710059_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

Type of Visit VCor�ipliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint o Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 3 Departure Time: County: N� Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: __SAtrCS 8i3_L. Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o ❑ 6 ❑ s& Longitude: = e = 6 =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
ElLayer
Sd�Z do ❑ Non -Layer
❑
Wean to Finish
®
Wean to Feeder
El
Feeder to Finish
El
Farrow to Wean
El
Farrow to Feeder
El
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
ElNon-Layers
El Pullets
ElTurkeys
El Turkey Poults
El Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
El Dairy Cow
El Dairy Calf
El Dairy Heifer
El Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
El Beef Stocket
El Beef Feeder
El Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: �h
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge? ,
❑ Yes P "o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,��o
I `1"No ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection #c7 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: GA (rW #,r- !
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 'La
Observed Freeboard (in): ` Ly
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes LdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ["No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 2fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs [:]Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl [:]Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 61XU-f 1~- L14) , 6
13. Soil type(s) 149JS AAG 16L1/5
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
a0
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
L hfo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments {refs to,question #) Edam any YiES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings ofofaacRo i to�better,�e�plaun situations. (nse additional pages as necessary):
: ..
�#.) 11i�TE C2of' ''rLut ADD ST�c_IC�J�,
N Eta/ WU Du1.];v vJi-{4 (vL-Tt~L ET AN V 00 P S o , c� 65cm
Y&O S CR T seorS G.Q�J
Reviewer/Ins ector Name �, r rA `
p,j=- A�24 t
Phone: %d ql
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
v 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
r
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Zo
NA ElNE
20. Does the facility fail to have ail components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ElYes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ We y Freeboard El Waste Analysis El Soil Analysis El Waste Transfers
❑ Annual
Certification
El Rainfall ElStocking Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain InspectionsWeather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
El Yes
�❑
NNoo
❑ NA
[I NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
,L�/J,
Uf o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�f
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by'the permit?
❑ Yes
El No
VA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E o
El NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
El Yes
El No
7NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [: No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
ElYes
o
ZN
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
(2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
,��
Id No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

]Type of Visit ¢1 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit A Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: /r/0 4t Tune:
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted [3 Certified Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date -Last Opera r Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �' � Z L- SK Qf _ County:
Owner Name: tJ�_-f A P.2_�}._. ,, , ... _. . Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: — .... ----Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative; E^f �?LL _. _ _ . integrator:
Certified Operator: _ _ _ _ _ _.. .. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Pouthy ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• �/r< �u
„- Desegmr Carrnnt ` z Design , Cnrint _ Design. { uri
-
eat
.. .... -. S .... - =s ..�
Ca..
\rattle
swine city";Pa hon. Po Yhon
.
- Wean to Feeder5062- " ❑ Layer Dairy
Feeder to Finish Non -Layer Non -Dairy
-
Farrow to Wean "x
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish x Total Destgn'CapaQlty "
Gilts
Boars x TQiiii SSL ■.�
Niter c� Lagoons
am L am
Dlschmes & Stream hupa
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes
YNO
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 gaftin?
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 XNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes eo 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 60
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
I2/I2103 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, ❑ Yes A No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes PrNo
closure plan?
(ff any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the sitnation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancerrmprovement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes Ej No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancerimprovement? ❑ Yes Ij No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 'ONo
❑ Excessive Pou�nding ❑ PAN��tkq\
Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground Copper and/or Zinn
12. Crop type \C I D� 111$GLt/'R / � / G'i� M-4� / F /ibis$
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes J'No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes .I No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 9N0
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 9'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 /d No
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes RM
Oct 1, 2aa'�� Gzsrs� �� F=F2:
/1%A0.
ReviewerAnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
�wirrw w�uusuea

Facility Number; Date of Inspection
Required_ Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes gNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes 0 No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility. not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes P�No
27. Did Reviewerfimpector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes YNo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes ONo
31 _ If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No .
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit Yoti WM receive no further correspondence about this visit.
22� c ✓• cr r�io �'Q�s��>, G{/tlJ� 4�"gc-.0 �,&,o `Y
�AS �U�'if/7 ll�i3�o2 *44a /gyG'o'l,6e
IV66 Al,
Al
z-�oaa Leos z
Q, EF
F
12112103

