrator: Mku:phy..l'amity.FArzm.....................................
Certified Operator: CLarl=J.............................. Stakes ................................................ Operator Certification Number: IM13.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude ©• ®4 ©��
esign,; .;U urren esign, Currentesign Current
Swine "Capacity."Population °Poultry ' ­Capaclty Population ;Cattle Capi;tcity Population
p Wean to reeder
® Feeder to mis
p arrow to Wean
[3 Farrow to ee er
p Farrow to Finish
[3 Gilts
p Boars
p Layer
p Non -Layer
3 airy
[3 on- airy
p er I
rg'Toia1Design _Capacity. 3,672
Total SSLW 495,720
,:.
Nu�iiber of Lagoons 1 Holding Popds . pSubsurface Drains Present 113LagoonArea 113 Spray Field Area
p o iqui as a Management Sy
em
y
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? 13 Yes N No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [3 Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p lagoon p Spray Field 13 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) I3 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 E No
5, Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require Cl 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 0 No
7/25/97

;1
ace Number: 0_1
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures CI.aoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...._...._. »........_........................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (fl): 5 ft.
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)
13 Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
13 Yes a No
13 Yes a No
15. Crop type Small.Graia.[Whcat,.Harley,....................... Fcscua...................... .................... aybeaus...............................................................................
Mlo.
16. Do the receiving crops dilidrDwith those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes a No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
R . o v>lo ians.or crencies•were.nos urrng is visit;. You .receive no further .
�a�>ce'spop�eaeie abou0 ,110i-viAt::
p Yes N No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
p Yes a No
Reviewer/los ector Name a hne t,""'-��' ' = r ''` "' "°` " ""'�"""
n F .j,.f ,tub. UYz.' �' ;. .{ �.�,t
P ,� hr�.' a, --� .r .a; ^ . n :i ' , ' : �n + " . `�' ? f .... d, i. ` r. ✓.4. „ r"i N ., '?. 2 ,I.� _ Y_ . } " 4' "
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: &' 4 �� �] d ry-". Date: G — a L - Cl -t

rV r;;tR V- 100 �Q
0 ecti
'tip,
.Ito
- ti
F.
Rntitin6 0 CwMilabz ltQ 1'a)flow-u0if-DWO
k'
........ ........ 24,br?..(hh.
'4 'J'NA", rJ h;'m-05'rx
7� A
JV
"A 'fill,
NS
irm CrL
k1
----------
ys
:Z
01-ni! r
-4;
AydenN C
P
OoAe Re fleselita Ve: 1 c1�,9.L:S>ta e.a -«.«. ...
Ir1 tezrattar-MurvhxEwW=3
Cerfl&-d Operatcor..Owki ------ Operitor adwj NumbeF. 1MI3.
35 JT � T F-3-01, 2832
113 NT!lt Oot�rat Olhlrafi!ih
Tylwo(OperaApn and Design Capacity
Swine Number Poultry Number Cattle Number
❑ Wean to Feeder Q Fs FQ:Kje—r (D Non-1 1 10
M Feeder to Finish 3672
IRnrmyj tn Wean
Fanuw to FCCd4x
D Other Type of Livestock
Number'of Lagoons / Holding Ponds I JE1 Subsurface Drains Present
10 Lagoon �Ama Q Spray Field Area
General
1. Are them any buffers that need Mamtenancefppruvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
h. Wdkuhar-,,; iti obsvrvc.11. did it L14a(A1 Surlauc Wa(,:Y? (TI'v,.-s, iwtify DWQj)
C,
C'. If dj-1C-hHrge i.; Okl")'VTA- T%-hflt i9 111-. C.StilUkItCd flOW it]. a111/136.1'1
d. Dm:i :U' bvpa�:"' a lanwnsysu:in? 01'yos. notifyDWQ1
C,
3. Is them evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
F`Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
3c No
Yes
XNo
Not Applicable
Yes X No
::Yes jC No
4. Were them any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? z: :� Yes )?. No

