400150_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

A
.r

j
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection
Permit: AWS400150
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 08/08/2017 Entry Time: 12:05 pm Exit Time: 12:40 pm
Farm Name:
Sandy Ridge Farm
Owner:
Charles L Stokes Jr
Mailing Address:
782 Lower Field Rd
Physical Address:
782 Lower Field Rd
Facility Status:
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Ayden NC 28513
Ayden NC 28513
Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
y Murph-Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 28' 23" Longitude: 77' 29' 57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles
from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
❑ Denied Access
Washington
[e-mail]
252-531-2689
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, T Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2017
9-12-16 = 1.44
12-5-16 = 1.99
1-19-17 = 2.30
3-29-17 = 2.26
7-25-17 = 1.95
IRRs are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: WUP 3-10-2017: rainfall/freeboard; stocking; sludge survey due 2019; calibration
page: 1

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Nfumber:. 400150
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
-7 Swine - Wean to Finish 8,621 7,697
Total Design Capacity: 8,621
Total SSLW: 991,415
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 05/01 /95 19.00 25.00
page: 2

C
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles t Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inppection 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)
❑
N ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
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 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
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑0
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance aftematives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 tbs.?
❑
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

7
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number:
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
400150
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
N ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
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

0
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/08/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. If 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?
❑
E ❑
❑
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 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?
❑
N ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑_
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
400150 Facility Status:
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit:
Routine
Date of Visit:
08/11/2016 Entry Time: 12:05 pm
Farm Name:
Sandy Ridge Farm
Owner:
Charles L Stokes Jr
Mailing Address:
782 Lower Field Rd
Active Permit: AWS400150 ❑ Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Exit Time
County: Greene
12:55 DM
Region:
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Ayden NC 28513
Washington
[e-mail]
252-531-2689
Physical Address: 7132 Lower Field Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude. 35' 28' 23" Longitude: 77° 29' 57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles
from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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 = 1.93
10-2-15 = 1.65
11-25-15 = 1.86
1-12-16 = 2.61 NOTE: 59 Ib. PAN applied to Overseed in Dec. & Jan.
4-21-16 = 2.76
7-8-16 = 2.15
IRR records are complete & balanced out.
Reviewed: stocking/mortality; sludge survey extension until 2019;
Freeboard range: 2-26-16 = 12" to 25" on 4-29-16
page: 1

rr}
1�
}
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 8,621 7,707
Total Design Capacity: 8,621
Total SSLW: 991,415
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 05/01/95 19.00 21.00
page: 2

r
r.
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
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.l large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
MEI
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
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%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type i Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Fescue (Hay)
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
Management Pian(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
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?
❑■❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na Ne
page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/11/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23, If 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?
❑
E ❑
❑
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
0
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
[]
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
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 tail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
❑
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑
Other Agency
Facility Number
400150
Facility
Status: Active Permit: AWS400150
Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Greene Region:
Washington
Date of Visit:
08/12/2015 Entry Time:
11:50 am Exit Time: 12:25 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Sandy Ridge Farm
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner:
Charles L Stokes Jr
Phone:
252-531-2689
Mailing Address:
782 tower Field Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address:
782 Lower Field Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: ECompliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 28' 23" Longitude: 77° 29' 57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles
from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste Analysis:
9-12-14 = 1.31
11-18-14 = 1.79
1-29-15 = 2.88
3-13-15 = 2.6
5-26-15 = 2.67
Marlene Salyer
soil tested: 2015
ERR records are complete & balanced out on Bermuda & OSeed.
Reviewed: WUP/6-2015; New COC; Sludge survey @ 20%; rainfallltreeboard; stocking/mortality
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Dale: 08/12/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 8,621 5,623
Total Design Capacity: 8,621
Total SSLW: 991,415
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 05/01/95 19.00 23.00
page: 2

Y
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inppection 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. 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.cbservable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
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 Application
Yas No Na Ne
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 manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
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?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ N ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ N ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No No Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
E 0 ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
C]
E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
[]
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner- Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/12/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V 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?
❑
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 structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na Me
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

r
?, r I
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400160 Facility Status: Active
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection
Permit: AWS400150
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: UI eelie
Date of Visit: 0811312014 Entry Time: 03:00 pm Exit Time: 3:30 pm
Farm Name:
Sandy Ridge Farm
.Owner:
Charles L Stokes Jr
Mailing Address.
782 Lower Field Rd
Region:
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
Avricn Alr' '19A Q
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
❑ Denied Access
Washington
[e-mail]
252-531-2689
Location of Farm: Latitude. 35' 28' 23" Longitude: 77° 29' 57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles
from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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:
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil Tested 8/30/2013
Waste Analysis:
8120113= 4.3
111712014= 2.44
413114= 2.4
7110114= 2.23
Marlene Salyer
IRR records are complete and balanced out.
Reviewed crop yield (225), rainfall, freeboard, stocking and mortality
20" rainfall recorded since June 2014
Remember to do a sludge survey before end of December.
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

JF. (. ,
Permit: AWS400150 Owner- Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 6,090
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon i 05/01/95 19M
page: 2

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inssection 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. 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
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large
❑
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
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 Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
[]
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

r
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number:
400150
Inspection Date: 08/13/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14_ Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
E ❑
❑
determination?
17. floes the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No 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?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility : Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
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?
[]
N ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
01313
(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 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?
❑
N ❑ 0
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
Other issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / 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 reviewilnspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400150 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washinaton
Date of Visit: 08/15/2013 Entry Time: 03:00 PM Exit Time: 04:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridae Farm Owner Email: clsi580,amail com
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr Phone: [phone]&9
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Avden NC 28513
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'23" Longitude:
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903_
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat 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
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested: 2013 & due in 2016
6-25-12 = 1.84
10-25-12 = 1.64
Avg. = 2A2
6-17-13 = 3.2
IRR records are complete & balanced out. Rainfall, freeboard & stocking are recorded_
Sludge survey due in 2014
Crop yield = Bermuda Bales 130/175/68
Looks Great!
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 08/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Wean to Finish 8,621 8,545
Total Design Capacity: 8,621
Total SSLW: 991,415
Waste Structures
Designed Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
lagoon 1 05/01/95 19,00 33]00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number. 400150
Inspection Date: 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?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than
❑
■
❑
❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large trees, severe
U
■
U
U
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management
❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
T Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number : 400150
Inspection Date: O8/15/2013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
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? 1100 ❑
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: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 0811512013 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
Facility Number : 400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ Cl ❑
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: 6

Permit. AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection pate: 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 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?
Page: 7

Division of Water Quality
.Facility Number ®- ® 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral 0 Emergency O Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:* s
Farm Name A Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
�� Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: (!5,
Phone:
Integrator: 4—A
Region:(
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
A ad 4,<d6 ;�/
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
E]
Turke Poults
Other
I
Dischar es and 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)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: ?&
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3^7
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 which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [:]Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes M/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the 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
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections/,
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes &6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
A
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
53 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. ,e&a, a9.0 /,�
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structures) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
v ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ YesJN
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yeso
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
S`f
Af
45�zy�� �_A4
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: Q=/11-1j���
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
/4/2011

i
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400150 'J Denied Access
Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routing County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit. 08/02/2011 Entry Time: 11:OQ AM _ Exit Time: 11:40 AM _ Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridge Farm _ Owner Email: clsi580omail.com
Owner: ghades L Stokes Jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 782 LoWer Ejgld Rd Avden NC 28513
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd 6yden NC 28513
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting F
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'2X" _ Longitude: 7j°29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Waste analysis: soil tested Aug. 2010
10-14-11 = 1.3
1-12-11 = 1.8
5-12-11 = 2.1
5-22-11 = 3.4
SS July 2010 @ 22%
IRR's are complete & balanced out.
Freeboard & rainfall are recorded as well as stocking/mortality
Looks Good?
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 0810212011 inspection Type: Compliance fnspection
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Facility Number: 400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Designed Observed
Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 05101/95 19.00 20M
Page: 2

I
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles !_ Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/0212011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No NA NE
4, is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, 00110
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

i
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18_ Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the Facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑ Cl ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
■❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Lease Agreements? ❑
Other? ❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
Q
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
❑ 1300
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: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes A
Inspection Date: 08/02/2011 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Records and Documents
27_ Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Facility Number. 400150
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 ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
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 I 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?
a ■ ■ 1
Page: 6

i
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency nn
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400150 U Denied Access
Inspection Type: ComNiaogg Ig§ppction inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 0811012010 Entry Time:10700 AM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridge Farm
Owner:
Incident #:
Owner Email: cisi58 g_maii.com
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 782 Lovyrr Field Rd „ Ryden NC 28513
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farm
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'23" Longitude: 77°29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes
Secondary OIC(s)'
Waste Collection & Treatment 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: _
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
11-30-09 = 1
1-25-10 = 1.6
6-1 B-10 = 2.8
Soil tested July 2010 SS 7/10 Freeboard range:
2/15/10 = 17" - 7126/10 = 31"
Looks Good!
Date:
Page: 1

a
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number : 400150
Inspection Date: 0811012010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Feeder to Finish 7,334 6,714
Total Design Capacity: 7,334
Total SSLW: 990,090
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 05/01/95 19.00 28.01
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08110/2010 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 DWO) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑ 0110
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?
❑ ■ D
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 08/10/2010 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for VisIt: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 101/6/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

