940008_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NOHTH CAHOLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

\
_ y m 2m- E
u
N
�^ \ ^ T
\
( N/\ �° �T.0
_: ~ _..
` :� g�>\�\ w
..< : . m_^ -��`s - -

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:, 940008 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS940008 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Washington _ Region: Washington
Date of Visit: 11/14/20 6 . Entry Time:04:00 PM Exit Time. Incident #:
Farm Name: Gerald Allen Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Gerald E Allen Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 5262 Hiw_3S Plymouth NC 27962
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35°45'00" Longitude: 76°40'00"
On the north side of NC 99 & 45; 2.5 miles SE of junction with NC 32
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: Gerald E Allen Operator Certification Number: 18621
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Gerald Allen Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
I spoke with Mr. Gerald Alen, at the fall meeting in Plymouth.
He stated there have been no amimals on site during 2006 and therefore he has not irrigated any waste water on crops.
He is in the buyout program and will continue to maintain the lagoon and freeboard levels until they are closed out.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen
Facility Number: 940008
Inspection Date: 1111412006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
kgoon #1 05/18/93 19A0 :22-O]o
Page: 2

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen Facility Number: 940008
Inspection Date: 11/14/2006
Waste Structures
Type
Inspection Type. Compliance Inspection
Identifier
Reason for Visit: Routine
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
F.9-,,,
1 #1 05/18/931 - -T 19.00 22.00
Page: 2

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen Facility Number: 940008
Inspection Date: 11/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ ■
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field Q
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? Q ❑ ❑ ■
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)
❑
Q
❑ ■
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
❑
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 (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
Q
Q ■
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
Q
❑ ■
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑ ■
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
❑
❑ ■
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑ ■
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
❑
❑ ■
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
Cl
❑ ■
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS940008 Owner- Facility: Gerald E Allen
Facility Number : 940008
Inspection Date: 11/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Sail Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Sail 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? E)
❑
❑ ■
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑ ■
18. Is there a.lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑
❑ ■
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
Cl ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS940008 Owner -Facility: Gerald E Allen Facility Number : 940008
Inspection Date: 11/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? Cl ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
.❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
■
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen
Facility Number : 940008
Inspection Date: 11/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Q ■ Q ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6
0

Division of Water Quality
C] Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 94000d Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS940008 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Washington Region: Washington _
Date of Visit: 04/12/2005 Entry Time:12:50 PM Exit Time: Incident #:
Farm Name: Gerald Allen Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Gerald E Allen Phone: [phone]$265113
Mailing Address: 5262 Hwy 32 S Plymouth NC 27962
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
On the north side of NC 99 & 45; 2.5 miles SE of junction with NC 32.
Question Areas:
Q Discharges & Stream Impacts
Q Records and Documents
Certified Operator: Gerald E Allen
Secondary OIC(s):
Integrator: Bunting Farms _
Latitude: 35"45'00" Longitude: 76"40'00"
0 Waste Collection & Treatment ® Waste Application
Other Issues
Operator Certification Number: 18821
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Gerald Allen Phone:
On -site representative Gerald Allen Phone:
Primary Inspector: Marlene Salyer Phone:
Inspector Signature: —
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Freeboard levels and rainfall records are recorded weekly.
Soil sample good for 2004
Waste analysis: 3-2-05 = 2.1
6-2-04 = 2.4
12-11-04= 1.6
Date:
Phone:
Phone.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen Facility Number. 940008
Inspection Date: 04/12/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon #1 19.00 35.50
Page: 2

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen
Facility Number: W008
Inspection Date: 0411212005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ M ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 11000
C. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
M ❑
❑
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
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Waste StoraQe-$�ajment
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.eJ large trees, severe erosion,
❑
0 ❑
Cl
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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 > 100/6110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen
Facility Number: 940008
Inspection Date: 0411212005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applirstion
Crop Type 6
Yps
No NA
NF
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)? on
❑
❑
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?
00
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
00
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
110
Yes
❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records i5nd Onrijmpnts
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
110
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑
Cl
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 8 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?
❑ 0
❑ ❑
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑ ❑
❑
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ ❑
E ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ ❑
0 ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ E
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ ■
❑ ❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS940008 Owner - Facility: Gerald E Allen
Inspection Date: 04/12/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 940008
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other ISSIJp_S
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewlnspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 5