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 71 59 Date of visit 2/13R002 Time: 2pm
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted MCertified E3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: EA R.S u[ ncr.Farm......................................................................... County: Pender ............................................... VlrULQ ........
OwnerName: Edward .................................. Sumae r....................................................... Phone No: 4.10,459.-.1143.............................................. ............
Mailing Address: I.04Q0. .U.,S..JNy 42I........................................................................... CurdeM .............................................................. 28.435 .............
FacilityContact: .......................................................................... Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative:. rmu............................................................................................ Integrator.JAK.Eatw ............................................................
Certified Operator:F.dxa]rd.D............................. SUMMir ............................................ Operator Certification Number: 17.019 .............................
Location of Farm:
West of Burgaw. East side of Hwy 421 approx. 0.3 mile South of SR 1119 just past catfish farm.
® Swine [I Poultry [I Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 34 • 29 19 " Longitude 78 • 03 00 u
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)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONO
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier. ................. I ................. .................................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard(inches): ............... 32......... ........... .............................. .................................... .....

Facility Number: 71-59 Date of Inspection 2/13/2002
'5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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 Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed Tree Stand
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes ® No
Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes 9 No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? Yes No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes Q No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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 N No
0 Yes ❑ No
9 Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ($ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ❑ No
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit, ,
a w'er.::tu eatt< lair>an .-Y)svre <andc►r cxeii'tiee><»:::<<=<<<€«€€«€«:..,:..:
�r :: ns
7vAliC: ?'[IQiEW��. s
Field Co Final Notes
PY
{AEi{
#7 It was observed that trees were growing along the inside bank of the lagoon, on the side next to the hog houses. These need to be
removed and the lagoon bank needs to be maintained
48 It was observed that cement floor construction. debris that was removed from the old hog houses was stored by placing them in the
main Bermuda spray field. These also need to be removed to reestablish wettable acres.
It was also observed that the lagoon pole was not accurate with an error of approximately 5.5 inches.
413 No Small Grain Overseed was planted as required by the WMP.
414 No active Permit to apply waste in the neighbors trees was not maintained.
# 15 The Bermuda crop was not maintained and looks like it will need to be re -sprigged this year.
.r.,:,as::.::.c;:c:.::::<.:::. p:'.:;, ,r<:%r%r<:Y:..•F i''fi:is:3::.ri?'<: `;:�:a:
Reviewer s actor Name
>� e
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05103101 Continued
Facilisy Number: 71-59 Date of Inspection 2/13/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attar below Yes 19 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 0 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, 11 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 R No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes O No
17 This farm is Permitted for 450 finrow to Wean and yet has 3100 Wean to Feeder hogs instead. This is operating in violation
to its present active permit.
18 There was no certified Animal Waste Management Plan to cover the changes made to the facility.
19 The Lagoon was modified alter 1995 and no longer -matches the current as built drawings.

r

F.
Facility Number Date of Visit: Z/I3 dL Time:rO Z n
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 64`))Sk haeo, FiLto. County:
Owner Name: / t Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: OwhP/
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone
�No:
Integrator: HIV_`l?."01s
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 0 4 " Longitude 0 4
Dischar>res &c 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)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gatimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 37,
05103101
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 1K No
❑ Yes tR No
Structure 6
Continued

4
Facility Number: 71 — S71 Date of Inspection / Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 19 No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes 9 No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structuref need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? VYes IgNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pon/ding ❑ PAN El Hydraulic
cOOverload
am ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type I11 LCOICc L -Pd 0 _ emuledry An �dPl.fe[� /JPe
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ® Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 0 Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
ID Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
EfYes
❑ No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
;9 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?
❑ Yes
® No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 Yes
❑ No
03 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to;question Explain any YES` answe and/or -any recommendatron's, .or any other._rcotnments ,
v a.� _q
Userdrawmgs of facility to better explain situations: (use-a'ddrtronal pages as necessary) Field CoUY ❑Final Notes
.• , :. ❑
1t wk5 b 6SP/i/d 4474 'eCS klrvt rc%,j 14a
/-Vire
oR f%Q S dO, 4 efi- -o -At Xi hoofer . n eo-W -/b Ae Aeow eVel
�- t I✓l5 Q 6sProdT eem en �ADri &� �
/�ouits 15 Sure,( 6y �/�11.��e.,+ i4��.rr.'n►/�rvd �r�e�� -7t's4F_
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
0510310I l/ Continued

