720009_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

-I � G P
Irmo i"
5 - -
N
!mph
� t
u
T
�Omq A.M. jamo Age
QMZb
I N u
& Pt
71 T I

+ State of ,North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Divisionlof Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Perquima6s McDevitt,Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
January 21, 1999
Mr. Billy Williams
Billy Williams Farm
Route 1, Box 614
Tyner, NC 27980
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Billy Williams Farm
Facility No. 72-9
Perquimans County
Dear Mr. Williams:
On June 9, 1998,1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection at the Billy Williams
Farms in Perquimans County. I was unable to contact anyone prior to the inspection over -the
telephone or upon the day of the inspection; therefore I was unable to review the necessary
records. A copy of the inspection report is attached for your review.
In general, this inspection 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. The following deficiencies were observed during the inspection
♦ The Division's records indicate that your farm has a Certified Waste Plan. Upon being
certified, you were required to install a gauged marker in the lagoon. At the time of the
inspection, I was unable to determine if a marker had been installed. However it was
noted that the freeboard of the lagoon was approximately 5 feet. If a marker has not
been installed, contact your Technical Specialist for assistance.
♦ Without reviewing your waste plan, I assumed that corn is the designated crop in your
plan.
♦ The vegetation on the dike wall is lacking (many bare spots). It is suggested to address
these areas and work toward a good vegetative cover on the walls.
♦ There were no animals' onsite and during past conversations the option to not produce
animals has been a concern. Please note that if a farm goes for four years without
animals, the farm will be considered abandon and will be subject to the present day
regulations.

Cont. Page Two
Billy Williams Farm
Facility No. 72-9
January 21, 1999
♦ If you choose to never grow animals again, it is suggested to fill out the enclosed form
"request for removal" and submit to Raleigh. Upon receive and conformation, your
farm will be removed from the active farm database, meaning you will not be subject to
routine inspections. However, you will still be responsible for properly maintaining the
wastewater, in the lagoon. Contact your Technical Specialist for guidance.
It is very important as the owner and the Operator in Charge that you resolve these
aforementioned deficiencies and any other problems that may arise, as soon as possible_ For
additional assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist. Nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and liability of any violations that have
resulted or may result from these deficiencies. Failure to comply with your Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and General Permit could result in civil penalty assessment and/or
revocation of your General Permit.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection. Should you have further
questions or comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call at [phone], ext.
318.
Sincerely,
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
cc: Perquimans County SWCD Office
WaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, NG 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled 110% post -consumer paper

10 KOutlne p complaint p #loilow-up of UwQ inspection p hollow -up of mwC review p Vtner
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
I
p Registered E Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 113 Not peMI"o—na Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: BiUy.WiWa=.F:arm................................................................................... County: Perquimans WARO
OwnerName: Billy ............:........................... Williams .................................................... Phone No: 9.19=.416-7036 ...........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: Rt.l-M aL.614......................................................................................... TYaer..NG............................................................... 2794.4 ..............
Onsite Representative: no.inne......... .... ............................................................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:CarpalllU ............................. William& .......................... ................ Operator Certification Number: 1.7.751 .............................
Location of Farm: 4
Latitude ®• ©� ®� Longitude L 7• F--�° ®-
PciQn . • _ jM-n _ _ _. _, , m eslgn •- urren
p Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to tuts
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
Boars
Capacity *
rCapacityw; pP lation -.
Total DesigriFCapac>ity y770
Total SSLW103,950
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man -trade? p Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water" (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? n/a
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) p Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97 Continuer) on back