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 Date: 5/18/04 Time: 1100 Time On Farm: 50 WaRO
Farm Name Gerald Allen Farm County Washington Phone: [phone]
T
Mailing Address 5262 Highway 32 South Plymouth NC 27962
Onsite
Representative Gerald Allen Integrator .1 Bunting 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
Design Current
Capacity Population
Ej Wean to. Feeder
Feeder to Finish
0-Farrow to Wean
j] Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2000
2000
QQ Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1.. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3: Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
. seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
• Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive pending ❑ yes ® no
.`.requiring DWQ notification?
t is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
r: �•P
andlor public health?
S:.Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier L
Level (Inches) 25
CROP TYPES 1corn, Grain heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Pe Pt Co Ap W d
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
i 03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1.. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3: Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
. seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
• Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive pending ❑ yes ® no
.`.requiring DWQ notification?
t is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
r: �•P
andlor public health?
S:.Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier L
Level (Inches) 25
CROP TYPES 1corn, Grain heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Pe Pt Co Ap W d
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
i 03/10/03
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1.. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3: Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
. seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
• Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive pending ❑ yes ® no
.`.requiring DWQ notification?
t is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
r: �•P
andlor public health?
S:.Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier L
Level (Inches) 25
CROP TYPES 1corn, Grain heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Pe Pt Co Ap W d
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
i 03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 08 Date:
5/18104
PARAMETER
Qs No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
El❑
10. Level in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
❑
® 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
v; ❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33.Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
®19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
u Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designrnstallation
❑
❑
❑ 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 oval uation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
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)
❑
❑
56.Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 08 Date: 1 5/1 S/04
COMMENTS:
*At time of inspection, lift station full of solids. Waste needs to be pumped to lagoon.
Need to remove old feed from under feed tanks.
13. Lagoon dike walls need to be mowed to allow for routine and visual inspection.
Waste analysis dated 12/11/03 nitrogen is 1.6 lbs.
Time to secure new waste analysis.
*There have been no irrigation events since last DSWC inspection on 12/4/03.
Soil test dated 1/21/04. Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
As noted in previous inspections, if soybeans planted and waste applied to crop, then contact tech spec to have crop added
o waste plan.
19. Missing lagoon freeboard levels from 12/5/03 thru 12/29/03. Lagoon freeboard levels are to be recorded weekly.
Suggest contact tech spec to re -site lagoon marker. Appears that lagoon level recordings are greater than visual recording
y inspector.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST 110artin McLawhorn IF
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 5/19/04 1 Entered By: IMartin McLawhorn
3 03/10/03

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ID Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number bate of Visit: N O Time: yJ
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
j Permuted �Ccrtifie ©Clondiitiom ly� ertified D Registered Date Last Operated or ove T eshold-
Farm Name: r/Yr.l_Dl _ l�'I/�d.�.rw. ^� County
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: ] Title:
Onsite Representative: L—
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' G a Longitude 0 L o u
Design Current ,
`
Design Current Design Current
.Swine Capacity Population:
- ,Poultry
Capacity Population CattleCapacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
'
❑ Layer
❑ Dai
Feeder to Finish
Non -Layer
❑Non-Dai
ED Farrow to Wean
❑Other
ElFarrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
To fai Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
z.; Number;o[Lagooas ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
- - __ - -- -
Hold>ng Ponds L Solid Tiraps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System y
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 KrNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes PXNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes eNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ;LD
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
_ seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7..Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
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 maintenanm/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
12. Crop type
❑ Yes 11'No
❑ Yes ,4No
/)VYes ❑ No
❑ Yes � No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes , ftrNo
❑ Yes 1A No
13. Do the receiving crops differ Vtti hose designaArm Ile Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes allo
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 ,4No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ;? No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage.pond with no agitation?
1$. 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 A 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.
b",
ek-
���a,,�p
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewerAWspector Signature:
❑ Feld Copy ❑ Final Notes
q laq C-S r-in -7
Date:
12112103 Consinued

Facility Number: Q — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes1P No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes *No
23. Does record ll awping need imps ment? Ify6s, check the approprip-de" box below. ❑ Yes q'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 A 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?
❑ Yes No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
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 4No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
IVPDES 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?
1 o
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
o
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
-5-Yur-❑ O
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
dditioaal Corrimenis ariilfBi`Dravirings �"`nyw_ }
I'!I 4-
Ss.s
av�
C'O 'at 'nJ Leo►. nO r A Cw r rks,T (/ G�i. of �J
as
1
4 dt mow - ►�aw �-a v �3kal
tz".", D
AA -
361''►s�e�i'-
" Anal
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 ®- 0$ Date: 1214/03 Time: 1 1300 1 Time On Farm: 60 WaRO
Farm Name Gerald Allen Farm
County Washington Phone:
252-793-3826
Mailing Address 5262 Highway 32 South Plymouth NC 27962
Onslte
Representative Gerald Allen Integrator 1C.B. Bunting Farms
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
Q Routine
Q Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaintilocal referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
iQ Follow-up
Q Emergency
0 Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Ca aci Population
❑ Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
20oa
2aoo
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment [:]yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1 44
CROP TYPES 1corn, Grain heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Pe
Pt Co Ap Wd
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment [:]yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (inches) 1 44
CROP TYPES 1corn, Grain heat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES Pe
Pt Co Ap Wd
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 08 Date:
12/4/03
PARAMETER
O No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
26• Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11 _ Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114, Over application >= 10°% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10°% or < 10 lbs.
30.21i.0200 re certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfteld conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallaWn
El
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date-
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationtrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, eta
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
El3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
Cl
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 94 - 08 path: 1 10 103
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis dated 5113/03 nitrogen is 1.9 Ibs11000 gallons
7/16102 nitrogen is 2.1 Ibs/1000 gallons
New waste analysis taken 12/8/03 No results.
Need to use waste analysis dated 7/16102 to cover irrigation events on corn for July 2002. No over application.
There have been no irrigation events since last DSWC inspection for 2002.
Soil test dated 11/20/01 for 2002 crop year. Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
Soil test dated 2/4/03. Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
Wheat crop has been planted. If crop is not harvested, apply no more than 30 lbs N per acre.
If soybeans planed in spray fields and waste applied, then amendment needs to include soybeans with pan rate and crop
rindow. Consult tech. spec.
Lagoon level is recorded weekly. Level needs to be recorded in inches.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhom
SIGNATURE
3 03/10/03

4) Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency 11
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit rg) Routine O Complaint O Fallow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 1 �
Date of Visit: Time:
rO Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 1p Certified CondiqQgally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: M County:
Owner Name: Phone No: -7�✓ 13 gyx" ; y—'5 `/3
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
16 Onsite Representative: 0 04, -S
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: / �i�►^+ S
Operator Certification Number:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' �� Longitude
Design Current
swine Unpacity ro ulatton
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Boars
Number of Lagoons I I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacitv Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
h
❑ Non -La er 1. JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW L
Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area
No Liquid Waste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge frorn any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
W t�
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
Field Area
❑ Yes ;�No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes 10� No
❑ Yes 4 No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection 1
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)�� r
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? t� 4 N
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 ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desli�gnated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAU MP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records S Documents
17. pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ %VUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, eeboard ante analysi soils ple reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria to effect at the time of design?
21 _ Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notifi- regional DWQ of -.mergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oe? 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?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Yes ❑ No
❑Yes No
J*Yes ❑4 No
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes �No
El Yes WNo
❑ Yes [:]'.No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [V No
❑ Yes k No
1
❑ Yes 2VNo
❑ Yes R No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes AfNo ivA
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ,] No
No violations or deficiencies were.noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspoiidence about this visit
.-.•� _ r,�..:_. ���,. ,�„ �, .._, �...r •�a�r.:r�:.r �•-:�-- � -'�-�->�.-a-�-:;_ � � �:f-�• ..x� � u , ,�,• --
Comments'{refer to'question): ^Ezplaasiy YES answers aradlor.aiysecoramendations or anyother_oommenti;.
Use drawings of facility to better explain siitnations: (use adtitttona! pages:as necessary)
, ;,❑ Fteld Cot7Y ❑Final Notes
a
y�
:c_ x.:xw..<..,�-,r,,.0 �^.. �5gia.w�° .
ewerllnspectarNgme _�-�,'- �� ��r�`�'�'����t`���:`.-.:='-.ewer/Inspector
E
Signature: Date: 9- /%- 03
05103101 Continued

n);
C)y
Facility Number: 'j� — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
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 wired 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 1 ermanentitemporary cover?
nA2ej
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes] No
❑ Yes ❑ No
i nSIJrP.��.•►S .
Addititiital ommenis:audlorDrawings:
d S K3 �� ' ;t T"o.-. �..w�tg - /Q.t�Z $ l l a
AL P s ee
o y� =Lw 11� I
V LJc7 I \ / y�ej
. 6-2 gc ,----------------
'
VVV
OL
CIV�
tr"K 4me 2 ao3 n �,; -e�ih ';4
"Z?f3 (Air—s �,►� Mtge
UJCt5kV?4"'
P6 se g e- a` c� �J
A 002- 4 vc,� eC C,, b2,- ao 2- 45 ctd a s
*e."N14 a SS 1`7`I !1
a-V'5 +0 4e_
O5103101
M Vej+
O �
r-I n r1

Type of Visit • 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 Date of Visit: I-��.dILJ Time: �
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified ©Conditionally Certified Q Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 67, 04 1 I-C, County:
Phone No: .ass ,�Iti 3 - z� r 3:,�
Owner Name:="710�
Mailing Address: _ a ki.or
�_ 2 S !'fir ►ti.n_ Y �— 2 2
Facility Contact: A Title:
AOnsite Representative: �� { �6�1_
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 " Longitude 0 4
Design
Current Design
Current '
Design Current
Swine
Ca aci
Eo ulation Poultry Ga aci
Ro ulation Cattle
Ca aci P.o In "on
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑Dai
29 Feeder to FinishE
S0 ❑ Non -Layer
° - Non-Dai
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
-""
Total Design Capacity"
❑ Gilts
10 Boars
otal -ST
Number of Lagoens ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
❑ No Liquid Waste
te
Management S sm
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes JR No
❑ Yes 9 No
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillwav ❑ Yes ,® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): H
05103101 Continued
k

Facility Number: 611 — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes X 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 RQ 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 W No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes SNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes IQ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes 14 No
12. Crop type s + yA �,a.� L.— . 1A JLO.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes .E J 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 tack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
W'No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
W 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 0 No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes EN No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 13 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question # Eaplaru any YES.answers anons; or any other comments
Use drawrng§of faedity to better explain s�tuateons. (use addition as necessary) t
4, ;'� f.. ❑ d Copy
-
El Final Notes
nu.�. _.y is "
jr7
8� vl: a i S c a ti, �►, : ,,� nr�-� si �., a v� ,,r,�� s lo.�,
Reviewer/Inspector Name j
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Z1,4_7 /
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: q — Date of Inspection al
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 M 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 M 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
I.AdditionAl'Commexib and/or Dira►vmSs. ram' , F ' ' , ' .... < =:,,.. n: r ._
�7) c s' T -
05103101