1
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number. 400150
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?
❑ ■ Cl ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
V.. IJn NA Idr-
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 ❑ ■ Cl ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 0811012010 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?
1101111
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
a
❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 6

a
0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400150 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routing County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 07/28/2009 Entry Time, 12100 PM Exit Time:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridae Farm
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr
Incident #:
Owner Email: cls058 mail.com
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Ryden NC 28513
Phone: [phone]
Physical Address: 782 Lower Field Rd Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant E Not Compliant Integrator' Bunting Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35*28'23" Longitude: 77°29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Fans entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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:
On -site representative Chuck Stokes Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Page: 1

Permit: AWS400150 owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number : 400150
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Inspection Summary:
#28: Qverapplication on field SRD of (-30.92) pounds NIA from two irrigation events dated 2-"9 (20.51 Ib)and 2-11-09 (12.541b) out
of a 50 lb PAN for small grain. Freeboard levels during this time were: 1-26-09 = 19"; 2-2-09 = 24"; 2-9-09 = 26"; 2-16-09 = 30".
There was 4.5" rainfall during this period according to farm records. There was no cattle on the field and the hay was baled and
removed.
Waste analysis:
2-2-09 = 3.3
4-29-09 = 3
5-26-09 = 3.4
11-25-08 = 2.3
soil test is current.
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07128/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 7,344 4,123
Total Design Capacity: 7,344
Total SSL.W: 991,440
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
1 05/01/95
19.00
25.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS400150 owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
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) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Z 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 ❑ ■ Q ❑
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?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
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
Q
■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu. Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare 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?
1 B. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑
Page: 5

f'erralt: AK,!S400tSo
, fnspectfon Date:
RecOrd 0712,
" 61/2009
I"
DDcurnents
Checklists?
,�e$ign?
Maps?
owner - r Facility:Chaves L Stokes
t epection Jr
Ype: Co
mAtfange rnsPectron
Other?
21. Does record
keeping need in►provernent?
If yes, check
Was appropriate box below. to Application?
120 Minute inspections?
Weather code?
1•acfllty Number: 400150
ReAgoR for
yr°n Routine
Yes
No Nq NELc:
v
vveekty Freeboard?
Transfers? ❑
Rainfall? ❑
Inspections after ❑
1 inch rainfall 8 monthly?
Waste Analysis? � ❑
Annual soil analysis?
Crop yields? ❑
Stocking? ❑
Annual ❑
Certification Form lNPD1_5 on,?
22. Did the fa ❑
facility fait to instal! and
23. If selected,maintain a rain ❑
did the fa gauge?
cility fail to install and D
24. Did the facili maintain
ty fail to calibrate a rainbreaker ° ❑
waste a n irrigation ®❑ ❑
25. Did the AAltcation gallon equipment � �
facility fail to equipment (IYPD'„
conduct a slud as required b `` °nIY)7 ❑ ❑ ❑
28. Did the f 9e survey as required Y the permit? I acifity fait to have an by Y the Aenrtit? ❑I{■ ❑ ❑
27- Did the facility
y certified °Aerator i Y fait to secure a Ahos n charge? ❑
her issues phorouS loss + ■ ❑ ❑
assessment (PtA7) �rfcation? I
8. Were an Cj ■ ❑ ❑
Y additional r
A Problems Did the facility fail to ins noted which cause non ��i ■ ❑ ❑ rtality rates that exce Properly ratose of dead animal, non -co of the Permit or Cq Y� NO NA
Pity
t the timg ins es? mats within 24 hours and/or WMA?
of the ❑❑ ❑
representative immediately. the facility pose an air document and re
p°rt those
qualify concern? If yeS contact ❑ ❑
a re9iona! - ❑ •
Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: g

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07/28/2009 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
OtherISSues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ 110
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 7

I
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400150 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region:
Date of Visit: 07/02/2008 Entry Time:08.30 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Shy Ridge -Farm Owner Email: [e-mail]
Owner: Charles L Stokes Jr Phone: [phone] _
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Find Rd Avden NC 28513
Physical Address. Sr 1337 Lower Field Rd _ _ ., Ayden NC 28513
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: guntina Farms
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°28'23" Longitude: 77°29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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:
3-25-08 = 4.7
4-8-08 = 4.1
5-22-08 = 4.3
soil sample is current
looks great
Date:
Page: 1

f
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 7,344 7,350
Total Design Capacity: 7,344
Total SSLW: 991,440
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon 1 05/01/95 1 1 19.00 41.00
Page: 2

e
Permit: AVVS400150 owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 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? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyanoe man-made? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWG}) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑ 0011
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.l large trees, severe ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
5. 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 andlor 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

11
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stakes Jr Facility Number : 400150
Inspection Date: 0710212008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ ❑ 0
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Q
■ ❑
❑
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?
❑
■ ❑
Q
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?
Q
■ ❑
Q
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

a
Permit: AWS400160 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
Q
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 ❑ ■ ❑ Q
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

a.
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 07/02/2008 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

i
6
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 4QD15Q_ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS400450 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Qompliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 11/16/2007 Entry Time:11:00 AM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridae Farm Owner Email: LCHEQearthlink.net
Owner: Charles LStokes Jr Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 782 Lower Field Rd
Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address: Sr 1337 Lower Field Rd
Avden NC 28513
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Suntina Farms _
Location of Faun: Latitude:
35°28'23" _ Longitude: 77°29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern
side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and 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
On -site representative Chuck Stokes
Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
waste analysis:
12-4-06 = 1.5
2-8-07 = 3.1
4-24-07 = 4.5
7-2-07 = 3.2
9-14-07 = 2.9
soil test 5-18-07
Looks good
Page: 1

A
IE
Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 11/16/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine -Feeder to Finish 7,344 7,457
Total Design Capacity: 7,344
Total SSLW: 991,440
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
igoon 1 05/01/95 19.00 38.0
Page: 2

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 11/16/2007 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?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
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? 0000
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 altematives 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: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Inspection Date: 11/16/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type B
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?
❑ ■ ❑ Q
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?
❑ ■ O ❑
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: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Jr
Facility Number: 400150
Inspecton Date: 11/16/2007 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?
❑ WOO
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 onty)?
❑
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 0000
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS400150 Owner - Facility: Charles L stokes Jr Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 11/16/2007 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? Q ■ ❑ Q
32. aid Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ Q
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ Q
Page: 6

f
E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA2AO150 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 02/07/2006 Entry Time:04:00 PM Exit Time:
Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridge Farm -4 Owner Email:
Owner: Charles L Stoked
Mailing Address: Rt 1 Box 359 Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Phone: [phone]
Location of Farm: Latitude: '2 " Longitude: 77°2 '57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representat!ve(s): Name Title Phone
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Soil test 12-05
Waste analysis:
12-5-05 = 2.3
9-13-05 = 2.5
7-16-05 = 3.6
5-9-05 = 4.1
2-25-05 = 3.4
12-20-05 = 2.8
Look Great!
Page: 1

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number. 400150
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations
Design Capacity
Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 7,344 5,541
Total Design Capacity: 7,344
Total SSLW: 991,440
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon 1 05/0"5 19.00 �2400
Page: 2

r
Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Qischar es & 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,
Cl ■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑ ■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 02/07/2005 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? Q
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■ ❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No NA
NE
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ Q
Q
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ Q
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Q
Page: 4

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 02f0712006 Inspection Type: Complianoe Inspection
Reason for Vislt: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ 0110
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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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 00110
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concem? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - facility: Charles L Stokes
Inspection hate: 02/07/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number:400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
00011
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 400150 Facility Status: Active Permit: NQA240150 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Greene Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 05/04/2005 Entry Time: 12:30 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Sandy Ridoe Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Charles L StohpQ Phone: -74 -
Mailing Address: RtIBox 359 Ayden NC 28513
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Bunting Farms
Location of Faun: Latitude: 35'28'23" Longitude: 77'29'57"
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles from
the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
Question Areas:
Q Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Q Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles L. Stokes Operator Certification Number: 18513
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Phone:
24 hour contact name Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
Soil test Jan 2005 & lime was applied.
Waste analysis: 2-25-05 =3.4; 12-20-04 = 2.8; 11-4-04 = 2.9
Again, the small grain was not listed in the WUP, but Mr. Stokes stated that technical specialist gave verbal approval.
Page: 1

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Inspection Date: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Waste Structures
Facility Number : 400150
Reason for Visit: Routine
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon 1 22.50
Page: 2

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Qfscharges &, Stream impacts, Yes 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? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 00013
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑ ❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
M ❑ ❑
No NA NF
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe erosion,
❑
0 ❑ ❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property 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?
Yes
No NA NE
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
Cl
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu. Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 1W.110lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Page. 3