8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? p Yes ® No
Structures (Laaoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits —etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? p Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft)...............5_0............... ............ !....................... ................... .:.............. ..................................... .................................... ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? p Yes ® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity :of any of the structures observed? p Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? N Yes p No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes ❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .......Com.(S!Iage.&..Grain)........................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in'ihe Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes p No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? '
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Oniv
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?
9'.v_ d t ohs•ba' a 4ciQtttEes'Were-n4Ott hg tors visit: wf will •ire'et ive no rt ee •
orres�iruti�ence airotit �t�iis visit: .. :.' :..... . .
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
N Yes ❑ No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
p Yes p No
Go mntents'(refer toghestiun; E�tplainTany YESanswers and/orany recommettdations'or slay other coriiments. -
Use drawings of�facili#y to better ea lain situations, {use additional�pages as necessary):
o'one as•onsiteTdiiriiig�tlie ins ectionSeveial attemri pts were made to contact Mr. Williairisrandno'one '"'asTa "ailable:
1 L� f
ee
opg
rerOls�onsitd efreebis'aot�Qk
UPT
i rM
urm yr. ; ` ection it""was determmed�at the iLu , as;plenty of land ava 1e for alciaiton but yKne er-its in the N
ertified,plan � not;know: • -'�
i OUR.'
' t
12 e ve eta onron the ke tis olunteer s. ome bare spots d .
On•receIVE 'our general; erml ou` '11`be equue. o ecord weekly;free�boar�:-lt'is s!'ugesre totins all'a gauged marker with
ixlinc m ents atillustrates the. owe - int-o e� a all and the mmunumand aximtun ump ark 's>formrof
erill.allo .yo cord a oar more.a y. +
sugges edt eco rauifall. A s i
Reviewer/Inspector Name LynnTar""'tisonMEN
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1,1AA Date: �- Q

❑D
Routine O Complaint
inspection
W,
Other
Date of Inspection t - 2 -I
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ®24; hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours �--�
Farm Status:
❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
,
ERCertifled ❑ Permitted I or Inspection includes travel and rocessin
Jr Not Operational Date Last Operated:.... » �. 9.6_ .......... _....._ .»....... ....._.... _ E .�......».. _ ..
Farm Name: ._ .-LI' t A bohc% sy�t� 5 .» . _ . ....... ...._ .._ County:.!/r
Land Owner Name: B , ._,�%�.��i. .s ........_........._ Phone No:.»»l,.`-F?d3L I _.»..... ...... _..
Facility Conctact:..:L'L:. C &A-1S. ._ ...._ ... r Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address:...rzq2v......Ul. ... _.. _..».... __...r -/ �4r .. .� �. ...» ..�.�� .....
Onsite Representative:. .�....�!.� ...._ ... .....»» ... _.. �.. _ Integrator:. _.....»........»» . _ » ...... �...» ......_
Certified Operator: _ 1.;.N . S(!L .......... .....__.» ... Operator Certification Number: �. �..
Location of Farm:
�.....
.._w......
W...._ �..... a
LatitudeLongitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
y� �DIgn CurrentDe lgn Current DeSfgil' Curirent
xWlne a ? p x 4 POa1 E Catfles2 "
ulaHon . t?S' �rCa a" Po` elation �� _.. ��� Ca ace rPo ulihon:�
❑ Wean to Feeder . .
❑ Feeder to Finish Q Non -La ❑ Non Da
r: Farrow t0 WeanF� '-rs+ ,�".`� �: �.` '":%`a"_.-,5`°�3'-
43 Farrow to Feeder Total Design Capacity r
TI Farrow to Finish ;N u
M`
Other.
'��Total SSLWr �_
F ❑ Ocher''s3"� e� .N �
Number o€LagHold gP�nds �—� � "� ❑ Subsur€aee Drains Present � 3� �`
�° � -�, ��� } ' � Y$ s � � ` ❑ Ls oop Ares ? � S ra Field Area � • -�- $
Gucral
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/'improvement? ❑ Yes kNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RVo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) Yes [:]No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Pallo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes BrNo
t
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than Iagoonstholding ponds) require ❑ Yes eNo
maintenance/improvement? Continued on back
4/30/97
t