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 94 g Date of Visit: r 1-0/19-120-0-1-1Time: 11:45 am Printed on: 10/312001
0 Not Operational O below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: W . _......_.
Farm Name: --------- ---------------- —_-------- County: V!'Osb►uu>:t�t1...... .�. ._....W. W.URO.__.
Owner Name: Gerald....................Phone No: 252_.T9.�-
Mailing Address: 52�2.H�b�?�aly .SStrEI _.. _. _ .-_.., ....... P.ly.M ux11..XC ................._...........- . 2.7 62
FacilityContact: ........................ ... .............. ..... .... ._.......... — ....Title: ............... ........... ......... ................. ........ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: GeJC Id_A��lel0.lRirky.) 111..-�..,,......... — ..............:........ Integrator: l [tgtallgFaLtlug_.
................ ............ ........ _........... ...
Certified Operator:.GcnJd.R.----................. ...... Alka.......... ............................. ... Operator Certification
Location of Farm:
On the north side of NC 99 & 45; 2.5 miles SE of junction with NC 32. +
I�
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 45 00 Longitude 76 ' 40 00
rent°'D signesign Current
rI%'a
Swine. s
'' �_ Cao
lati n_ .Poultry ..Ca c . -o ulation Cattfe Ca ci Po ulatton
❑ Wean to Feeder
.. ❑Layer ❑ Dairy
}
Non -Lay ; ❑ Non -Dairy
; ; ❑ er
® Feeder to Finish
2000
600
s: :, ., w - . T" T 414 ` 4„
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder
to Finish ❑ Farrow
�Tot$1 Desigq'Capataty 2,000
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
s
y :' TotalcSSLVV 270,000
s
umber•°of goons
1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Ho dingsPouds/,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? [I Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2- Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 48
nsin3in1
['nntinuPd

05103101
Facility Number: 94-8
r Continued
v: -
Date of Inspection 10/I9/2001 Printed on: 10/31/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
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?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
m a
Field ❑ Copy ❑Final Notes
*Waste analysis dated 10/11/01 at 1.9 1bs N/1000 gals.; 5/7/01 at 2.1 lbs N/1000 gals.; 10/13/00 at 1.3 lbs N/1000
_
gals.
* 2001 soils samples are pulled and waiting analysis.
V. The lagoon walls need regular m for viewing during routine inspections.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 9wii94 dall ;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: f 1y%z oho/

05103101
Facility Number: 94-8 Date of Inspection 1fl/19ROOl
Continued
Printed on: 10/31/2001
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. 1s 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
J

OF W ATF9
Q�
Mr
To: Producer
From: Scott Vinson
lin
Envu�onmengmeer
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance 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 of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2110217, Serrate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff.
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
(p The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWW. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard
q) An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
T Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsoil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum of three years.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case_ shall_ land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during anv liven aoDlication.
cp All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
cp It is suggested, not a requirement, to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated.
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surfice waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, ext. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: WaRO
SAV Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit 0• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 0 Denied Access
Facility Number 94 g Date of Visit: 12/11Z000 Time: �:00
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated'or Above Threshold:............
Farm Name: Sa.Crald.A,lEetl.lmixik........................................................................... County: WA5JxiJlgtlRl>..................................... WARO........
Owner Name: GcraJt1....................................Allm ............................................................ Phone No: 25.2-793:182(............. 2,52 XIi.51.I.3AArm......
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:......................
Mailing Address: 5 � .tti$hl?��l}t.32. Q1A 1................................................................... F.IYAUQUILAC ...................................................... 2.79.62 .............
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator: #lAgt1l11g.1:o1C15......................................................
Certified Operator:.Ggir.Old..................:.................A119ift .................................................. Operator Certification Number:jL$A2J .............................
Location of Farm:
n the north side of NC 99 & 45; 2.5 miles SE of junction with NC 32.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 •F-45--141 00 Longitude 7b • 40 00 K
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2000
750
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: .................................... .................................... .... I .............................. .
Freeboard (inches): 51

5100
acii!it} Number: 94-8 Date of Inspection I2/1/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with.required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application.
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
Continued on back
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
IN 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 (CA WMP)? ❑ 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 wetttable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop teed 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 reviewlinspection 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,violatitins:or deficiencies-rvetre:nbted:during-this vis_it.:Y6u:Will:receive no further
cor�resnondenCc about thus:visit.:.... .. :::::: :: ::: :: :::::: :::::: :
to pull soil samples on 1211/00
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rufus Croom
n..........