w .
Facility Number: 71 — Date of Inspection Z /3 DZ Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes XNo
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
El 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
J@ No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
d/si A ee /r 4v Je re were re - esOCAJ%�1, 4re7 fJ1e- tZW' i .
—.-Z '
e.rf6r
!3Ad
A 4011 bars i!"tC5 ho-, /1M"(/r 7V& 0(
1�rt r�ritW. Zr,,O wV hD- -- /,-IX),C�-
% S�t7r�,"t� 7rr.'S �rerr,
0/7 l `� rat ✓ i�r�, "7 ram[ r �/nw 7� b �
t -fie
-/-0 eio✓e r .4-0, e- Iwy`y
#` r• I RZ ���en 4i�s id�re�4�e�t �t�f�°✓ 1p9l—�- `ry ZAO7d- h s e; ea ry e
J
5/00

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 71 Sg Date of Visit: 3/7/2002 Time: 9:25
O Not O erational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:...._
Farm Name: FKA.I? & maer. Eum............................................................. County: PRAda................................... NJRO......
Owner Name: Edu d�--------------._ �vWu>wC--------------------------- Phone No: 9�459=JX43-- - ---------- --- --- ----
MailingAddress: d.QQOQ I.M...H.W. CAN ........................................................................... Cardc.N.0 ............................................................... Z8.435 ..............
Facility Contact: ...........................................................Title: .. Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: siltl�neC----------------------------------------- Integrator:J�£FRCfi11S------------------------------•
Certified Operator: EdwaCld.D............................ Summer Operator Certification Number: 1.7.Q19.............................
Location of Farm:
West of Burgaw. East side of Hwy 421 approx. 0.3 mile South of SR 1119 just past catfish. farm. �
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle
❑ Horse Latitude 34 • 29
19 u Longitude 78 • 03 00 u
Current .
= Curent
signDesign urrent
_'CDesig
- Caace
7.Po
-,
Po lat�Poultry
uan.
o ulat�on-Swine C
_ .=
elation
a act
® Wean to Feeder
4800
-
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
='
❑Non -Lay er
❑Non -Dairy
I-
".
❑Farrow to Wean-------------
-
- -
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
- -
Tota_1 Design Capacity.:
4,800 -
❑ Gilts
_
-
- Tota1;SSLW
144,000
El Boars
w Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
_. . .
HoldmgPonds lSohd.Traps -] ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & 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): --27.5

v.Iiu3iul t,oirrueueu
Facility Number: 717-59 Date of Inspection 317/200Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? N Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed Forest (Pines)
13. Do'the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ElYes ❑ 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?
(iet 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?
N Yes []No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ❑ No
N Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were.noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
;Comments to,quest�on.� Explarn-anyYEB;answers andlor anynrecmm�3endatronsuor any other comments � �-
_(refer
�ilse�drawmg� faeiliaty toetter expla�n� srtuatrons�(„ use addrtronal pages as necessary)_ � Field Copy ❑Final Notes
9. Need to have marker reset in lagoon. Marker is currently reading about 32 inches of freeboard. We took hand level readings and
were getting about 27.5 inches of freeboard.
_
15. Bermuda crop needs improvement in both fields especially the small field.
5. No small grain is planted in either of the bermuda fields and it needs to be. Field 1 is shown as 6.1 acres in the waste plan but the
wettable acres for this field is 4.69 acres; need to have acreage corrected to 4.69 acres in the waste plan in accordance with wettable
acres. I have spoken with the technical specialist since this inspection and she said that this has been changed; we need copies of this
info. Also, the waste plan is written based on farm records; however the operation type has changed since these records were produced;
is may not be allowable; I have also spoken with the tech. specialist about this since the inspection and the waste plan rn continued
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall=Maths Gale Sten_berg __ — _
ReviewertInspector Signature: ��" Date:

O5103101 Continued
,Facility Number: 71-59 Date of Inspection 317r200Z
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.). ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
itioQa omments an br_ rawmgs: � -
5. continued) be rewritten in consideration of this. Also, Mr. Sumner's house and the house of his son is closer than 200 feet to the
sprayfield; Mr. Sumner is planning to sell the farm so this could create a violation of the required setback; I have spoken with folks
about this since the inspection and it seems that Mr. Sumner's sprayfield is grandfathered with respect to this part; however, it may
be in the best interest of all involved to have proper documentation that this situation is acceptable to all.
Note. Mr. Sumner indicated that he does not get very much production of bermuda from his facility.
i
L1