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Kenansville
Soil Type 2
Pactolus
Soil Type 3
Rains
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)?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
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 determination?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
Yac
M ❑ ❑
No NA NF
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 > 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?
❑
N ❑ ❑
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?
❑
so ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
M ❑ ❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA240150 Owner - Facility: Charles L Stokes
Facility Number: 400150
Inspection Date: 05/04/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NF
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ E ❑ ❑
Otherlssues Yes No NA NF
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ❑ M ❑ ❑
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality ❑ M ❑ ❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality conoem? 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?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
0000
Page: 5

�0� WNA Incident Report
Report Number: 200501058
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting On -Site Contact:
Category: Animal First/Mid/Last Name:
Incident Started: 04/04/2005 Company Name:
County: Greene Phone:
City: Pager/Mobile Phone:
Farm #: 40-150 Reported By:
Responsible Party: First/Mid/Last Name:
First Name: Company Name:
Middle Name: Address:
Last Name:
Owner: City/State/Zip:
Address: Phone:
Pager/Mobile Phone:
City/State/Zip:
Phone:
Permit
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM Chemical Name Reportable City. tbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal Position Method:
Latitude: Position Accuracy:
Longitude: Position Datum:
Location of Incident: Sandy Ridge Farm
Address:
City/State/Zip
Report Created 04/18/05 03:57 PM Page t

Cause/Observation:
High freeboard
Action Taken:
Faxed in levels
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown
Surface Water Name?
Directions:
Comments:
Conveyance:
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown Estimated Number of fish?
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type. (Above Ground or Under Ground)
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Access to Farm
Structure Questions
Animal Population
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
E Spray Availability
Report Created 04/18/05 03:57 PM Page 2

Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
Animal Population
Confined?
Depop?
Feed Available?
Mortality?
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
Available Fields?
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches
Lagoon 1 19.00
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Plan Due Date Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
05-04-08
12:00:00
Event Type Event Date Due Date Comment
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2005-04-18 02:49:22
Incident Start 2005-04-04 09:00:00
Report Created 04/18/05 03:57 PM Page 3

Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
DWQ Information.
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Marlene Salyer Marlene Salyer David L May
Phone:
Date/Time: 2005-04-18 02:49:22 PM
Referred Via: Fax
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 04/18/05 03:57 PM Page 4

� �'" •F � sf oyi& ��"��`��` ° ��' A ;r �'$`.. v'w� t _° yw„ = S ice: a =�T3� ti �1.7 ^`
���� ���i�''+��,-� � „,� ��, ��''��, • ��DiYlS10n Of W$teP (3Ualltyi�. �„v�7 �'`�'e� L`"'n�s• a �. � �- S �.'�" ����
�n�--
ii
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit •O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number j
Date of Visit: 5-4-ZOU4 Time: ��
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted (] Certified ® Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:................
FarmName: SAuidJc.] WgUirAt.....----............................................................................ County: Gxg.9jae .............................................. WAR .......
Owner Name: l]arlgs..... ......................... SkQ1tes.,Ir..................................................... Phone No: {�.7�. 21�.Lszficek................................ .......
Mailing Address: 7.,81Lo'..ww. k#1d.IiSt&d................................ ...
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Lug &..Ly.rL L•................................................................. Integrator: Bimting.FArma...................... ...............................
Certified Operator:.Cliarica.L ...................... S.haku ............................................... Operator Certification Number:1.&S.t3.......................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 +
miles from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 Z$ ° Z3 Longitude F 57
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry Capacity
population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE3 Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
7344
7344
❑ Non -Layer
I
I
❑ Ndn-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
7,344
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
991,440
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons:
DischarEes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
Structure 6
Identifier......................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 20
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 40-150
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 Ievel
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Fescue (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ®No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments {refer_to questton #) Explain any YES answers and/or any.recommendatians or any other'commenfs_
Use drawings`of facility to better explain situations: (ase additional pages as necessaryK '• ; ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
Waste analysis: 3-2-04 = 2.3; 12-18-03 = 2.5; 10-10-03 = 1.6; 8-13-03 = 2.2; 6-19-03 = 3.3; 4-24-03 = 1.9; 2-14-03 = 3.3 #
samples for 2003 and 2004 are on site.
freeboard levels and rain events are recorded weekly.
irrigaion records are complete and balanced out.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Marlene D.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:u
Date: .! -
12111/03 `� Continued

Facility Number: 40--150 Date of Inspection 5-4-2004
.IReguired
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/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
® Yes
❑ No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
®No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
® No
34,
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Stocking Form []Crop Yield Form [:]Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
E3
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about
this visit.
dditional Comments'and/or Drawings
12112103

' Technical Assistance Site Visit Report
• Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 40 - 150 Date: 12115103 Time: 1 900 1 Time On Farm: 60 WARO
Farm Name Sandy Ridge Farm County Greene
Mailing Address 782 Lower Field Road
Phone: [phone]
Ayden NC 28513
Onsite
Representative Chuck Stokes / Carl Dunn Integrator iBunting Farms Inc.
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Op Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producerfintegrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
0 Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population ❑ Wean to Feeder Capacity Population
❑ Layer
® Feeder to Finish 7344 7344 ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands?
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
® yes ❑ no
❑ yes ® no
[]yes ® no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay lCoastal Bermuda -graze ISmall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES KeA Pa
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands?
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
® yes ❑ no
❑ yes ® no
[]yes ® no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay lCoastal Bermuda -graze ISmall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES KeA Pa
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?
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
requiring DWQ notification?
5• Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
❑ yes ® no
® yes ❑ no
❑ yes ® no
[]yes ® no
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1
CROP TYPES Coastal Bermuda -hay lCoastal Bermuda -graze ISmall grain overseed
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES KeA Pa
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

F
Facility Number 40 - 150 Date:
12/15/03
PARAMETER
p 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
❑
El
❑ 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)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200
❑
❑
® 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Latelmissing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
[123. 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
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
❑
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

tI
Facility Number 40 _ F 150 Date: I 12/15/03
MENTS:
Naste analysis dated 10/10/03 nitrogen is 1.6 Ibs11000 gallons
8113/03 nitrogen is 2.2 Ibs/1000 gallons
6119103 nitrogen is 3.3 Ibs/1000 gallons
4/21103 nitrogen is 1.9 Ibs11000 gallons
2/14/03 nitrogen is 3.3 Ibs11000 gallons
12/18/02 nitrogen is 3.1 lbs11000 gallons
10/11/02 nitrogen is 2.3 Ibs11000 gallons
Soil test dated 3/3/03 Lime requirements were met. Cu and Zn within guidelines.
Waste plan dated 11/13/03 Developed by Carl Dunn, PE, SWCD Deficit 2,320x1000 gallons Crops to be coastal bermuda
razed.
Be sure to use the most current waste analysis to balance PAN on crops receiving animal waste.
Facility planted millet PAN 150 Ibs/acre documentated by Carl Dunn, PE via e - mail.
and 15. Over application noted field 8 crop coastal bermuda amt - 6.74 Ibslacre
field 22 crop coastal bermuda amt - 18.92 Ibslacre.
New waste plan deletes row crops and includes pasture.
Need to calibrate irrigation system.
Lagoon level and rainfall recorded weekly. 1/1103 and 11/8/03 lagoon recorded at 17" and on 3/22/03 lagoon recorded at
6".
,er application recorded on small grain over seed was deducted from coastal bermuda irrigation events within crop
dows.
n sludge survey conducted on 10/8/02 average depth 18.6 " / 1.55 ft.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST Martin McLawhorn
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 12/18/03 Entered By: Martin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

W ArF9
To:. Producer
From: Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2002
Michael F. Easley
Governor
Man G. Ross Jr_, Secretary
Deparbnent of Environment and Natural Resmuces
Gregory J. Thorpe. Ph-D_, Acting Director
Division of Water Quay
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 a0 other
documents pertaining to yoar animal operation for futare 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 21L0217, 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, andlor 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:.
(p The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum, maximum waste
level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24 hour storm
event phis an additional foot of structural freeboard.
(p An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least
within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
q) Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
T The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, was&soil analysis and Land irrigation records.
These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manages in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three years_
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant Available
Nhtro�en {PANT rate for the receiving crop or result in nmoff during any given application.
q) All grassed waterways small have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet can be
another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilisation structrne, or other suitable outlets.
q) It is suggested,not a regi0emot to keep crap yield information for futume use to update your waste management plan You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001. ..
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-6481, ed.
32I or your Technical Specialist
Cc: LaRO
DBC Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