Reviewer/]nspector Signature: Date: 5/00
Facility Number: 94-8 Date of Inspection 12/1/2000
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
5/00

f
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water,Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
BRI Holman, Seonetary .:
Kerr T. Stevens, Director •'
June 5, 2000
Mr. Gerald Allen
Gerald Allen Farm
5262 N.C. Hwy. 32 South
Plymouth, North Carolina 27962
SUBJECT. Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection -
Gerald Allen Farm
Facility No. # 94-8
Washington County
Dear Mr. Allen:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (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 #arm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15
NCAC 2110217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan; (3) the
farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; (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:
q) The maximum waste level in lagoonststorage .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 hours 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
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Page Two
Gerald Allen Farm
# 94-5 :
(p The following records are required: rainfall and lagoon level data, 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.
(p Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no _case shall land
application rates exceed the Plant Available Nitrogen fPANj rate for the receivi.njaMPor
result in runoff during M eve application.
Keep lagoons/stor3geponds free of foreigndebris including, .but not limited to tires, bottles,
plastic duct proOig i bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solids 'waste.'
T 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.
q .All grassed waterways shall have astable outlet with adequate capacity to prevelrt'ponding or
<: -flooding-damages: The outlet can be another veget�d channel, an earth ditch, stabilization'
structure, or other suitable outlets.
(p - It is sMested not requn=ed.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
updatedL
you for your assistance and cooperationduring the inspection. If you have any questions,
please contact meat 9194946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
G;1�11 d IZA 4445- -
Lyn B. Hardison - — -
Environmental Specialist
Cc: WashingtonNR.CS
�O
LBH. files

I
(Type of Visit . O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
( Reason for Visit @ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 94 g Date of Visit. 5/10/2000 Printed on: 5/22/2000
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted .M Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3Registered - Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......... ..... . .....
Farm Name: !~ivald.A ken.EA rz .............................. .... County:
Owner Name: l iet Ed ................................ •t#Rl<nL ...................... ..................... Phone Na: 25.2 :z9 :3.82,6..........W2
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:............... Phone No:
Mailing Address: 52Q.Htglt]yAy.,32..S.amtb..... .............. ................ --.......................... jPlytAtStutb..N.K................................... -.- ........ ...._ I9 �__......
Onsite Representative:GrAmid..+aA.11clx... ......... _............. ......._...--•---•-••----•-• Integrator: bllllttjU.)F
Certified Operator:.GMUE .......................... A11911 ... _...... .......................... ,...... Operator Certification Number: jL$$2J.
Location of Farm:
...a.tt...l.�-..a..3.a...r..l.t.h.....�..i..>.r...a...>.~...l.Y..............................................................................................................-........................................................................................... A,
�9..................................... -----------------
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 45 OD Longitude 76 • 40 00
❑ Wean to Feeder
I0 Layer z ❑ Dairy
'" Non -Lay `-' ❑Non -Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
2000
2000
i
r
r
:' Other ,
Total Design Capacity 2,000
r Tot-dSSLW­'--j 270,000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑Farrow to Feeder
❑Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:•............................................•---------•-•--•-•------ ----...............................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48

Continued on back
Facility Number. 94-8 Date of Inspection 5/10/2000
Printed on: 5/22/2000 � T
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 stuciures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?- - —
Waste Application
10. Are thereany buffers that need maintenance/unprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? . ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
I3_ 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 IN 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 iame agency?'
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
50•yi6latipiis'or d&fle n.cies-were.noted-&Hitg•this Agit: Doti will receive iao further'
correspondence about th%s.Vnl ........ ' . . . . ' .... . • . .. . - . ... .
Records available for review.
Continue efforts to improve bare spots on dike wall. There is noticeable improvement.
Waste analysis: 3/19/99 & 3/23/00; 10/11/99. Time for another waste analysis.
1999 soil analysis available.
If you have any questions, contact me at 252-946-6481, extension 318.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name yn�gardi's'{o/�n/''/ /]"`'t

{� Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: `
Facility Number: 94-8-1 Date of Inspection 5/10/2000 Printed on: 5/22/2000
Odor Issues t
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 anyTmajor maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blades}, inoperable shutters, etc.) - ❑ Yes . M.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

0 Drvis�on of Sori and Water_Conserva�on Operation Resew �'
0 Ihviswn of Soil and Water Conseryahon Compliance Inspection �m r
�nsi� _
on of Water°Qriality,'-°Compliance Inspection x�
4' �'0 Other:Ageney OperatioitR Reviews°
w a
outine 0 Co;;plaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
M4e'rmitted 13-eertified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Not O erational I Date Last Operated
Farm Name: o!a�A. m� P:aLrb + County:...0..:.....................................
............................................
Owner Name:........4r] .... .. ... ............................................ Phone No:...;? --.�,.+ j�....................
Facility Contact: .....
............................. Title:....
Phone No:
Mailing Address: .....�.......nn........... ..................... ........K.................1.....G.......... .22
Onsite Representative: ,-.OL ............. A.Z4................................................ integrator:...... ..................R......b......rZ....
-
Certified Operator: ...... Con%.Q A �;,................. .. Operator Certification Number:......�.��.2(
............................................ .. .......................
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 6 44 Longitude ' '
Design Current Design Current _ Design -` .Current
Swine
Ca acity. Population Poultry Ca acity Po ulation Cattle Ca "acityJ ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish 9000 to ID Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
:❑ Other - Farrow to Feeder El Farrow Farrow to Finish Total -Design. Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [+M
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes allo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/thin? K�A_
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, notify DWQ) El Yes Oa -No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Q-No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [9-No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes gNo
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: A p
Freeboard(inches). ...........=.............. .................................... ................................ ............................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes algo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on bark