10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 71 S9 Date of Inspection 3/3/2000
Time of Inspection 14:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted M Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: E.A.R.Sumu r.fArm.................................................................................. County:paltdRx............................................... W.IRQ.........
OwnerName: EdwArd.................................. Sumner ....................................................... Phone No: 910-2$1-92.04...........................................................
Facility Contact:..................................................I........I................... Title: Phone No.
Mailing Address: )I.Q AO..U.S.11M. 921...........................................................................EurAcM .............................................................. 184,35 .............
Onsite Representative:... ................................... ..... ........ Integrator: M.K.lra�q,9-..................... ...............................................................................................
Certified Operator:.EdwAOrd.D............................. S.umrxr ............................................ Operator Certification Number: 17.019 .............................
Location of Farm:
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
1'a.1..e.lYC.Hxry..4,21.aae�tb.F.arm.�.1),w..ea.......::::::---------------------
................................................................................................................................I............................................................................... ............ ....:........::::::
Latitude 34 • 29 ' 19 u Longitude 78 • 03 00 u
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
450
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
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„iiotify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): .............. (P.---•......................................................................I.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23199
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
© Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure b
❑ Yes
❑ No
Continued on back

Facility Number: 71--59 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?
I I. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
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?
21 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/mspection with on -site representative?
24- Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
302000
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No
1�o irio(atiorris: or:deficiencies'ivere."not ed.du'ring!his'•visit:. Yriu ivilfrecceive:no hift ier
-corre dndticc . . - • . . . . . - • . • . • - - '
fHt3>1:_ .efe3`2iEF;' �l3- ..<::: Ian=: :, :.......... .... .....
l-:airs;war ::.aTm~:.:::reeammedIh:r: i::>::>:::>-::<:>:
.... .
.....................I ..-. i.........::.:..::: ....
.............................:........................
Bob Heath (DWQ-FRO) informed DWQ-WiRO on 2128/00 that he had seen Mr. Sumner spraying in the pines over the weekend.
Mr. Sumner's WUP does allow him to spray on pines. Reel was set-up in first lane (lane closest to Hwy 421). Gun stops appear to be
set such that Mr. Sumner is maintaining proper buffer to help prevent runoff to roadway ditch
wr
Revi ewer/Ins actor Name
sz<€<>«-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environ
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govei
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Edward Sumner
E & D Sumner Farm
10900 US Hwy. 421
Currie NC 28435
Dear Edward Sumner:
Y?W'A
E VED •
JAN 0 3 2000
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 71-59
Pender County
This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers.
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRRI, IRR2, DRYI, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR1, SLUR2,
SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Pender County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

- _ 1Dsvisroo of Water Quality ;
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- Q:Other Agency
IType of Visit JWCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 'ORoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of visit: It 2Q 00 Time: I 2. Z Printed on: 10/26/2000
1 5'9
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted © Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: .• ✓h C r t
.. �.. �....... ...-..�!...............�... �.-....-......-.......................... County.........e ri....Q'r...-.........-.....-.....-...-.........................
Owner Name: `''r-` ` SU M Vi 2 Y
r U\je%.......................................................................................... Phone No: .
Facility Contact:
....... Title:
MailingAddress: ........................................................................................ ............................
Onsite Representative: -,-.- ''d '"�"� Q'�
w .............. �V......................-..................................
Certified Operator:........................................................
Location of Farm:
, Phone No:........
Integrator:.... oCa+n. s...�CA /.....�:�.............
Operator Certification Number:. .........................................
i
swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' L ii Longitude • ' 69
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish JE1 Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
arrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons i Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area Wpray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I0 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impactx
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 ran -made'?
b, If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. Ii' 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
G. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure t Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ................ .-.........................................
Freeboard (inches): 3�
5100
❑ Spillway
Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes _N'No
❑ Yes &No
❑ Yes $No
❑ Yes .B No
❑ Yes ;E�No
[]Yes ONo
❑ Yes allo
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: ! — 4 Date of Inspection f 2B Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes )!j No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ;5No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes bd No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes O'No
12. Crop type Pit -11 e5 CCA 001 6efr-1 ✓dCi PO- v S. !2ti e CCU ersc�--A
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal
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?
aste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
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?
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?
o yiglatiOds'or• &flcie dti § were noted during this'visit' • :Y:oir will •reeeiye Rio' Putthe�
eorresponidence. moult: this visit ' .
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes J9 No
❑ Yes g No
_OYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,EJ No
❑ Yes EFNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes VrNo
❑ Yes 5M
❑ Yes j@ No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes F�d No
Comments(ieferto,q ): Explailidny YES rs,and/or any.recommendations _or any -other cominients _ .... y w
_ P (
Use drawrngs of facility to defter explain situations. use additionid pa es as necessary}
I14ced 4D tla ve Ce.,4,V ; co14e, o�e coverabe q v,d 6erttyoll peg-m; 4
Mo4e- Apply 1;•,,.,e d�
accord(;,. 4.s soJ )es- rrQco/rN.I�+�1ewis an f nef�
'rLte OF C.—Ali OH is to if
?l 'crv,0d c IIL-a7" [se G�ei'�7 e'd q-r
a #I O�rr""OX;VI-1 "Jo 5-p 00 A'eedee Ope)-z)
Reviewer/Inspector Name
SVancwal
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 'D Date: HPLA/0 9 5100