Facility Number:.--.-2-2 �... ..„
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?
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
1 goIfolding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes *No
❑ Yes Qj No
❑ Yes 4-No
❑ Yes JANo
Structure 5 Structure 6
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
Q9 No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
1p No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ER No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13, Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Yes
[$ No
Waste Application
14, Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of W/7MP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type 11. .w _ . ___ . _._ _ .... ........... ........ _ » ... _ ... _ .......
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
6(j No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
%No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
q No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Certifitd
❑ Yes
No
For Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
[j No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
w No
Commen6(refer'to question #) Explain ariy YES answers and/or any fecommendations or any other comments a
Use drawings:of facility to better explain situations: (use additional pages as necessary) ` zr
s,4s fo. reenl4p C p,r4, ollE<i p (j On
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
l01
Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit
4/30/97

r . -
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.B., Director
Mr. Billy Williams 15 December 1997
Billy Williams Farm
Route 1, Box 614
Tyner, North Carolina 27980
SUBJECT: _Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection_
Billy Williams Farm
Facility No. # 72-9
Perquimans County
Dear Mr. Williams:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection
and keep it with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the faun 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.
Please be advised that farms with 250 animals or more are required to obtain a Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan by 12/31/97 and if this requirement is not met then the farm is in violation and is subject to
civil penalties. The following items are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
are conditions of the general permit therefore these items must be implemented: -
- Keep lagoons/storage ponds free of foreign debris including, but not limited to tires, bottles, plastic
products, light bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solids waste.
- Pipes discharging wastes into the lagoon should be extended beneath the surface of the lagoon to avoid
releasing gases from agitated wastes.
- The lagoon areas should be kept mowed or otherwise controlled and accessible. High grass does not
allow you to conduct a thorough inspection of the lagoon area for seepage, rodent damage, etc.
- 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.
- Soil analysis is required annually
- AlI grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with -adequate capacity io prevent panding or flooding
damages. The outlet can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other
suitable outlets.
- It is suggested to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
- Lagoon levels must be maintained within the permanent and temporary storage and at a minimum must - - - - -
always have nineteen inches of freeboard.
- A gauged pump marker must be installed upon certification.
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Cont. Mr. Williams
Page 2
In accordance to the Senate Bill 1217, all animal facility that fall within the requirements of State Rules 15
NCAC 211.0217 must be inspected twice a year. The Division of Soil and Water, a local Soil and Water
Conservation District or the federal Natural Resources Conservation Services conducts an operational review
and the Division of Water Quality conducts a compliance operation site inspection.
If you have any questions, please contact your local Technical Specialist or me at 919/946-6481, ext. 318.
Sincerely,
0J - 4417�
Lyn . Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: WaRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

131.1bWU Animai reealot uperation xeview
■ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection.
JoRoutme p omp aint p Follow-up o inspection p ollow-upof DSWC review p ter
Date of Inspection -Tr3
Facility Number
Time of Inspection. 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Farm Status: 0 Registered p Applied for Permit
Certified p Permitted
In Not Operational I Date Last Operated: 5-12-97
Farm Name: Billy Williams Farm County: Pnrquhw as ..................................... ..W..ARO.......
Owner Name: Billy ........................................ W. juiams......----.•------•.....................-•-----.---- Phone No: 919-426n7Q3jj........ ...................................................
Facility Contact: Matt.m.Billy-Wiflxaxns ...............................Title: owners ................................................ Phone No 9.19-.42.6r.103fi.......................
MailingAddress: Rt.L.BaxAM......................................................................................... T�cner..NC......._..................................................... _27944.............. -- .—
Onsite Representative, Mattand.Billy...LTV.ilGams....................................................... Integrator: Independent............................................................
Certified Opera tor:Caxxoll.M.............................Wiiliams.......................................... Operator Certification Number:17.7.51........ -....................
Location of Farm:
.0 !1 L. ec i
i..
1
Latitude Longitude ®•
Type of
,n Swm�Oe_perationCapac�tyCeslg� P�ox DnrC rrent- Cp �#u�r_ren#`n'irenesgsDesE nmQ4C
C
atilyppIaon�tpulY
ZUJ
Wean to Feeder p 13 ayer Dairy
r� r
® Feeder to mis p on- ayer p Non -Dairy
p Q Farrow t0 Wean
p arrow to Fee er .Total Design Capacity770
€ Farrow to Funs
T
} _
p Other
Numlr ofpLagoons f=Holdipg Ponds p u sur ace rams resent 113 Lagoon Area p spraTFM Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
- - b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) 4 - " p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes ®No
4/30197 maintenance/improvement?