Facility Number: C7 — Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
d'fio
(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
GjNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
EINo
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
La -No
IL Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
Umn
12. Crop type W kzal r
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
ZJXO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
P- o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
9-No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
B-No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
[P<O
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Q
❑ Yes
DKo
Rmuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
El 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/ irriggion, freebtl-ard, waste analyai� soil saniptrr-eports)
❑ Yes
2-Ko
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
P-No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[�-Wo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
GNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
B'No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
P44-o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
M-No
10•yiolatids:or• difcinces *f!re noted• ring �his:visit• Yotk wil•re0*6 id further0:�hedu1i.
corres�&idence ab' ' f this visit: ::: :: .. '
FUs�e
nsor.anyorawings of facility.. to' bettdi _explain situations (use: additional pages as necessary) -r v .
v. ry
LLUwX,v -- 3-0 -99
S RqQ Q.rs-cr�� e
FeRv'"'er/Inspector Name e
wewer/Inspector Signature:
,�� �L,d � Date:
15 1h rcc)

Facility Number: q — Date 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
GSM
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
�o
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
QNo
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
2--&o
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Yes
❑ No
Add Cs
itiona - Comments an or rawings:.. - - ', _ ,.., _
r

why
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment and
Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Mr. Gerald Allen
Gerald Allen Farm
5262 Hwy, 32 South
Plymouth, NC 27962
OM4 f
SL
Nc'D Eum R
NORTH C4AROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANi> NATURAL RESOURCES
May 14, 1999
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance Inspection
Gerald Allen Farm
Facility No. 94 -8
Washington County
Dear Mr. Allen:
On May 5, 1999, 1 conducted an Animal Feedlot Operation Compliance inspection at the referenced
facility. Overall, the operation was found to be in satisfactory condition. A copy of the inspection report is
attached for your review.
In general, this inspection includes verifying that (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan (CAWMP); (2) the farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2HA217, 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 sewage, erosion, and/or runofE
The recommendations and/or comments regarding your inspection can be found in the comment sWion of the
attached inspection form. It is very important as the owner and Operator in Charge that you address any noted
concerns, as soon as possible. For assistance, please contact your Technical Specialist and/or the local Soil &
Water Conservation District Office.
Thank you for your cooperation and assistance during the inspection: Should you have further questions or
comments regarding this inspection, do not hesitate to call me at [phone], ext. 321.
Sincerely,
- -(:� . WLV-A--
Daphne B. Cullom
Environmental Specialist 11
cc: Washington County SWCD Office
aRO
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889
Telephone 25ZS46-6481 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

W
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
■ Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered 113 Not Operationa Date Last Operated: ...........................
Farm Name: Gerald.AI1mFarm...................................................................................... County: Washington WaRO
Owner Name: Cxerald .. Alka...................... Phone No: 2 2-74 . k................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress:26Y................................... ..................................... ..... 1'lytl?A.1ith...N....................... 77.92..............
Onsite Representative: GecaldAllen............................................................................... Integrator: BRuntiug.EArxns.......................................................
Certified Operator:.Gru.41.0—L.............................. AftQ.. ....... Operator Certification Number: 1.$$ .............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude ®• ®' �"
Swine Capacity Population
p
Wean to Feeder
®
Feeder to
Finish
2000
2000
13
Farrow to
can
❑
Farrow to
ee er
13
Parrow to
Pmjsh
13
U11ts
(3
Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 JE3 Dairy
❑ on- yer I 1 1[3 Non -Dairy
E7 Other
Total Design Capacity 2,000
Total SSLW 270,000
Ak
T
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ u su ace rains resent p LagoonArea p pray ie rea
Holding Ponds./ Solid Traps ❑ o LiquidWaste Management vstem.�.,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes H No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 13 No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) p Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): ............... 84............... ................................... .................................... ................................... _.._................................
............................... I...
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, p Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

i
Facility Number: 94_8 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? O Excessive Ponding p PAN
12. Crop type Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
® No
p Yes
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
(3 Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 ..No.viviations or:deficiencies were: noted, during this:visit.: Von.wilt receive: no.furtiier.. :
::cbrrespo�dence atioUt this:vi$it...... .:: ... . .
3esnot need a WA Determination.
records complete with nitrogen balance.
you have any questions about this inspection, please contact me at [phone], ext. 321.
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes", jNo
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
[3Yes ®No
Reviewer/Ins ector Name r " s� s' a' --":a {• zxw
P Dapbae B Callom :
Reviewer/lnspectorSignature: Date:

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.E., Director
January 11, 1999
Mr. Gerald Allen
Gerald Allen Farm
5262 N.C. Hwy. 32 South
Plymouth, North Carolina 27962
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Gerald Allen Farm
Facility No. # 94-8
Washington County
Dear Mr. Allen:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site inspection (as it is
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 it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
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.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 919/946-6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: LBH files
943 Washington Square Mall, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