Facility Number: 71-s Date of Inspection 2 O printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge :it/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 M No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes IffNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes VTNo
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 ONO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes VgNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes 'SNo
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
5/00

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report /
Name of Farm/Facility �7 " S - eb LAA&a S car c,nov-en,
Location of Farm/Facility �-
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Numb
Date of Inspection 9 9 Names of Inspectors
Structural Height, Feet 10 Freeboard, Feet f
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres. Top Width, Feet �-
Upstream Slope,xH:IV Downstream Slope, xH:IV
Embankment Sliding? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of
Yes No
Yes No
Vy,ggg4,tjve Cover j
Crrass, rees) GC1
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes No
f
Engineering Study Needed?
Yes No
Is Dam Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967?
Other Comments
Yes No

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Name ofFarm/Facility :579 -- i5b L/ARb 5C4 t-*never_
Location of Farm/Facility+� L�
Owner's Name, Address b&14,P4) _ C5q [ L rcle ir" - - - and Telephone Numb
Date of Inspection Names of Inspectors _ �115 �•�1,r so-z'
Structural Height, Feet % (� _ Freeboard, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres .. 's Top Width, Feet �-
Upstream Slope,xH: I V Downstream Slope, xH:I V
Embankment Sliding? Yes No
(Check. One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of
V tive Cover
),Ire
es) _
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes No
i
Engineering Study Needed?
Yes No
Is Darn Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967?
Other Comments
Yes Y No

V
Dtvtsxon of Soil and Water'Conservatlon-'Operation-Review
El Division of Soil and -Water.Codservahon ' Compliance..Inspection
y Division of Water Quality -Compliance Inspection
W;Qther Agency: Operation Revtewx g-
$ „T
Q Routine JR Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-u of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection V411i
Time of Inspection : yQ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted © Certified T© Conditionally Certified (] Registered Not O erational Bate Last Operated:
Farm Name: E� Y.. `G ,ti*-................................................ County: ......:�41(..-----•--------•--...........................
........................................................... ^
Owner Name: ......... www..) ..................... ...... cnhllRUr.-.............................-.....-..... Phone No:..��t1a.�.. ,..'..� t ....
V
Facility Contact:........................................................... Title:................... . Phone No:
Mailing Address:....... j(7�00.........�.% ....-4.W.1.....qZ:1....................................... ...Cis(fx ...I...0 ............... ..:. ... 7,1.05 ........
...... ...... . ........ .................
Onsite Representative:......C= .fc r).........s i!n7N'.................................................. Integrator:...... ir3kt 5..........................................................
Certified Operator: E&J .. �; .still)mr•-.- ....... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
... Q ....... - A l ....... ...t....rl 1 .[,v S ............r
.......... ......... . °+.....................-----•--..-..--•----.-..................................... _
................................................................................................... .................... ...................... ....-..................................... IV
Latitude �� �C ��� Longitude • 6 «
-.. Design
Current =. .:Design Current- -, Design Current
Capacity
Population ,Poultry ;=Capacity Population Cattle . Capacity Population '
❑ Wean to Feeder _
r ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
- ❑Non -Layer . ❑ Non -Dairy
arrOW to Wean
„ . „ • .
Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
= Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
= -_ `Tota1.SSLW
jl�lumber of Lagoons-
_.
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I[] Spray Field Area
Holdjn Ponds /
_g.- Solid Traps
� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow. in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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 t'
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4< Structure 5
Identifier:
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure fi
Freeboard (inches): .... ....... Z-7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