CS No
waste maw er thai lapq*4/holdmg ponds)y
5* 'Does an Oit of the _.y Yst= (06
.."Itus
m4rd'v"m ink?
41 4
0
7,
nba�k
r
i v t1i
2
'3�
fit
.14 Yes
compliance with applicable
facility not m cot:
_V cc my
.ibl charge in
N6
facility &H Go have certified operator in responsible a
1.7 -Did thila6ffi
,;K 14�1 A4
"'PA _
E�,
.�11*0 MM- p V n ir
Are'there lagoons or �0%
properly R
, k CS
storage ponds, qu site which liiil to be �Ioiid? Y A! I o
YKV
tructures (IAgoom antherHolding Ponds)..;`W-.'
de te? No".— ­�R
JO I
. ­q.Q . (0 Fs ----------
� -1
�..
10. is spepage, observed ft6ifi"y of the structures?
q'Ycs No
m
struc 6d "es No
"5."Or -any other '_'&e'iniigdty of 1. is threat to an fth,
. yo c turcs obwv 7
12. Do a0r­ iced maintinaii6ihWL 60 :*Yes No
j of the
(If any of questioni 9-12 was answered yes, imd Ae iltnitiion P..., an
linmea" public 'health 'or environmental threat, notify DWq)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? Yes No
WWAL A pblicatlon
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? I Yes k. No
(If in excess of VVW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
16, Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? Yes No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? Yes ;kl No
IS. Does the cover crop need Unp rovement? 1 Yes k. No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment? Yes kNo
For Certified Facilities Only -
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Wage Management Plan in any way?
22, Does record keeping need improvement?
23, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/mspection with owner or operator in charge?
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. 40-131
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): I
No subsurface' drains present according to W. Stokes
12. Maintain vegetation around swine houses and lagoon. Remove tree from outside toe of western dike wall. Contact your Technical
Specialist for'specific removal guidelines. Situation did not pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment.
15. Soybeans and fescue are also grown on portions of the spray irrigation acreage.
Stokes has expressed a desire to be present for all subsequent site visits.

Yy � a4r!� J f'r Tom" -f k •+YK '�S f i • 4 t �.� <.-
• •ii�.: ::�G:Ji,.'•��ti• �yQisn,�+�'v.;i,� yy�'�'F1K7.r•-i�+ri�:�j cures:.. ^S�`1�rW of ,wht;,::�,.�;.: .':..�•'•'a .r.�•i.:ni `_ tryy n� ..�:��.t' �
Revkwe�llnapector Naime, � S�c�o?tt Jones � � ,� .L '�. !'�+'' `,%`�.:"`!�+''r • r %!, , : '; � ;t ; Si•i "r �4''s. Y�a+ ' K r - rr Ls r
'".°�Cr^*i��'��•,•�,'4'�iTk 'Ik�'�t'J`''.'ri -Z . �r+ � r ��� •:ft � {« �� r r���s �" � ,�`uk�'�,a� �.J,lT��+1.� i;. i- f* - ..
ReviewerRnapcctor S_ ignatnn �',: '�•� • `�`' �
cc. Diwswn Of Water Qu ji , Water -Quay Sediome, Facd' Asisessn�ent Unit , r h ; 11/14/96
�o.yy ; IFi'� . � �, 2t •....•yp � &1f', efa Y � -7' k w
%;RRN' .1K'lrf[n
JV 'T: r
strJr r1r ..} I.'C �c1! P .s.•.-Cyy``���5• J4 'xi�` Y,":�r,r,! �' t "F�s'
'�rx"'; Lt+'N�k":''°'� r3 Kai it-Ipk;f - }� s'x i�•hWMr��s ki1{+ !q-r.:!ti r 3!� ,x-�-I.. -:?': .::•,}-r -
r+}*r�✓%L "� ��,r �*11��,, x 37'�,' :.`'l `y,r�i XiJ'1 r5' }!.�• ��i• _ s'r y �:f:, -
}
ki 3'y.�"• �i:s:•i ttl:r'isY3 '-..�` f t1a,7 r.wV•y
J.
�V
,•.p S } 4d 1ikWi d ��,rrP r r. t f "10n- -v - ✓ .+e w .n, ,
r� rr a.i GSS� �'•r, K R- ..4 v§I kill" .a •i,' � V•C .+na J7t e� �[.F.: t
a I•.•:,, 4 L! J'wr. r`$ r r r tIC e:,.i "Z'. +a -Sc, -r +4 3•ry't"i�tNx
.Lti s•� •�a:= -'> �• hWr�,,fk_ ti;,24='h_ -•t :Fpi' ti w- --.i. ':. .',' -
`J:.=�.�.�..r :i.`a�r �ss7s,. >:a.l: r•., •s,t 'lit �: R:'t�.' -r a _ -a- .. -
,. ':i 'r. A Sm.,•!i b'7��5 :1 yri, �,� r _ 1 rK'1 > r
Slh ,.p:t M !I(•V-M M1 ti Arq'titae / �-`W'+T+�f„ .w i. 6 V