ace um er: 72_9
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 - Structure 2 Structure 3
................2.1I................................8 0..............................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
13 Yes N No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application --
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type C.om_kSilagc.&.Ckain).............................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
Reviewer/Inspector Name
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
® Yes
p No
[]Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
N Yes p No
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: t_.� � � _ Date: I — 15 _ 9 7

til
0 DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
z ®DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
®'Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number Time of Inspection Vl� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Tune fin fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit lex:1.25 for l hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
ISCertiFed ❑ Permitted or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..................................... ......................................................
Farm Name:..._ + �i\.......1..d1..Lti{'4:4^.......r ...... County:.i-!.........................................
Owner Nance:
......!'�L..�.�.ir..�....�............................................................. Phone No:.......�q.....�t�...�.-.�0�.�.......................
Facility Contact: ..1'.�!� �..� ..t. ....................... Title:...�;,cS1+1,Qy'. .......................... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: .............................................................................. ................. ...... I...................
Onsite Representative:..3-�. ................................................. Integrator:��-K,� . "a` ...... ........................
Certified Operator:..I rL...... . Wit - ...............................................p = T �' .7715-.11.
....................� O erator CertitScaLon'tiurr►ber•.......;....
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 1 :4 Longitude • ° :°
Type of Operation
Swine ;
El
Design: Current
Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish rJ170 40
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current I
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population .
❑ Layer F ElDairy
❑ Non -Layer I I IFI Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of LagooEts'/Holding Ponds' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
y
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 El Field ElOther
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 estimate(] flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon.systera" (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 '?
4130/97 maintenance/in-Lprovement
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes 12 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
Design Current Design Current I
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population .
❑ Layer F ElDairy
❑ Non -Layer I I IFI Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of LagooEts'/Holding Ponds' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
y
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 El Field ElOther
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 estimate(] flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon.systera" (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 '?
4130/97 maintenance/in-Lprovement
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes 12 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
VrNo
❑ Yes
2rNo
❑ Yes
0$,10
Continued on back

Facilty Number:7Z — g
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Jallo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes .L3No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ,B*`&o
Structures (l,a oons and/or Holding Fonds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes R(No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structup 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
............'................ ...................... D............. ...................................... ....................................... .......................... ............ ......... I......................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes --ffNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? J50yes O No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? .0 Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes ,2<0
Waste Application µ
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? Yes VNa
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .. Car.n.................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes 12 No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes j rNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
)RI No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? '
❑ Yes
,ErNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Lkgo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
,b No
For Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
,&es
ONo
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
O<o
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?ayes
❑ No
off:, 4 "21ckQ A,61 tv,4+
s�taztARue-
43: U AA_
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit
Date: 1--) 5 - 9 T
4/30/97

.61 .a
FACILITY NUMBER _ - _ REVIEWER:
FARM NAME:DATE:
TYPE
NUMBER
SSLW Cff
SSLW
# Cff
# ANIMALS �I
Farrow/Wean
sow
433
2.5
Farrow/Feeder
sow
522
4
Farrow/Finish
sow
1417
10
Wean/Feeder
head
30
1
Feeder/Finish
head
135
1
Gilt Developer
head
150
1
Boar Stud
head
400
I 1
I
TOTALS
XXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXX
XXXXX
CAWMP Components (existing prior to February, 1, 1993)
✓ Completed Certification Form
✓ Site schematic
Show design needs (storage)
Show measurements and calculated volumes
Runoff control measures, if applicable (waterways, diversions, riparian buffers, fi€ter
SUMS. roof Guttering, other: )
`- Land application (max. usable field size, max. application rate, max_ ap €icatioll rate per
p
cycle: system type: for existina prior to 9/1/96; plus
equipment 'type, system layout and settings for systems designed after 9/1/96,)
=xistence of Operation & Maintenance Plan
Fool area (undesirable veg. growth; floating & lodged debris)
.—� Embankment (settlement; side slopes; wet & damp areas; wail erosion: rodent damage)
pe cc,ndition (icint separation; cracks or breaks: be supported by cradles, etc. to prevent
sr%cainc; extend into lagoon beyond toe, effective 9/1/96)
`.;egetation maintenance (brush & trees)
�r l'UlsiC= surface water ci]versiens (adequate `legetaticn. diversion capacity. ridge heicht)
war-� V

Lam`/• K� W ►. n- TI,•
Existence of Waste Utilization Plan !lIIII VL_vVVv""
Map of spray fields 17 Amount of plant available nitrogen produced/used annually �3'
`r Waste application method 1 '7'-I
Dominant soil series
" Crops to be grown
--'R.Y.E. of crops to be grown, effective 2/1/93, or actual yield records (3 of 5 yrs.)
-N application by R.Y.E. (or Land Grant University recommendation)
N balance (N applied minus R.Y.E. in lbs/acre)
`,,--'-Application windows for receiving crops, effective 2/1/93
NRCS irrigation parameters (effective 9/1/96)
Stnd. #633 required specifications (includes pumping markers; not applying waste to
frozen or saturated soils, etc.)
Calibration information when applicable
Waste sampling within 60 days of land application
Annual soil sampling, effective 9/1/96 (including lime requirement, Cu & Zn
measurements)
REQUIRED RECORDS after 9/1/96 RECOMMENDED
Waste application records
Maps of spray fields daily rain amounts
CAWMP on site freeboard levels (weekly)
Waste sample analysis crop yields
animal population
soils analysis
Existence of Emergency Action Plan
Existence of an Odor Control Checklist effective 1/97
Existence of an Insect Control Checklist effective 1/97
Provision for dead animal disposal effective 1/97
Comments/questions from producer:

Location
Certified
Farm Name
I imny wimams rarm I
Phone Number
Lessee
Region .
0 ARO 0 MRO 0 WAKU 0 WSKU
o FRO p RRO p WIRO
•••••• • .............. .. ;
Certified Operator in Charge luarroll M. Williams ICertification# 117751
Backup Certified Operator Certification #
Comments
Date inactivated or closed
Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Sheep p Horses p Goats p None
Design Capacity
Total 77 Swine
SSLW 103,990 Feede—r tc►

Higher Yields
Vegetation
Acreage
Other
p Request to be removed 0 Removal Confirmation Recieved
Comments
Regional DWQ Personnel Assigned to Facility
Date Record Exported to Permits Database

Site Requires Immediate Attention: Alb
Facility No. 7 2 -T
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT.
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: r �� , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: .11 a V ; 11;ems
Mailing Address4 . -- 1!� /V. C• . _al -Z'Ud
County: __ ery k;tk&,�,5� -- - - - If
Integrator.
On Site Representative:
Physical Address4
44}�G - 703,9
Phone:
4 /// G
Type of Operation:
Design Capacity:
Swine ✓ % Poultry Cattle
DEM Certification Number: ACE
Number of Animals on Site: 700 S )
DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3/3' 9" J/ Longitude: 76 _ 37 " i / Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) CGor No Actual Freeboard: Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes oVo Was any erosion observed? Yes or 1.
Is adequate land available for spray? (e or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yor No
Crop(s) being utilized: . -¢D 4c.r--- S s-&, ti
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings?�or No
100 Feet from Wells? OLeor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? es r No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line?(9 or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or(9 If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or&
Additional Co ents: z1 -- 1 o"-k p -.Z — Jr
Inspector Name / iWaturef
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

c--