Q
Facility Number Date of Visit: 1RSR002 Time: 10:45 am
p Not Operations p Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.... ....................
Farm Name: Sandy Ridge Farm County: Greene .................................................WARO.......
Owner Name: Charles L. Stokes Jr Phone No: [phone] (office)
Mailing Address: 782 Loot f h Rwd.___.. — ........... ................... 28513..............
Facility Contact: ........................ ..... ................... Phone No:
' A
Onsite Representative: Charles.Slakg&............................__---........................ __... Integrator: Muxphy..F aril}.Farms.......................
Certified Operator: Chores 1. Operator Certification Number: L84L3........... _................
Location of Farm:
arm is located off NCSR IJ37 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.3 ry
miles from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
® Swine p Poultry p Cattie p Horse Latitude ©4 ®4 ©" Longitude ©• ®6 ©�
lgn illrlCn a t-DCS1g��.•e ��nrrent ;+'sue sD£Slgn Curreni .
Swine`*,Capc�ijx Population Poul .rCapacityPopulatioa .cattle µ ',CapacrtyPopulat�on
_.
can to ee er . p Layer 13 airy
«_ ® ee er to uus p on- ayer w p ty on- ar
:.
pF arrow to can 4 : - - •;� -., s
arrow to Feeder
'
Farrow to Finish Total M9ign Cap city_ 7,344 -
Gilts, s t s
r to SS VV
p Boars � L 991,440
��
-.
T Nttmber�of Lagoons} u su ace rams resent goon Area n pray ie rea
i
i=Holdur PdbdslSoiid}Tra s - y`'
g P -�, o Liquid Waste Management System �,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: 13 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) l7 Yes p No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? (3 Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) Iess than adequate? p Spillway p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -
Freeboard(inches). ............. 28_........... ............... ........... ....................... .......... ......... ................... ................. .................................. .................. ....... 4........
.....

s
U
[Facility Number: 40_150 Date of Inspection 1/2512002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
(] Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an .
p Yes
® No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
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
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload
p Yes
N No
12. Crop type Wheat, Soybeans Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
p Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
p Yes
p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
p Yes
®No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
p Yes
®No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
p Yes
® No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
®No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
p Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
p Yes
®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 U No
in No violations or -deficiencies were not during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about t is visit.
�.ommenrs refer o question � .zpiam any x. r a ansvrers anaror aQy recomwpnaanuns or any qu er commenrs.
Use dErwmgs.nl: facility tas.hetter explam situations. (afse additional pagess-sanecessar g' ~� Field Copy p Final Notes
- -
Este analysis 1 url�/u 1: 1. / 1Ds/ 1 uuu gals; 1 / i a/u.. - s.L iDsr i uuu gals
I analysis 2000 - no lime required; 2001 samples collected in Dec. 2001 and submitted to Ag. Lab for analysis.
:eboard levels recorded weekly.
gation records complete with nitrogen balance - Overapplication noted from 2-10 lbs on wheat/2001; over 16 lbs
small grain and deducted from coastal bermuda 2001 crop. Soybeans 2001 (Sept.) last crop irrigated.
xiving crop - wheat looks good and Coastal Bermuda fields Have improved since flooding occurred in 1999.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur ' U11M b ^^- Date: r n

(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facili#_v Number 40 150 Date of Visit: &Z8-21101 Time: 8:3t!
--- - - - 0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted 13 Certified ® Conditionally Certified [3 Registered bate Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:.andx.Rid.k........................ ._................................................. .. Count: C
....................................
Owner Name: CIM&s.1.............................. Sjokel.jX .................................................... Phone No: 25Z-.7.4fi-.9 8UaWc4.......---•-- ........................
Mailing Address: Rt..1.B0059 .............................. ..... Ayden..NC ...................................... 28513 .............
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Chtwk5j91ws............................................................................. . Integrator: MUj:phy..F8M1Iy..Fatxni......................................
Certified Operator: jCbAdej.................................. S.I,&.................................. ..... Operator Certification Number: ,185.U.........
........ ....................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene County. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles +
From the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 35 28 23 Longi#ude 77 ° 29 57
Desrga Cnent Design Current Design . Current
Ca ac' Po iilahon ; Poui#iy .Ci ipactty., Population .Cattle :: 'Ca aci Po uiatwn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
7344
7300
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ®No
Di,,charpc 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 die 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)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge.
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity_ (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structwu 2 Siructure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........priinary...............................................................................................................................................
[:]Yes
[--]No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Struciwe 6
Freeboard (inches): ................ 2.Ci............... ....................__......................

05103101 Continued
F��
cility Number. 40-150 Date of Inspection 5-28-2001
5. Are there anv immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any strictures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste A PpUcation
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 Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed soybeans & wheat
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
® 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
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
® 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, fr-eeboard 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
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
13 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 requirements.
* Soils report dated 4-9-01 with pH, copper and zinc limits within acceptable range.
* Waste analysis dated 6-8-01 at 3.6 lbs/1000 gallons. Previous report dated 3-27-01 at 3.8 lbs/1000 gallons.
Waste applications made after 8-" 1 will have to be balanced with next waste sample report. Need to recalculate pulls 20, 22 and 24.
April overage on small grain transferred to Coastal Bermuda which is acceptable-
* Started applying waste to Coastal Bermuda this week.
* Waste plan dated 11-24-00 with an overall PAN deficit of 425 lbs.
(continued next page)
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Insaector Signature: Date:

051"01 Continued
Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection 8-28-200I
Odor Bsues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Lagoon level records complete. Lagoon at 48" on 5-26-01. On 8-25-01 at 26".
Planning to spray for weeds in pasture next week.
❑ Yes ❑ No
Cl Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes OR No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J

of Visit (?'Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (D toutine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 3-7 [ Time: 1
p �Sv
r Not Operational O Below Threshold
dPermitted © Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.......... ...............
Farm Name: .....SL........... .r G a r 111.................................................... County_: .19 ✓cGi1 ��� ................................................. :....
Owner Name:m �� �--. .� t$ �i- Phone No: �� 4 L l 2—
............................................ .. ........... ......................................_.........................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title Phone No:
Mailing Address:..... ...b..2:........ a............................... -.,.�.. I. ......
.............N.....................
Onsite Representative: ........ GhLIntegrator:.....................................�.........5.....l................_..... .....................................
Certified Operator ....... L F�? -Y.. .....f ...........� .. ..i —'� ..... Operator Certification Number:.......).5 3
........................... .......................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 1 ii Longitude 0 4 .4
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer JE1 Dairy
['Feeder to Finish -1,3 1 ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
�.
Number=of Lagoons . ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holdtng Ponds /Solid Traps; [ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ff To
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? El Yes ErNo
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? ri 10V
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systern? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes B No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [&IVo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 9/No
01/01/01 Continued

[Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 15Q. Date. ofVisit: 3-7-200I Time: 1140
0 Not O rational 0 Below Threshold
E Permitted © Certified ® Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Sam . ' Fi�cl.. _ .. , . _ County: Grune--------- — — - . illt'ARO ..._
Owner Name: Phone No: 25.2. 741i-21U.hffLc ... _ _ .
Facilitv Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 7.82.Ltt19�1 'AeI RQ t�... AY.delX..Ulu.............................................................. 28.5.0 .............
Onsite Representative: ... Integrator: mrghy„ y„ �__.......__..__.
pLLC�►,�kSl�i�S......................................................................... .........
Certified Operator:C11al;itt......_............ .............. Stq&S..... ................... Operator Certification Number:1$5.j .,
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene Count`. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4
miles from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • �• ��� Longitude 77 • 29 6 S7
Design Current
Swine Canaritv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
IN Feeder to Finish
1 7344_j
7344
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Populationp
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
JEJ Non -Layer JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps (❑ No Liquid Waste Management System_^tr;F.r'ri
Dischar es & Stream Impacts
I. 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? n/a
d. Docc discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DIAIQ) ❑ 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 ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifie................................... _..................................... ......... .......................... .................................... ............... ..................... ....................... ............
`reboard (inches): 37"
5100 Continued an back

Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection 3-7-21101 Printed on: 4/3/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6- Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed Soybean & Wheat
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?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Rewired 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?
Oe/ WUP, checklists, design, maps. etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 NO-Violations:or deficiencies -were :noted iiiiriik - -this: Visit.- :You:vvill ireee ve-iw-ftirthei-
. -. - corresiDondence. aboui this.visit. -. • . • -.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
* Records available for review .�
* Waste Utilization Plan has been revised to meet wetted acres.
* Certification on site.
* Waste analysis: 2-1-01= 3.4 lbs
* Awaiting soil analysis for year 2000 from the NCDA lab.
* Irrigation records are complete and balanced out.
* Freeboard levels are recorded weekly as permit requires.
* Crop yields are recorded annually. CONT. PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lyn B. Hardison n
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ;�r ` -
1 ,� •� f ,:fir-' Date: r i'-; 5/00

FaSlity Number. 48—M Date of Inspection 3-7-7.(1p1 Printed on: 413/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27_ Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, rnissing 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
Pasture is in good shape. Vegetation is well established.
Vegetation on dike wall is well established. The newly seeded areas on the dike wail are well established..
Wheat crop is well established.
* If you have any questions, contact are or Daphne @ 252-946-6481, ext 318 or ext. 321.**
J
5100