19 Koutme 0 4-ompiaint 0 roaow-up of owl2 inspection 0 roiiow-up of t»wi. review 0 viner
- n.�r.nr..rrter•- r
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection © 24 hr. (hh:mm)
ll Registered M Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 0 of Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Gerald.A 1en.Faxm. ............................... County: Washington WaRO
OwnerName: Gerald ................................... ARM ............................................................ Phone No: 252-.793--382fi ..........................................................
Facility Contact: ................................................................... ...Title Phone No:
Mailing Address: MfalLw:32.Sonth............................................................................. PtyMnU1h...NC ....................................................... 279.6Z ..............
Onsite Representative: Gerald A.11en...................................•--......................................... Integrator:RuntiagEar=......................................................
Certified Operator: Gerald.E................................ AUca .................................................. Operator Certification Number: X8821..............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©• t..J' ®K Longitude
a -,7 estgn j urren 7 estgn urren _ estgn urren
'�t
Swtne= ° Capacity PopulationPaulfry; Capacity Population Cattle = CapacttyPgpulafion
w - -
i. - - -
2I. t ❑ Layer _ 0Dairy
"y
© Non -Layer - p on -Dairy _
£ �y Offier
- Tota N ign Capacf y . ,
x:
Total;SSLW
_� as ,
-
Nu ber of Lagbiins 1�Ioldtng Ponds=
d 13 u sur ace rams resent ❑ goon rea p pray ie rea f,
p o LiquidWaste Management System
0 can to ee er
® ee er to mis
p arrow to can
� Farrow to ee er
© Farrow to Fims
p Gilts
0 Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
Ig No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
p Yes
g No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
p Yes
g No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
p Yes
g 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
g No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
p Yes
g No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
p.Yes
g No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
p Yes
g No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes
g No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
p Yes
g No
7/25/97
Continued on back

8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,Holding_Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft):............... 6-0............... ............................ ......
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Downy of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
® Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
15. Crop type ...... Ca m.(S.ilage.&..Graia)........S,mall.Cizaiinl (1Z1pp1��eat, Hasl�x..................... Szybeaus................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the' Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
• o' o ohs-(Wa iets'Wee.h4te agt is visit.- • You will•reWilve d � ee . -
i Correspience Axiiit ftiiii,. ."
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes R No
p Yes R No
p Yes ® No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ^y6i" a . LL:2 ^ 11 �� J Date: `7 ..2 3 - g JV

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
© Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
■ Other Agency - Operation Review
Routine Q Com laint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSW C review Q Other
Facility Number 94 $ Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 7:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered ® Certified 0 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Qc ra1t1A*1a.E;a=.............................................................................. County: Washingtian................... ..... ........... ..aRO........
OwnerName: GerWd............ .......... ......... ...d U=.................. ................ ... Phone No: 9.1%-711-.825.............................. ....................... ............................
FacilityContact: .............. _...... ...... ......... .............. ........ ....... ........ _ Title: .................................... ...... .......... .... .... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 5262.hwy.32.&utlt................................. .... ................. ..................... P1y.Moj1th..XC ....................................................... Z7962 .............
Onsite Representative: GeMd.A,llca.... ...................... -................................................... Integrator: Avsling.karma..... ...... .........................................
Certified O erator G�exal&E,,....................... A)kn........................... p ....... ....................... Operator Certification Number: .198Z1.w.................... .....
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 • 45 4 00 u Longitude 76 • 40 00
Design
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish 2000 1800
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,000
Total SSLW 270,000
INumber of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area I
No Liauid Waste
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If 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?
7/75/07
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑Yes ®No

t-uisunuca urr aac7►
Facility Number: 94-8 Date of Inspection 1 5/12/98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (LagoonsHolding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft):................4.....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
I I . Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any or 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)
❑ Yes
® No
❑Yes
NNo
Structure 5 Structure 6
........................... ......... I .... I......................
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
N Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
15. Crop type....................S:st3ihQaB,C....................................................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
13'No'viO_ or-deficiencies:were.ntited_during this *visit.* • You'Will�receive no further.:::
. .cotrrespondence about this:visit:•: :: ::: :
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N 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):
12. Improved from last year. Mr. Allen has sprigged Common Bermuda in areas and fertilized.
Reviewer/Inspector Name -Rufus Croom J 4
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Date of Inspection
Facility Number 4
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh. -mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
0 Registered U Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
Farm Status: 18 Certified El Permitted or Inspect -ion (includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: . ..... . ..... . .....
Farm Name:............. County: . ..... .
Land Owner Name:... ..... . . .... . ...... Phone Na:
.. . .... . . .....
FacilityConctact: ........................ ....... ......... ........ . ............. ............... Title: . . ........ . .............. . ................ . Phone No: .... . ...... . . ..... . ........ . ...... . ..... . ........
Mailing Address-. _.-az.. ­....­..... . ...... 2-726 -Z-
Onsite Representative: . .... . ... . ..... Integrator: . .....
Certified Operator: e+-alaf ....... A�F 'her:
......... ..... . . .... . Operator Certification Num
Locati n of Farm:
......... .. . .... ..... . .
....3.2 . ............. ...... . .. ............ . .......... ................ . ...... . ...... . ................. ... . ...........
Latitude Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
esign
EErren A
Design Current-D idjfe M ffiCiftihU
Swine ,. It ciVMPo0ulati6Y_anacaonuaF__A,_­.Caiacii4ftbOi on ❑
Wean to Feeder La er
1 1[] Dairy
Feeder to Finish Non -Layer 0 Non-Da'l
L
VVM *�g
El Farrow to Wean " [3-Farrow to Feeder bifljnTipaRi
. . . . . . . . . . . .
MIJ Farrow to Finish
All
Number
oUUag0-0ns'!#]H6ld1ilng,`P6n Su bsurface Drains Present
On
d A Lagoon Area FEI -Spray Fiel 0 La
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: 0 Lagoon 0 Spray field C1 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is obsened, 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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
0 Yes ONo
[I Yes ETN'o
El Yes [I No
[I Yes D No
0 Yes E]No
El Yes L?<'o
El Yes RrNo
El Yes ZNo
Continued an back