FacJ*ty Number: '� — S Date of Inspection
6. Are ihere 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? o
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
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: � ,6io iolatiotis oi•• defit:ienc3es *r re pored- ding this: SIC Y:oit will -receive t#t further - : - '
comes oridei<ce: ahauk this visit. ::::::::::::::::: ::: :::::::. :.::: :
❑ Yes ❑ No
[--]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Ye"s ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments {i efer'to question #) ' Explain ;any YES answers and/or any- recommendations nr any other comments
Use drawings of fachty to baiter explain sttuahQns (use adonal pages as -necessary) -�
_ ^.
I0• ky-. '&j»vnW ifv.) Sei uq Ur— �o S�vai t ^ SZde G4rIA IOV Mr,
A.
Mr . _%mvLzr 0.��urM s1t � V. 46 K� � siJ � u � �ov f ct— up Or vat,
daj
N6 tl•Sc�'�Y�2 vJo-S abSelN��- .
Reviewer/Inspector Name i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
3/23/99

k
Revised January 22, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number -_ _59 (/ Operation is flagged for a. wettable
Farm Name: G n acre determination due to failure of
On -Site Representative: MA,,2 Part 1I eligibility item(s) F1 0 F3 F4
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: I�1 Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
Date of site visit: ���3� i _ exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP: / Annual farm PAN deficit: — WI4. pounds
Irrigation Systems - c' cle hard -hose traveler; 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. s stem wl ermanent ipe stationary sprinkler system w/portable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART 1. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D)D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part III. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11 - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part III).
PART 11. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
i// F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits fields)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part I11_
Facility Number '71_-

Revised January 22, 1999
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT FIELD TYPE OF TOTAL CAWMP FIELD COMMENTS'
NUMBER NUMBER'2 IRRIGATION ACRES ACRES . %
SYSTEM
FIELD NUMBER' - hydrant. ❑ull_ zone_ or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers deaendino on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system. If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER2 - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS3 - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres an�d having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency
r� 'Division of Water Quality
10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-uv of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 10/Za/+f
Facility Number _ - — 11„�R
Time of Inspection .' t? 24 hr. (hh:min)
0 Registered Certified © Applied for Permit [3 Permitted 113 Not Operational !! Date Last Operated: ii
Farm Name. .. 1U 1"` e'er...............I..................... County ........ I..r............................�.1..l .
Owner Name. �d , e �� Sc�+�+ �2.i ..... Phone No: ......� ,D_.Z $ S~ Q 7 o `�
Facility Contact:
Title:..
Mailing Address: 1A99 0 d ti ..........
Onsite Representative:...,......
Certified Operator. ................ ! `....r..'�....... ..............................n e ✓
Location of Farm:
.................................................... Phone No:......................................
(,jrfIP, N . � 3.5..........
......................................................... ..... y..
Integrator:.................................................... r'�S
...
..... Operator Certification Number,....
Latitude • =° it Longitude =' 0' "
Design "c .Current, ,
, Design Current . Design ' "Current
-':
Swine
Capacity 'Population ' ,Poultry Capacity Population: Gaftle ,Capacity Population ,
❑ Wean to Feeder
: ❑ Layer z ❑ Dairy
1. ❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer = ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
S'Q
❑Others
[] Farrow to Feeder
;
❑ Farrow to Finish
'" T01 De5lgn CapaCtt
❑ Gilts
[] Boars
�" Total'SSL'VV a
as (Holding Ponds
umber of.: Lagoo"
❑Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area
❑Feld
d Area
.: •
F
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System.
ny, .:
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �o
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes bklqo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other [[
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes W10
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes N
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin? 4� s
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �TN
0
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 'KN0
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require El Yes fVN0
mai ntenancelimprovement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes "``���No
7/25/97 [[[

Facility Number: —
if ti
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes �(No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is less than
❑ Yes
�No
storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): .._....... Z Z,
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
YNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
�(No
12.
Do any of the structures need niaintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
TYNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
�(No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
�No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type:�^�...� Y«,.....�12.y..�..............................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
�No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
VNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�(No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PINO
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
VYes
❑ No
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?
0 No.vit;lkitins•or. deftciencies.were-nated-during' this -,visit.- You:will i&e- ive�_uo-furih_ er-:-
cofrespbnd k6 alioui -this:visit:
ZZ, Ytcp t—ce14)Y •Frce l2ecor4 on. S;4-e-
❑ Yes [ 60
❑ Yes V.
❑ Yh$o
7/25/97

10 Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 5 Time of Inspection 1 :25 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status* IN Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted lor Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:.... _..............
Farm Name: _....... .._......-....... County: ....264Q:+ ... .........
_........ _... _.....»_.
Land Owner Name:tx�lulr ._�._. �.. ....... . _._ Phone No:_Lb,. ��`._ ....._.... �,.[... ._..
Facility Conctact: yy ...._.. Title: _ . ?xup . ............. :. 4 . . ...�:L��o,2Az�....5?:!►.�:!r ........_.......... 0 ........._. Phone No• filc
Mailing Address: 1.
_ ...._ ..... _ ... 1JY� { .... _ ........._....._ .......
Onsite Representative: ` ...�...�t�d�k3Acr__..............................._..................�. Integrator: ._.. .....
._----.
Certified Operator: ... j,�1...L.Ytt�f�........... ......... _..... _... _ .. Operator Certification Number: _� �Q�...._......_...... .
Location of Farm:
Latitude -�• L._R� .1I 'V_ u Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
'wig` Design Current Design , Current Des�ga ,Current
�.. Ca aci Pa uladon
S�v�ne Paul - Cattle
-T Ca ace Po ulatianCa ace ,_Po eilat�oa'..�
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ ❑ Da
❑Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer �... Non -Dairy I
Farrow to Wean w..
Farrow to Feeder Total Desig>t' Capacity o r
A
Farrow to Finish
F
❑ other `. Tofa1 SSLW� l o
'Number of >Cagoons I Haldtag Ponds ❑Subsurface Drams Present
r,
3 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
sera
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)
e. 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?
❑ Yes . p No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes P$No
❑ Yes ® No
N
❑ Yes [kNo
❑ Yes Ed No
❑ Yes INNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
4/30/97
RJ Yes ❑ No
Continued on back

Facility Number: ..._.1...... —...9...
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes 18 No
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?
Struqture5 fl.agoons and/or 11olding Pond
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
l�5 .... ..._. _ ....._ ......... .
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes JO No
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [@ No
Im Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ja No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes W No
(If in excess of WMP, orf runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....,...._ ......... .�f1PI .............................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities 01)11
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 X) No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes gi No
❑ Yes (K No
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Comrirnents {refer to question'#) Ezplarn any YES'answers andlorany recommendahonsor any other comments`N r
Use drawings of facility to better explain situationsaddihonaI pages as necessary)
_. -
,. ,..•<t«L x...,
5 Mr. Scxnr�x 1S C0TVV"rtX JA14, �b
c�YttSSec� W�
a�w,t. ` s will YeJj(-e 4L rfsp_ o -
Q
�V6m G. Uln'V u►r-, Pi�i ruj 0_ e3 ih
~ nmfi 0kt.
H 10,111 a.ESa ktM �
12-.-rVCe5 eP, :"r" kJOI A )CLIP gb 000
6 rCb%OWJ
ada�5 W1�4- rW�
w " d
Reviewer/Inspector Name ., 10>.,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r Date:�T�D %Q
r,r ■ rr�u rrir_�rrrr�r.r
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Facility Number:- O
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: qZ 1 G
Time: 10=319offv
General Information:
Farm Name: T--, dr 1:) 1 m 0 ems` County:. eg-�V\dev ^
Owner Name: par^ _ Phone No: ;?-B,;l -g�! o�j
On Site Representative: S0 1 Integrator:
Mailing Address: 0 g o o r_?. C,
Physical Address/Lo iidon: - 1= ..� q Z-[ _
Latitude: I I -Longitude: 1 I
Operation Description:, (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
a Sow 1 O Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Nursery ❑ Non -Layer a Beef
QTieder
OtherType of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons:-_ (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1 foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage..
Yes Eir, No ❑
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?: -
Yes ©
No @"'
Is erosion observed?:
Yes ❑
No U—�
Is any discharge observed?
Yes ❑
No C�
Q Man-made Q Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Yes 2(
No ❑
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
Yes ❑
No IF—'
( list the crops which need improvement)
Crop type: Acreage:
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Yes ❑
No l�
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application?
Yes ❑
No ff"
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes ❑
No Q-
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
Yes 0
No €3-'
A01-- January 17,1996

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes Q No 2-110
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ No CL/
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No Rf
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes Q No
Explain any Yes answers: O `` oa,Ne o
Drawinvs or Observations:
AOI - January 17,1996

Site Requires Immediate Attention: >�S
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
• ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATION SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: . 7, 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address: G[% G
County:
Integrator: Phone: , /-
On Site Representative: Phone:/'
Physical Address/Location: 3 �tl �• Ql i� 49r ICS7f lilt q ON
WSJ- - t
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: ASP 14td) Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ° _ �' Longitude: —1,9 ° 4_3_' 00 Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes r No Ac 1 Freeboard: o Ft. Inches
. Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes qf N Was any erosion observed? Yes o No
Is adequate land available foj spray? Yes or No* Is e cover crop adequate? Yes a No
Crop (s) beingutilized:��
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwelling .Yes r No
100 Feet from Wells es r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes r N If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specifics acreage wi c�o�ver crop)? Yes No
Additional Comments: {. t-
A-rzmr/ - s
APAgAeS _60 JVae,�P / Ofe, - c'1 !�G!> A90-A
r _
Inspector Name S igdature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.

•
•
Site Requires Immediate Attention
Facility Number.
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE. m..., i R .01995
OwnerFarm Name:
�
County: Pender
Agent Visiting Site: Bryant M. Spivey Phone: {910} 259-1235305
Operator. _ Ed Summer w Phone: 1919.L 283-9904
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address: 421 just south of catfish farm —
intersection of SR and US 421. Farm is. on the left.
Mailing Address:
Currie, NC 28435
Type of Operation: :'Swine x Poultry Cattle
Desiga Capacity: 200 sow Number of Animals on Site- 200 sows - _Farrow'/wean
Latitude: o ' " Longitude: O "
Type of Inspection: Ground x Aerial
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard; 1 Feet 0 Inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed hom the lagoon(s)? Yes orC� Was there erosion of the darn?: Yes or&t
Is adequate land available for land application? G or No Is the cover crop adequate? Q or No
was • i . • t�e lagoon on - date of -•- •
d
Fax to [phone] 569nature of Agent

OPERATIONS BRHNCH - ILIQ Fax:[phone] Jul ` 0 '95 : 4 9 P. 14r'?C)
�
I
•
'0
Site Requires Lxunediatz Aaendon - J
—(n0
Facility Number. -�/--
S11r VI51-T 17ON MCORD
HATE: �._����„� i . 1995
Owner Pri Farm Name:
County; gender
Agcnt Visiting Site: Bryantm. Spivey Phone: [phone]
Opeaator. __ Ed Sunmeg Phone: -�910 2$3-9944
On Site Represcatadvc: _., Phone: -
Physical Address' 421 jUst south of catfish fare.
intersection of SR 1 and US 421. Farm is on the left.
Mailing Address: r„uF, .---. _421.—
Currie, NC.. 28435
Type Of Operation_ 'Swine x Poultry CHttic
Design Capacicy: 200 sow Number of Animals on Sitc., 200 sows - Farrow ' /Wean
Latitude: a Lcrigitude:
Type of Inspection: Ground ___Z, Aerial
Circle Yea or No
Does tte Animal Write Lagoun have sufficient frccbozcr$ of 1 Foct + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Four + 7 inches) Yes or 5 Actual Freeboard: 1 Feet 4 — lncl¢es
For faci Sties With Mort than one lazoon, please address the oter la(zcons' freeboard under .fie
comments section.
Was annv seepage obsen-ed from the hagoon(s)? Yes or ' Was there erosion of Lhe dam:': Ycs 0
Is adequate I=d avaUable for land application? e) or No Is the cover crap adequate? �� or Na
Additional Comrneats: t hich_dug
was pwnpipg the lagoon on the date of this inspection.
at to (91975-355 igum f Al n