O�O� w A rF9PG
o -c
To: Producers
From: Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Date: May 21, 2001
Subject: Animal Compliance Routine Inspection
Year 2001
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Enclosed please find a copy or copies of the Compliance Site Inspection(s) (as viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the
referenced facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and
keep with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the general
permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p The maximum waste level in iagoons/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.
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 Nitrasen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff durine anv Liven application.
tp 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.
ip It is suaaested. not required, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three years of.crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
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 your Technical
Specialist or me at 252-946-6481, ext. 318.
Cc: _WMO
LBH Files (inspection form only)
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NG 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-945-9215 (Fax)

Q D�vrs�on of Water (uzlih
-_NDrvrsron of Soil -and Water Conservation
Other
a�
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O+ Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Hate of ViAf: 9/14/21100 Time: 1Q55 Printed on: 3/6/2001
40
roNot Operational Q Below T'hre.4hold
I Permitted 0! Certified M Conditionally Certified R Registered Date Last Operated or Above T'hresltald: ....................
Farm ;Vance: SAndly.Rudpe.Farm...................... County: Greene .............................................. WARO.......
Owner Nslrte: Cbatrs.L......_.._.._...._-........ ,1QI e�.�Ir........................................ P[tOne ti'[�: hS- ......................
Faeili€v Contact: .................................................................... ...... Tale Phone No ...........
Mailing Adtlresti: Rk..L.BRI.154....................................................... ............. Ayden..PLC.............................................................. 2351.3 .............
Onsite Representative: Chuck.S191m .............................................................................. lrstegru#ar: + I1rA11J.8jjdly..F'.A.l=.....................................
Certified Operator.- Chaflea.L. ............................ SIRIM&......................... ..................... Operat(rr Certification Numher- .18.SU.............................
Location of Farm:
€Farm is located off NCSR 1337 in Greene Countv. Farm entrance is on the eastern side of NCSR 1337 approximately 0.4 miles i i'
F i --
from the intersection of NCSR 1337 and NC Highway 903. i
® Swingy ❑ Pouitry ❑ Cattle ❑gorse I �ii.i#ode, ; 35 ° ; 28 I: '•.':, 233 Umgitud 77 ° F 29 5 u
Design — Current .
_ g ._ -- - -.Design= -Current-- - -- - - -Design— =- urgent-_-
Swine Ca ac' P, opulation - Pouttry Ca ac' =Po ufatic►n. Cattle ri_ Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
7344 6844
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
3
U Farrow to Finish•
Gilts
u Boars
❑ Layer I JEI Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
ILI Other-
- _=--Total'Design'capacity- 7,344
�Total'SSLW 991,440
Number of. - 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 5prav Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps- _ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dkehar+fyv% A Str! am m,3a0i
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? E] Yes No
a!_ ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
❑ Yes ❑ No
I:. if `t se!' ...� ._.::1-a= _ t .;.t ;k . _ .:1_ tiir4;r �{ ��� Ct..i�`7 fi! . :.. �;£- 7lCllfll ❑ Yes ❑ No
if .:: ub ;tf 1 n`ha! ::; ih-e ..41f ..
71�-_ a__..�. ___._ �. �_��_ _ �f�r_ ❑ 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 Z No
W;�� !e Celledlen &-- Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
sir:rcture I Structure 2 Stnichsiv = RtruQirrrti 4 strircttrre 3 Sir;:durn 6
lile=.it iit--r:
1'rceboard (inchCS):...............A5................

5100
Facility Number: 40-150 Date ;f inx ,ect" .^. 9/I412000 *�
I ['!ltC41 4fid:
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?
w a3 ! s.:
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
I I - Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Continued on back
3/6/2001
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
0 No
12. Crop type Wheat Soybeans Coastal Bermuda (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 0 No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
l5. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Reevrds & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25- Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
. N6 violations;or:defidI.encies.were.noted;during this-viI.siI.t:: Y6' wiD:reeeive'no'fu1.rther:-
. - .correspondence about this.visit. .... ... • • • - • • • • ... • . - • • .
❑ Yes ❑ No
(:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 154 No
❑ Yes E9 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
Comments (refer t6 question -#).=EX -OW any YES answers and/or -any -recommendations or, any other comments.
:Use drawin s;of.-fackt _to better -ex l4 situations: use:additional; a es as=necessa' -- — — _
* Last waste analysis dated August 25, 2000 at 2.2 Ibs/1000 gallons. !
* Last soils report dated May 26, 1999 with 1 to 1.3 tonstacre time needed - time was applied. ^1
•* MR2 record complete.
* Lagoon level records contained within MIFF reports.
,* Need to have technical specialist re-examine RYE and RYE coefficients for paxville soil related to corn, soybeans & wheat.
* Field portion of review completed on September 15, 2000.
* Coastal Bermuda field sprayed for weeds mid -July.
Reviewer/inspector Name

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5/00
Facilitv Number: 40-150 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 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 properly)
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.) E; Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? El Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? 0- Yes J No
Additional Comments and/or -Drawings:
s
v

t0 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
(Reason for Visit © Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 40 150 Date of Visit SI17/2llOQ Printed on: 5/19/2000
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............
Farm Name: S.trody.R1dgc.Earm...................................................... County: G.reem............................................... WARi?.......
Owner Name: CjhpTk,$.,L............................ XR itrs.>Xl.......... •.. Phone No: 25.:245-3.61�4...........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: .1. Q>K7.......................................................................................... Udca..NC ............................................................. 285n .............
Onsite Representative: CbLtLck .$.j9j 5............................................................................. Integrator: i4l rphy..F.glt[l7lly..FaxrAa.....................................
Certified Opera tor:.h UjrjCs.I.............................&.Q.kin ............................................... Operator Certification Number: j.$5.13.............................
Location of Farm: _
Farm ie InratPfl MY NCCR 1'1137 in CrPPnP C'nnnty_ Farm PntrnnrP is nn the enctPrn CidiP of NC`C12 1317 annrnyimntP1v tl_d i
® Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 ° 28 G 23 Longitude 77 • 29 ' 57
Design Current
Swine Conscity Ponolation
❑ Wean to Feeder
0 Feeder to Finish
7344
7344
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry CaDacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons I0 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JE1 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 IN 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
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .................................... .................................... ................................... .................................... .............................
Freeboard (inches): 38
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6

Continued on back
If lFacility Number: 40-150 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,
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
12. Crop type Wheat, Soybeans Coastal Bermuda (pasture)
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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 ReviewerlInspector 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 A WMP?
0. �110 •violatioiis:oc deficiencies•wete _noted :during• this wi5it. ' You: Wi11'reeeive no farther : • _
.. - corresuondence 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 #): 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 - 1.7 lbs./1000 gals.
5/11 /00 - 2.6 Ibs./1000 gals.
Plant analysis 4/18/00 indicates adequate nutrient applications on receiving crops.
Irrigation records complete with nitrogen balance.
Need freeboard sheet!
Reviewer/Inspector Name
,Daphne B. Cullom Entered by Ann Tyndall

Reviewer/Iaspector Signature: Date:
r Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection 5/17/2000 Printed on: 5/19/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/or Drawings:

4D Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation O Other
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 4li ISE}
® Permitted [3 Certified ® Conditionally Certified E3 Registered
Date of Visit 2-&2000 Printed on: 3/31/2000
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: S.0ady.Ridge—Farm...................................................................................... County:(;XCCjjC .............................................. WARO.......
OwnerName: Cltarlgs..i.�.............................. Stokcs..Jr .................................................... Phone No: 252.7.46- G64.............._............................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rtj.fl.QX 35.9.......................................................................................... AYACU..AC'.............................................................. U513..............
Onsite Representative: lClTAN&.5.j9keS.............................................................................. Integrator: EY.ftllrpjjy.EAAgAly..k:I rM5.....................................
Certified Opera tor:.Cllliirjeij.J,,..............................SlAft ............................................... Operator Certification Number:j,$5.J3............................
.
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry []Cattle ❑ Hor Latitude 35 ° 281 F 23 a Longitude 77 ® 29 ° 57
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
7344
—7344
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Fsetd Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream I ml2acts
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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 25

Continued on back
Facility Number: 40-150 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, C] 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?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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?
❑- �Taw;oTatioos:or_defciencies•were:noted_d"uriing•th"' visit::Yoti Willreceive nb iurtheir
.. - 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 #): 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):
z
Reviewer/Inspector Name ',Da ne B. Cullom

13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
Q Other Agency - Operation Review
J* Routine Q Complaint O Follow-ups of inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number 40 150 Date of Inspection 10/28/99
Time of Inspection 10:30 AM 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted Q Certified ® Conditionally Certified Q Registered 113Not O erationa! Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: S.911dy..j3W9c.l ar M.......................................................... ............................ County: Gjr.egjmc .............................................. WARO .......
Owner Name: GhArIcs..1.+.............................. Slolm.Jr ................................................... Phone No: ZS2-T4fr 6!(x4...........................................................
FacilityContact:..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: ft.J.D.UX..3S.9............................. ...... pA3:dea.AC............................ .. 20.51,3 .............
.......................................................................................
Onsite Representative: C1AU.�Ii StgkeS................... ..... .... Integrator: jY Ur.P4..�apnikly..kar r1�S..................................................................... .... ..............
Certified Opera tor:Chmrjca.L............................ 5.tjaku ............................................... Operator Certification Number:j.&,513 .............................
Location of Farm:
ItlxJltr.Is.jQcatcsj.Ai�lGj.j7..1n..rcc�ac.QuattYx..j'>Itr.Ill.catx>1<ntwc.i.nil.tbl�.eaxtcrnl.si'dc..a1fSI.a7..�pRxaxinaatejy..Q,4........
�lAlcs..fxa»q.tfac.in.tc�sectiQ�n.at.NS�.Il.�d.�[G.Hi h»A,...................................................................................................................................
Latitude 35 ° 28 23 t. Longitude 77 ° 29 57
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
7344 7000 ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons �.J ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharacs & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ....3.2.....................................................................................................................................................................
........... .............................
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 12=199

i
Printed on 12120/99
r
Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection 10/28/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Beans Plan on wheat and rye
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• iolations:or di fcien66-*veee:noted:duriag•thN *Wt::You: Will:receive inb further
correspondence about this.visit.. • ..................... • ....... I .
® Yes ❑ No
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments ('refer to question;): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
w
efore Dennis - 24 inches
fter Dennis - 15 inches ------- Pumped some on pasture and beans while Dennis was off coast
efore Floyd - 20 inches
arm was totally flooded by Floyd.
umped down to 44 inches as water receded to relieve pressure per DWQ. SEE PAGE 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,Carl Dunn Entered by Ann Tyndall
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

• Printed on 12/20/99
Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection r 10/28/99
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? (Le. 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/orDrawings:
Waste analysis on 7/23199 = 4.3 lbs.; waste analysis on 8/12/99 = 2.1 lbs.
Planning to put out overseed and wheat.
Pumped on bermuda and beans after Dennis.
rops were destroyed by flood. Pasture will be overseeded when possible.
cur (4) of eleven (11) reels are still inoperable.
ecords partially destroyed.
J
Printed on 12/20/99

= 13 Division of Soil"and Water!
Division of Soil and Water
® Division of Water Quality -
© Other Agency Operation 3
nervation -Operation-Review
;ervation-- Compliance inspection
npliance n
10 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection_ Q Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection lo-ze—q.?
Time of Inspection 10:30 24 hr. (hh•mm)
0 Permitted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified [J Registered 1E3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Sa ^ �....... Rj..t:Y�................................................... County:...... .....-............................
........... --•
OwnerName........................CL1uC�......s > >.. Phone No:...............................................................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title: ......---............---.............................. . ........ Phone No:...................................................
FlailingAddress : ..................................................................................._..........................................................................
Onsite Representative: •••.•••••..• S Integrator: t�
Certified Operator: C ........... '4'. 's Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
r.............. ................. .... .......................... ......................................... ................................................................................................. ............ .....................................................
.� ,
Latitude �� �� Longitude
"Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity, Population- Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
-73 t• of
7000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
�Niuitnber 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 1!�No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made.? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 SlrUC[ure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
r5Q
Freeboard(inches): ........... ...........................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes t0 No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: - 15() Date of Inspection !O
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 10 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 fA No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 19 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes M No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes In No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes '8 No
12. Crop type 6 f 7Q--
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 6No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [2�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? 9Yes ❑ No
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?
-*Wafigtis ot, &flcienues v�ere noted• dl Whig this:visit; - Yotk will •receive iio further -
corres oridei ce: ahhuf this :visit: ':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :
❑ Yes 191 No
❑ Yes 8 No
f. Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes '® No
❑ Yes I, No
❑ Yes t9 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes q No
❑ Yes f g-No
-Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers" aid/or'any:recomrmendations orrany°bther comments.
Use' drawings of facility to betterrvexplain situations: (use additional, pages as necessary)
-
" q a�.'S S'' .,.t, cam„ oC a s ►.
a •
v lip ¢ FY -F 2-d
VA
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3123/99

Facility Number: LJJ — Bate of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
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
Additional Comments an or ra*nngs:` - — - - - - -
VA�� Acpr
C?Ve-S:e�a-
—'% "—t
-AL
rE.,,.-5
C r„�!S L✓S'z/� ��4.�i� �
t7y F fa�4 � f i��+.tr-� k 1 i � � O`s2�S.�e �e� L..t2� p� Ss�a� ,
15
3/23/99

t p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
p Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
0 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
p xoutme 0 uompiaint 0 rouow-up of Dwtj inspection p rouow-up of Dawt_: review D Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 8:45 124 br. (hh:mm)
Permitted p Certified N Conditionally Certified 0 Registered of perattana Date Last Operated: ...........................
Farm Name: Sandy..Ridge.Earm....................................................................................... County: Greene WARO
Owner Name: gl lmL Phane No:2.5
4..........................................................
FacilityContact: ...............................................................................Title:.................................... ....... Phone No:
MailingAddress: 8t.1.A.9X.35,9 .......................................................................................... MduX.AC............................................................... 7$ 1 .............
Onsite Representative: Na.aute.on.site............................................................................ Integrator: Murphy.Faunil<j..Farms..................---.................
Certified Operator: C(Ig1Cji•Se1............................. SkAO ............................................... Operator Certification Number:.18.51J .............................
Location of Farm:
#
frQna.lUlu.iu�t�r� ltiA.n.af.�Y ) .13 7.altd. LG. �ray.9Q................................................................................................................................................ —
Latitude ©•®' ©u Longitude ©a ®C ©�
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to
in-s
7344
p Parrow to
Wean
p Farrow to
Feeder
p Farrow to
Finis
p Gilts
p Boars.
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Uyer 113 Dairy
Non -Layer 1 1(3 on- airy
p Other
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons 1 1p auosurtace crams rresent IID Lagoon Area I0 apray rietu Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps F13—N—oTiquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 Yes p No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon 0 Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? 0 Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:.........................................................................
Freeboard (inches): ..............42::
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
0 Yes
p No
0 Yes
0 No
p Yes
0 No
p Yes
[3 No
Structure 6
..............................
0 Yes
p No
Continued
on back

Facility Nu ber: 40_150 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
❑ No
p Yes
p Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
p No
❑ Yes
i] No
p Yes
p No
p Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? p 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
0 :.No' V'161a'titins or.deficiencies were: noted, dying Phis:v'isit.- .You:will, receive: noInither.
cOris*)Adence about this: visit:
7Use
ents (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
❑ Yes p No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes p No
p Yes ❑ No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes p No
❑ Yes p No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes p No
❑ Yes p No
❑ Yes p No
,essment: Structure is adequate. May operate at normal levels. Flood waters surrounded this facility a second time on
29, 1999 due to heavy rainfall events, however the floodwaters did not enter the lagoon. Only access to the farm was by
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Daphne B. Cullom Carl Dunn i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,� Date:

EMERGENCY ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST
Drafted September 24, 1999
Facility # D - f 5O On -site Representative: Oo or,-R-avi 5;tiz Contact#
Date: ,ip- S - c,_Ul Inspector/Reviewer: i)- Orr . 0-� ^uArN
Time: �'.u� :a� DLQ/Dam Safety Rep.: tAA T
Waste Structures:
ti.
y,x
1. Structure Integrity (circle one):
Immediate Threat Potential Threat Adequate Other
Comments(does structure need repair/extent of damage, etc.
2. Allowable maximum lagoon level (circle):
Structure failed and is inoperable .
Immediate Threat - empty immediately
Immediate/Potential - maximum operating level
(inches from top of dike - must be initialed by DLQ/Dam Safety rep.)
Adequate - may operate at normal levels
3. Storm impact to lagoon (circle applicable category):
ft
Structure inundated
(Information related to length of time submerged, etc)
lood waters saturated outside wall
Estimated distance in inches (ie/36 inches from top):
Structure topped over
�e
(was top of dike cut, etc.)
Flood water o0ofrTA4pad from ��Q(name of creek, river, etc.)
Circle Basin: Tar White Oak Roanoke Chowan
Neuse
4. Date and explanation of remedial action taken after storm:

Other Parts of Waste Management System:
Comments (lift station, collection boxes, destroyed houses, etc.)
t
. Wast6 Application System:
1. Irrigation/appl,ication system - comments, assistance needed, etc.:
2. System is (circle): Inoperableldestroyed Operable but limited Operable
3. For inoperable systems (circle):
Lost supply lines Lost hardware (reels, pivots, etc.) Lost pump No power sources
Other:
4. What is needed to repair system and length of time needed to bring back on-line?
5. Would a generator fix situation?
6. Is pump & haul equipment available?
Land Application Sites:
1. Is field(s) currently flooded and if yes, what percentage of field(s) flooded? �a bsD
2. Fields are saturated but not ponded -Ari 1_1� avi)_
3. Are receiving crops available? Yes No
If answered no, estimated time before next crop planted
4. Fields adequate to receive waste
5. Comments - remedial action taken after storm which may have affected spray fields:
6. Are alternative sites or third party land immediately available?

Record Keeping:
1. Records were destroyed and in need of reconstruction
2. Records partially complete
3. Records available and complete
4. Date and PAN of last waste analysis
Structure 1: 2: 3: 4: 5:
5. Last lagoon level readings: 1 2 3 4 5 Rainfall Received
„F
Just prior to August 1:
Just prior to August 29:
Just prior to Sept. 15
Immediately after 9/15
Current level'
6. Documented volumes pumped from waste structure since Hurricane Floyd:
7. Current animal populations:
Mortality Losses:
1. Number of animals lost:
2. Disposal method used:
3. Does facility lack a means of disposal?
Other comme
nts; unanswered questions, etc.:
us `t; A.'vim
rl r,, - - D . ,} - _ Of). _ . _ --A-„ TT
aqm,n. 5 -4; vv� .
*:tJse back of sheet for additional comments, sketches, etc.
III

■ Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
13 Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
j] Other Agency - Operation Review
0 Routine 0 Com laint 0 Follow-up of DW inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 40 150 Date of Inspection I
6/7/99
Time of Inspection 800 24 hr. (bh:mm)
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: SaIjdy.Ridge.Faumi....................... ............... County: Gx ....................................................................... Y�'t iti.......
................................................
Owner Name: Ch0.rlt~5.L.............................. SLRtifrS.d1C.................................................... Phone No: Z52:Z9(k-3.61i4...
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:.................. Phone No:
MailingAddress: Rt.1.13tl&.3§2.......................................................................................... AyAca-M ............................................................. 2.&S.0 ..............
Onsite Representative:.CtLtL k.SX9.li$Sa.B1C.1a1I1..T.Hal e-a............................................... Integrator: jy, UrPbly..l::AILI1jly..Fax ma........................
Certified Operator:.Charl S.L............................ S-takta ............................................... Operator Certification Number:a.$513.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 • 28 23 Longitude 77 • 29 57
Swine
Design
Current
Design Current
Capacity
Population
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
7344
2800
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
IN Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons l ❑ 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 ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field. ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?- ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: #1
Freeboard(inches) 3s�........................................................................................................................
..........................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed an 5I1SM00

Printed on 511612000
Facility Number: 40-150' Date of Inspection 6/7/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ® PAN
® Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ 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
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) ❑ 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
0. N6,VioTations;o"r d6h0encies•were;notedAarft this visit. ;Yon_will;receive no further ;
corresp ondence about this.visit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
ents (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
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 A6
" Given Integrator Registration card
7. Has seeded walls with Common Bermuda
11. Over applications occurred on field 5 (rye PAN rate = 50lbs/acre) with over applications at 27.33 lbs; on soybeans (soybean
PAN rate = 90 lbs/acre) with over application at 21.5 lbs on field 7, and 21.5 lbs. on field 8. Minor over applications (<10 lbs) for
wheat crops. Inconsistent waste analysis results noted with 5-11-98 at 3.5 lbs/1000 gal; 10-15-98 at 1.9; 2-22-99 at 1.8; and 4-29-9
at 3.1. Mr. Stokes has anew revised plan which changes PAN rates for small grain, soybeans, wheat and corn. Once wettable acres
are determined, plan will need to be amended to a wettable acre basis, and small grain overseed PAN rate needs to be adjusted to 75
Reviewer/Inspector Name :pat Hooper 252/946-6481
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Printed on 5/9612000
Facility Number: 40-150 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/orDrawings:
14c. Unable to determine total acreage for Coastal Bermuda field and need to measure fields 5 & 6. Operation pended for addition
information. Waste plan will need to be amended.
15. Plans to spray Coastal Bermuda next week for weed control
6. Extenders installed however had to cut off 5 of 12 due to clogging problems
32. Did not implement RMPs due to possible malfunction problems
* Waste analysis dated 4/29/99 at 3.1 Ibs/1000 gal.
* Soils report dated 5/26/99 - will lime in the fall (1 ton)
* Keeping weekly lagoon level records as required by General Permit
Printed on 5/1612000

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
D Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
N Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
0 Other Agency - Operation Review
0 Routine O Com laint IP Follow-up of DW2 inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number 40 1S0 Date of Inspection 2-18-99
Time of Inspection 9:45 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted © Certified ® Conditionally Certified 13 Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: 5.8IXft.Rll 9e.,k'13rm....................................................... ............................... County: CjXCCAC .............................................. W.RO?.......
OwnerName: ikljtL0.1a.............................. 1QlCI;S.jr.................................................... Phone No: 7.4�-3..........................................................._..._....
Facility Contact: ......... Title: Phone No:
..................................................................... ...................................................
MailingAddress: lit.JJG.o.35-9......................................................................................... Aydvi.AC .............................................................. Wn.............
Onsite Representative: ............................................................................. Integrator: rAUrV4..F.jjjM113'-.Fa.1jAs........................
.............
Certified Operator:.Charlca.L. ............................$4.&M ............................................... Operator Certification NumbeT:185,13 .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 • 28 4 23 Longitude 77 • 29 4 S7
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity population Poultry Capacity Population_
❑ Layer
7344 ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
[I Farrow to Finish
[I Gilts
[I Boars
Design Current
Cattle Ca aci Po ulation
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 7,344
Total SSLW 991,440
Number of Lagoons I� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present © Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharp_es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the 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 [I 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? [I Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? El Spillway [I Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: ...................
Freeboard(inches):....................................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed nn 5I1612000

Printed on 511612000
Facility Number: 40-150 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes []No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [:]No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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 •*fiD atiotis: o'r defteiencieg •were :noted :d'uring thk wisit:: Y6u; will :receive p6 further
correspondence about this •visit. . . . . . . . . - • . . . . . . . . . . . • . • . • •
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
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):
This site visit was done at the request of Mr. Stokes. We discussed the Notice of Deficiency letters that he had received for
overapplication & inadequate freeboard at several of his farms. Mr. Stokes is concerned about these letters and will be sending a
letter to the Director of DWQ. Mr. Stokes also had questions about the wettable acre requirements & the new odor regulations.
qV
Reviewer/Inspector Name Daphne B. Cullom Cari Dunn
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

❑ tvision of Soil and Water Conservation [3Outer Agency
Division of Water Quality
iA°Routine O Comblaint O Follow-un of DNVO inspection 0 Follow-ut) of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Q Q _
t# -fit — Ct S
13 Registered Certified © Applied for Permit 1Permitted
Farm Name:.......`....��4!.....................
{� Owner Name ...... �,...,�A. 1�i 4,5................
Facility Contact:
Title:..
Date of inspection 5 _2 a
Time of Inspection 0 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ...................
County:.... ..........................
........ Phone No: ..... .q...� r.......�P�P....................
Phone No:
Mailing Address: ...... .:....?i.......r�................................................. .... NC'................................ a,.?�.
�........... .,��...`` __(� ..-4..............
Onsite Representative:..... ..................c,_ ... ......... Integrator:..
Certified Operator;/} ..... -...... .............................. Operator Certification �JNumber:__.A`J!��k.a.............
Location of Farm:
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................. r
Latitude ®• 4 ®44 Longitude . ' ®6 " .
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, notity DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in ;al/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes
6;K0
❑ Yes
12
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Cl Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
(No
❑ Yes
Ei;r<o
❑ Yes
[;Vo
❑ Yes
RTo
❑ Yes
[g No
Continued on back

Facility Number: t4 f) — jGJD�
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (La2oons.Iloldine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
................................................................................................................................
Freeboard 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'?
Structure 5
❑ Yes P<0
❑ Yes 2<0
Structure 6
....................................
❑ Yes \`o
❑ Yes
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes L1d10
(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 enter' g waters of the State, �... n{ottifyDWQ)
15. Crop type ...........S�JM�+.1 .... ��.................1.�_ .... .......... I ......
.......�.....U�.L. ....
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW,MP)?
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?
ForCertifiedor Permitted Facilities_0RI
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0 No.violations or deficiencies were noted during this.visit.- You.will receive no further
correspondence about this:
visit
❑ Yes ,'o
❑ Yes 521No
❑ Yes �'�o
❑ Yes EKO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,//0
El Yes R 0
❑ Yes `o
❑ Yes < o
❑ Yes I3Stvo
❑ Yes 2No
❑ Yes L�TIo
Comments'(refer`to question #): Explain any Y"ES answers and/or any recommendations or any other coxdtnnents.�
Use drawings of facility to` be'tter explain situations. (use additional. pages -as necessary) e
.�
stlzi t,R PtcevN
Y - • P�«.v` _
S it
eS
boll is i-alwlGl
7/25/97
IMF
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Facility Number 150
Date of Inspection FC —I 1T I
Time of lruspection. 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Registered M'Certified [3 Applied for Permit M-Pie'rmitted 113 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Countv:. ......... ......................... .......................
Farm Name: ........ . ...... ............................................
Phone No . ...... L
..........
Owner Name:......... . . ... ........ ..........
................................ ...................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title: ................................................................ Phone No . ...................................................
I -
Mailing Address . ..................................................... A+AA-
. .......... ............... ..
. . . . .. ..... 11 ..... .......................
Onsite Representative.-.AU.A196 ....... 6.16.6,S ............. I ......... ­........ ........ Integrator: ...... ir
Certified Operator; ...... Ilk ....c K.......... Operator Certification Number ....... LZ .............
I
Location of Farm:
...........
Latitude r IfF.] Longitude
8wimle
Current
Population
D an to Feeder
[TFeeder to Finish
E] Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
0 Farrow to Finish
0 Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? El Yes M40
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El Yes GKO
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon [] Spray Field 00ther
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes.. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past,discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
[:]Yes [I No
[:1 Yes [I No
El Yes El No
El Yes Eplo
El Yes BPN-'o
0 Yes Nvlo
0 Yes
0 Yes ; 0
0-
Continued on back

Facility Number: 4 — f
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
Structures (Lagoons, Hold ing Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
&K'O
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure. 5
Structure
6
Identifier:
y1 �i
Freeboard (ft):..................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
NSNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
R o
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
R<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
�io
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
G Yes
❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoffenteringwaters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type Ona;si.�k ` K.I..: �!K. ICXa.X t...........................
... .... ......................... ,c' ........... ..............................
....................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
UKO
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
(Ko
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
2 o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
ElYes
B No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
__�K_O
i3No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
For
Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
M No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
Lido
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
Rf o
0 No.violations-or deficiencies4e'reno' edduring'this;visit.-Youwvillrecei'venofurther"'-
etirrespundence about this'visit:
W - u p vi 6
ZL o� [; �`a� ova
lc�f -�-t ss u � v�i�
4
�p (t> t b 0-"-4 S `� , C-54- t"�S c5 1�a,c.-k_u b �_ pv t l 0 ✓l.
1 E� vi O � tv � a C le 4 �, LK
7/25197
��-Q.SS
_
I Reviewer/Inspector Name
[Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: C — t �

Cz %` _ r`':i;k^ ._t ='-'•: ' '»}�� '. r'' ';<;: _ - ;-;ikrz ;ju is
' -+*e4' rpp.r:a'
. `.--�• -ma's 1 Z��A7li�•on
Mri
a:. at--� :;=,x� .a. ' R- �T {'�: yi •.`.T, z 7 - . � r �}nti- z:S�
,. .:.(-ii�c a.r^=X �!G'•yt. T e L!7.'��. vk ::77°. /'r �� ,5......-S:'.�.ir 3a i:k`_.�.•c1.�77: �'Y.ri`y :.. i
7b)'(irowo lyXiir�tJii MO 1•+�J fit;�tiijf ttf 1)C ' {'`Akiht ti y �i7 [} lire=`K%�i�s 'w:s : e;:}rs ,.�
-: -,y Y"-.+��i, ��T �_¢�1,�ta.sti •:-.^,-n:. - ..ta.sd�+4. �- j�. �� r+.�.4��-171':: 5�'��E:���".: `-�^,' �y/1��7 � �3� �j - k- �.i,.'� ��'�., -
1'EilCilil; t�tflfF�fi'C� �•�fl 3i:r .-�.-��M:if s�- •'�,'`� fi^tii. 't�z:?e3- ilri'�.•Y'zt t., e�� - aa� �•-
. cei: x er a '_. aM •: •.:�ef0ssi : I �:;: IA �.`,1:i ; , �_ scti .413� 7' 7+4 bi:_�:i11m3 s:
" i - T
T
+ks s+I;l: T-3E.f i E3] '3fiE:SE" >I3: Ll_°
1 Sii `fR! K'=t`..Cs
i i :
r �nF'yrydG �t n.= <U w wFr�; /YaS� err �. `Tstac`.".-�...• ..t„ - :� a 5[_". -.:7 fir= -
"'t• 7�-•
- -.�.�` _ .s$�.Y,Mi '"'�C µ"7eF�1 t� � r •-kr'ar"a� .. 'n _ -..i �#�& s. S.T_ i'Js�t, e'i#es ri•`L'aw -+V�i-S .MC I�yP.7yirt:bl F�4 'rva+�ii �:t.: ci y�,•I•.. a.t.-�.f 3Y,•-,�.a^ b..-.
NAL
Af
,ztine: Name.Sitwtl�eai.TrJ:�:ie N:,
' - _ � - sue:_.. ��r`X'f .... s�� i�, a.aa....Gri o'K • a rr.k.wF --' .... .�a�t- `nr.. ti.- s '_ s-;
MIaJI,�I d�Jr�, , $L1�Z$52 r,�. - v:� _, .4 r ;s��ve�er NC .:-r ,� •-
OnsheRe' .exY3Y=atti'e= l .Jr. r R,i ,te r.t(�r:
Cer.-Med OptraE;rY: - stdw,; „ - --. 3£Y.i'id Ccez—Ofic;i ou Nurn ei-- IMM
Lgliationrbf,Farm. -
Lath Ut12
113
Tr'pe ofOperatiiin and Design Capackv
Swine Number
1,] Wean to Feeder ❑ Fa:
Feeder to Finish 7344
Fzu�=- to Feeder
Poultry Number Cattle Number
❑ Layer Q Non-11 JE1 Dairy
❑ Other Type of Livestock
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds 1 10 Subsurface Drains Present
❑ La oon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Cenenil
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancefimprovement?
... Yes
3 j No
2. Is any discharge observed firm any part of the operation?
..: Yes
No
a. if disctaroc is nbetVe(L ova the Conveyanze Man-made'
Yes
X No
h. It'dkt:.Jlar."t is did ii I,:201 Surl'ati. �';ii r' 1TCt►s. iiotift D%VQ)
... Yes
X No
C.• if'di�1arge is aitiwn c(1. ❑-hat i= [be estiivated fl:)V.F in Qa11131ill"
Not Applicable
d. Dncl —; di.:t:llar�g:: b}pa- a JaL,-tion syston? lTl'�'c-4. uoiiry M-7Q)
Yes
No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
s Yes
S( No
4. Were them any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
-..Yes
No

Dc&*Rny part of waste DBnagCWA61 systems (Odir OAIoIdn Is '="qmc
-4-0
-�A
7
.414 Iwit_,,
h ay
IS not M compliance n M ff
*y fail. 16_�
responsible if 'iiftci)/1/97)
�-T Did the- a 6iiiifiid t prespw invec-on
rV, ­k-
-A
8 -Ari hdii mioons6i k&ige pbids on iftwA Fdod to be cloica?4 N
,9.
.,t -a!
GA
3
_40. is Seepage observed 6fromany of the struc
RN -
�=
-.ii. is c:ro. sto--n,, or my threats to 'In �f ed?,.j_�:
y of the jjj�.
4.
A."
12. Do any of the str ad�tares need
(Ir any of questions 9-12 was answered yet, and the srtnaiioa poses: in
Immediate public health or environmental thirst,thirst,notify' DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping' levels?
Waste A pplicAlion
14. Is them physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State,' notify DWII:D
15. Crop type COASW BJWMIIdA_CnZ _- _5MAlIfAAiU.(n6LHUI9y. MaL
16, Do the . active crops differ with thosi designated in the Aninial Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility hivi a -lack of adequate: acreage foiland application?
18. Does.thc cover crop need improvement?
19. Is them a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fag to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need iniprovement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by Sam agency?
24. Did ReviewerAnsp6clor fail to discuss revicw/hispection with owner or operator in charge?
Yes
No �i­
*C 0n back
-yes
"jt Nor
YNo"'
E... Yes
Nd.:
Fi
Yes No
Yes Y No
.*-X-Yes No
.;`X.Yes :.-:-No
Yes No
Yes X No
I Yes No
Yes x No
1 :Yes X No
:Yes X No
?X Yes No
:Yes No
:Yes )(No,
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. 40-150
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations.' (use additional pages as necessary):
No subsurface drains present according to Mr. Stokes"
11. Flush pipes need to be extended fiw&er out into lagoon pool area. Oumfly pipes are discharging onto inner dike wall causing
erosion ofthe structure. Contact yout Technical Specialist for specific instructions for repairing these areas. Originally these pipes;
extended into lagoon pool area via flex piping which was later disconnected due to repeated clogging problems.
12. Maitain vegetation along dike walls and between houses. Remove fallen tree from dike wall (storm damage from Hurricane Fran).
Situation did not pose an immediate threat to public health or the environment
15. Corn is also grown on a portion of the spray irrigation acreage.
22. Need to update Waste Utilization Plan (WW) 'to show actual yields. Currently irrigating based on these values as opposed to the
realistic yields shown in the WUP. Contact your Tachaical Specialist for this revision.

I
�iv