Facility Number:.. 14........Z.-
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?
StrucluEes (LagQonsand/or Holding Ponds
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes 0-'No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yeslo
Structure 5 Structure 6
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
NNIaste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering watters� of the State, notify D`W,Q)
!4 �' ....._...... l�'!!.......... ............. .......... _..... .......... ........ .. 15. Crop type _ ..... ..... .... _...............l.e� .
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? �a-
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 Certifled il'
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?
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes JD.No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes J2No
❑ Yes ,0'1Clo
❑ Yes JaWo
❑ Yes ZWo
❑ Yes J1Vo
❑ Yes 0-go
❑ Yes ENo
❑ Yes Aa']Qo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes ErNo
Comments„{refer to questroii #) Explain any YES answers 'and/or:any recommendations or any otherwc`omrnerits.
Use drawrngs,of facility to better expIarn srtuatrons (use additional pages as necessary)-
vlAt Pik, dt.Q c J �.
a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: (—)I,[ A,- 3 /, 194 7
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James 8, Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
December 15, 1997
Mr. Gerald Allen
Gerald Allen Farm
5262 N.C. Hwy. 32 South
Plymouth , North Carolina 27962
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Gerald Allen Farm
Facility No. # 94-8
Washington County
Dear Mr. Allen:
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 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 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
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.
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. Allen
Page 2
In accordance to the Senate Bill 1217, all animal facility that fall within the requirements of State Rules 15
NCAC 2H.4217 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,
!Btdison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: WaRO
943 Washington Square Mail, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

MR-
,¢ p DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review „
�a� < � �- � DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site inspection ��=� �� d
Routine a Complaint p Follow-up of UWQ inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review p Other
Date of Inspection
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:
Farm Name: Gerald Allen Farm
County:'Wasungton ..................................... W.aRo........
Owner Name: Gerald .................................... Men ............................................................ Phone No: 9.19.m793:282fi ..........................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:
Mailing Address: 52ft2.Jxw.y.32.So�u1h......................................
Onsite Representative: Geirald.Allen.....
Certified Operator: GeraKE.........
Location of Farm:
... Allen .................:..
Phone No: ......................................
...... P.lymnath.. NC ....................................................... 279.62 ..............
I n teg ra to r: Hunting F.artta..............................
Operator Certification Number:1.8821 .............................
Latitude ©0 ®° ®" Longitude ®� ®� ®46
Type of Operation
Swine =
!gn "Current
p ean to keeder
® Feeder to utts
arrow to Wean
p arrow to Fee er
p Farrow to Finish
p Other
Design Current Design =Current -_
ou[try.Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
P.
Number of Lagoons I Holdttig Pondsm pSubsurface rams resent p agoon rea p pray �e rea
0
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? 17 Yes g No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes g No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? []Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in Cal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ 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? []Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than ]agoonslholding ponds) require p Yes g No
4130/97 maintenance/improvement?

ace i y Number: 94_8
' 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 fond
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I
................fi.0........
Structure 2 Structure 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
..........................
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
N Yes p No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
15. Crop type.......C.omkSilap.&.aain.)....... 5mall.Grain.(Wheat,.BArley.....................Soybeans..............................................................................
Milo, Qaats)
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in tthhe unal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? p Yes ® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
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 a No
0 Yes ® No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes R No
p Yes N No
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: X � 6& dw.A J Date: -7_3/ - G) 7

cm �b
(� Site Requires Immediate Attention: a
Sides Facility No.
0
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS ITE VISITATION RECORD
Date: -1-� , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: t_r lA 10,'
Mailing Address:
County:
Integrator:
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
Phone:
Type of Operation: Swine- Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: No. of Animals on Site:
BEM Ce,tifica ion ACE D M C,e{�rtification No.: ACNEW
Latitude: S � ��
gi 'ILontude: ( Oq Elevation: Ft
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Ft + 25 year 24 hour
storm event? (approximately l Ft + 7 in) IM jr No
Actual Freeboard: Ft ches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No
Was any erosion observed? Yes or,�i5.
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No ? M�Vf�a
Is the cover crop adequate?
Cron(s) being utilized:
Yes or No ,1
Does the facility meet Sggo,
nimum setback criteria?
200 Ft from Dwellings? No 100 Ft from Weds? es r No
Is the mal Waste stockpiled within 100 Ft of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes or Ho~
Is animal waste lag applied or spray irrigated within 25 Ft of a USGS Map Blue
Line? Yes or No i
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state b n-made ditch, flushing
system.., or other similar man-made devices? Yes ar c
If Yes, please explain:
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, 7
land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
14, "'2 A,�(_'442 15�" /"�
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Comments & sketch on Sack of Sheet
K

DEM
SITE VISITATION RECORD
Page Two
Comments: r-(0 klll-�S OC-A O (L )oOi'\ 0,
Sketch: