780027_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Facility Number: 780027
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for visit Routine
Date of Visit 02J13f20117 Entry Time: 09:00 am
Farts Name: 7681
Owner. Tar Heel Hatchery Inc
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Status: Active
Permit AWS780027
inactive Or Closed Date:
County: Robeson Region:
Exit Time: 9:00 am
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-843-2133
Mailing Address: PO Box 150 Raeford NC 28376
Physical Address: Sr 1702 751 Watson Farm Rd Maxton NC 28364
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 51' 52" Longitude: 79" 07' 37"
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and the
farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Incident E
Owner Email-
Phone:
Certified Operator:
James Brian McGugan
Operator Certification Number. 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Cudd
Phone
On -site representative
Mike Cudd
Phone :
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780027 Owner- Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number. 780027
Inspection pate: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,400
Total Design Capacity: 2,400
Total SSLW: 1,039,200
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.00 45.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na #!e
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number, 780027
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk loamy sand,
0 to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 2
Rains sandy loam
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
[]
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number. 780027
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Me
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑N
❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
ElEl
El
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ N ❑ ❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ N ❑ ❑
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
page: 5

f
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 760027 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780027
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region:
Date of Visit: 03/09/2015 Entry Time: 03:00 pm Exit Time: 4:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name: 7681 Owner Email:
Owner: Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Phone:
Mailing Address: PO Box 150 Raeford NC 28376
Physical Address: Sr 1702 751 Watson Farm Rd Maxton NC 28364
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
91 D-843-2133
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34- 51' 52" Longitude: 79° 07' 37"
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and the
farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Star, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative, Mike Cudd Phone:
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s)-
i
nspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
rffSwine - Farrow to Wean 2,400
Total Design Capacity: 2.400
Total SSLW: 1,039,200
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.00 34.00
page: 2

}
Permit: AWS780027
Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
ON
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
E]
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
N ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑0
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet slacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
0
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number:
780027
inspection Date: 03/09/15 lnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal
Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Rains
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
13
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑ ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
0
E ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check the
❑
N ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
■ ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
E ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewhnspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 780027 Facility Status: Active Permit: AVVS780027 ❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region: Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 0311812014 Entry Time: 12:00 pm Exit Time: 12:30 pm
Farm Name: 7681
Owner: Tar Heel Hatchery Inc
Incident ti
Owner Email:
Phone:
910-843-2133
Mailing Address: PO Box 150 Raeford NC 28376
Physical Address: Sr 1702 751 Watson Farm Rd Maxton NC 28364
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 51' 52" Longitude: 79° 07' 37"
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and the
farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Cudd Operator Certification Number: 25233
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2/26/14.
Site visit 3118114.
Robert Marble Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facitity : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.00
page: 2

r
Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharnes & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
11 M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.l large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
00
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na He
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Norfolk
Soil Type 2 Rains
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
M ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
(]0
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
M ❑
❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 D
0
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
e ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? if yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
[]
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

,; Z
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number: 780027 Facility Status: Active Permit. AWS780027
tnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County: Robeson Region:
Date of Visit: 02/26/2013 Entry Time: 08:30 am Exit Time: 9:00 am Incident 9
Farm Name: 7681 Owner Email:
Owner: Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Phone:
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-943-2133
Mailing Address: PO Box 150 Raeford NC 28376
Physical Address: Sr 1702 751 Watson Farm Rd Maxton NC 28364
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 51' 52" Longitude: 79' or 37"
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and the
farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number: 23570
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone:
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2/6113
Site visit 2126/13
page: 1

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection fate: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
LE Swine - Farrow to Wean 2,400
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.0o
page: 2

1
Permit: AWS780027
Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
DischaEges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
[]
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ N
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the Stale (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
El 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
01111
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
MEJ
❑
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
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Rains
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
E]
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
[]
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

. 0 1
Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately,
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑0
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 780027 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS760027 Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region: Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 02126/2013 Entry Time: 08:30 am Exit Time: 9:00 am
Farm Name: 7681
Owner: Tar Heel Hatchery Inc
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone:
910-843-2133
Mailing Address: PO Box 150 Raeford NC 28376
Physical Address: Sr 1702 751 Watson Farm Rd Maxton NC 28364
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 51' 52" Longitude: 79° 07' 37"
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and the
farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other lssues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number: 23570
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2I6113
Site visit 2126/13
page: 1

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
FffSwine - Farrow to Wean 2.400
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
N ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ N
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
a. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
w ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
e ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na Me
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Rains
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
■ ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
N ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780027 Owner - Facility : Tar Heel Hatchery Inc Facility Number: 780027
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
El
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Na
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? if yes,
❑
■ ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e.. discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
N ❑
❑
page: 5

Ii ype of visit: mv t-ompnance inspection vperanon xevtew �, structure Evaiusnon tJ z ecnnicat Assistance
Reason for Visit: (&Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 130 Departure Time: D County
Farm Name: (01 — 1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Q 6(ow n ` L UL Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 6 V.l c-
Phone:
Region: FT D
Integrator: l r \U. r� j2 �` j — U aw C�
Certification Number: W `f
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design 'Current Design Current Design Current
Swine - C.a ci Pa Wet Pou! Ca aci Po Cattle Ca aci Po
P tY P tr3' P .. 't3' P• P h' P•
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Layer
Non -Layer
Dry P,oult ,
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
airy Heifer
Dry Cow
Ca aci 1P,o Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turk e Poults
Other
-.... P
Discharges and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
[] NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
[] NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�PNA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
g NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
jP P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 119 C-X"f= I Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
PRNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): y ��
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
K)No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[�PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
& Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
25 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
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 09No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑nEvidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area N ,
12. C rop Type(s): l_,MS1C' l .({� C�-L.-��GS���" ► ,�CiS���(��, fit\ �4cti(1 ooc(Se CC
13. Soil Type(s): I ) p( •�O 11Q , Y-6 \ 1)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
D Yes
Uq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Q5 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
P No
[] NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps [:]Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [-]Yes R No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
[:]Rainfall ❑ Stacking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

• FacillSy Number: - -_-i Date of inspection: -�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [54 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No 547NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29_ At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ® No D NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes &) No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
®No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
$3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
St� ✓I S�+ �- `�r�3
Reviewer/Inspector Name: i!!kq
— � u(� l J l e Phone: "116 ('33 - •3 .CO
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: _5` --P 6 "- .3
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: 18 Region: )C�W:
Farm Name: i 10� �`� Owner Email:
Owner Name: ` Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _9 , 6 2
,4
d4 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: ?0,"r —a2L j'0*-\
Certified Operator: pri c__ (�(�� Certification Number: _' 17h2q
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
riig Design Current { Desiga Current'' �"
Design Current
C Swine apactty Po:._.WetPoultty Gapactty Pop. Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish = Layer DairyCow
Wean to Feeder Nan La er DairyCalf
''`"
Feeder to Finish DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean 2 ,; Design Current .' D Cow
Farrow to Feeder D P.oul Ca a" . ci KO Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish La ers Beef Stocker
Gilts Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Boars Pullets Beef Brood Co —
5 Turkeys
Other Poults
—.Turkey
Other Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2_ Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes IN No C] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
Dg NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
g&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: _ I
01 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No PNA ❑ NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 37"
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
VU
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
10
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Cwt,-1 I &_,,e-rY Qja &,o 55 Cf 64r tl ) , 6,
13. Soil Type(s): A/i5y'-t-0 JXL , K_9A ice?
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
AO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[�T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes F No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 1>
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes f3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

- Date of Inspection:
7 Z
jFaciKty Number:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�9No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
P No
[] NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge
levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
O'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
PO NA ❑ NE
LP
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes j} No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
TT
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes [P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes rO No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: qr o-yq-�3
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review U Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
County: Rai Region: �40
er Email:
[one:
Physical Address:
AAt.
Facility Contact: /0 1-ke ccou Title: Phone No:
u �l,,,,
Onsite Representative: Integrator: /}���,�����W_
Certified Operator: C_ Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: E__1 c = I = 1
1 Longitude: = ° ❑ f = u
F
Swine
Design Currents Design Current
Capty Population �WPoultry Capacity Population
z
Cattle
Design CurrentjM
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
# LI
��Dry Poultry
°- ❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
El Pullets
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Dairy Calf
' " 4 ❑ Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow� ;
❑ Non -Dairy
❑Beef Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
❑Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Z
El Farrow to Feeder
ElLa
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]No
RNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
[�TNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 13�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes $1W o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No tNA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 cture 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes WINo ❑ 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 [PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P 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 �►] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? t
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes �'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ 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 Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) L0 &c_-k7 t J 'fy cdQ LLPA, , T_4� U4f1 �m , (3'5
_:9
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15_
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
CP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use.drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
• IC@r�s ��Vi�I?>�l 3i(VIi r
J 3124 II r
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: /Q
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date: 31-z V11
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 1PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ W­Up ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Qd No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
VC No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_ Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �p No ❑ NA ❑ 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 ((� No ❑ 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'? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ 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 [� 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? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
E
Page 3 of 3 12128104

$,y q -/Z — Z 0/0
Type of Visit Pf Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ZS- D Arrival Time: %i00 Departure Time: '%; 40 County: &1bts4A1
Farm Name: _ #76 6/% _ (_T°v/O�( �0` �`'7 , ��'�'� Owner Email:
Owner Name: %u- 8pvwA_ LL.0 _[ �rl -� Aw4,c *y,.T�c Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: " ' JLAL' C ,-,Ad Title: L-Nm Mamd_SCX' Phone No:
Region: 111:,12D
Onsite Representative: Mil , cujd Integrator: A4-
Certified Operator: 15r'* _ �� ��� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =o =, [� « Longitude: [=]o EJ, = W
Design Current
Design Current
Design S0.1grent
Swi►te Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
I
I
❑ DajEy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
1Dry
Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
El Layers
❑ Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
PBoars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turkeys
Qther
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
1-1YesEl
No
,,�N
OA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
L A
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
I
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
,
L'SNA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
<.
❑ NA
ElNE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El��OElYes
NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number:']
Date of Inspection -2 S7/
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 7 fo&l%
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
z9"
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ici large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes L7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑Yes B o ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes L7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? El' Yes ��< El NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes L '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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required bufters, 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 L`f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
t / �
12. Crop types)y,.�,^dc� ({ �4S�crt ,�ja.t,/� ray n/ K0,
13. Soil type(s) _ Nor-r' J % FZa' W S —.._
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
ET'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
L No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/inspector Name K�� IZ+hS Phone: 410-'tt-33--3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: a'� � Date: �Y�L�, ZG�O
12128104 Continued

r
Facility Number:-78 —027 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents ,�
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes [5 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n ❑ Maps
p El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain inspections ❑l Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Lj
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N�o
❑ NA
ElNE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El2 Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
B<
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
ElYes
31 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Mf <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?
❑ Yes
BI o
❑ 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
�'No
L'
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ict discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
9<
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0<0
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

t
Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: _0&A1 I Departure Time: County: Pb8RegionE�
Farm Name:
Owner Name: ��h Lc
Mailing Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: l k r'`4+'� Title:
Onsite Representative: C4
Certified Operator: r,-nlL �CP—
Back-up Operator:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator: duaV4��U.,)kA C
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: • Latitude: 0 0 0 6 = « Longitude: =o = 6 = L1
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet poultry_ ,
Capacity Population
Cattle Capac.014ty Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder1,1[:]
Non -La er I
I ❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
2 qe6
'" ❑ Dai Heifer
❑
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
° �_
Farrow to Feeder
❑
. � ..
❑ Non-Dai
❑
Farrow to finish
Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
_ ❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
_
t�'
[] Beef Brood Co
'��°}�
Other
❑ Other
:'
"; Number of Structures:
WIN
�.
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
M NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
4 NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
)n NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
( No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Strutture ]
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
ZZA
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes *No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
J5 NA ❑ NE
Structure 5
Structure 6
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes k No
❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aootication
10.
Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
'0 No
El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence f Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of
Area
12.
Crop type(s) 4� Pe,-S lr 1, . �
►q1r'__S42ej
13.
Soil type(s) g�,t S — . /ifD✓�F o / % t/�
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
fig No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Epqo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
AL
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 9 0-y333
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 'yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 49 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [�io El NA ❑ NE
23. 1 f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 93 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25_
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
CA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
9PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[�PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
&No
❑ 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
NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
( No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
i Y 4
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

/lIs �,v�cr<cd 41 // —Zoos Rli_...
Type of Visit &11r ompliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: //,'/S` County: Av beso"
Farm Name: 7�e 9/ Owner Email:
OwnerName.. tn4//✓
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Region: 1z.71W
Physical Address: r
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ��'f'+d l�4..�. "r Integrator: A k V41 � ^�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: E::] o E�:]' = Longitude: = o =' = "
Desi n Current
g
SKine $Capacity Population
v ,ol
g'
I)esi n C•urrent Design Current
Wet Poultry _ Capacity. Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑
La per
❑
Dairy Cow
❑Nor
er
❑
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish'
:...
Dry Poultry -
La ers
ers
Pullets
Turkevs
"
❑
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
❑
D Caw
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑
Non-Dai
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other .
❑
❑Non-I,a
El
❑
❑
❑
Beef Stocker
❑Beef
Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Nu
3 ' `tuber of Struetzfres:
Turkey Poults
Other
_
..
❑ Other ❑
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DN1'Q)
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 ofthe State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes KI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
21 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
00 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued
" Jt _az - l—.ii

a
Facility Number: 7 — z'% Date of Inspection WE_7
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes m No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
El Yes
,,yy��
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
01 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'?
❑ Yes
[Z] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ yes
EjNo
❑ NA [_1 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
1K] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aoolication
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
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn,
etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of
Area
12. Crop types) j�1.f-htc�d,� (� %6i,rT ��rl� vet•
13.
Soil type(s) / eL �D A I
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 7 g —Z 7 Date of Inspection 4/-O
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ,n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes [g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes [21 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Vj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
QfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[HNo
❑ NA
❑ 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
No
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
[9No
❑ 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
� No
❑ NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
J9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

311a10-� UI/S
t
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z -/'/-Q Departure Time: ; ro County: Region:
Farm Name: 7&,-/ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �aµd h rl>CktMcjO4-tJ*1✓ Title: _ OUAr • Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: t> b-z .s ri
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [= o [� , [= « Longitude: 0 0 =' = l{
Design Current
ine Capacity PopulationT�[
We# Poultryopulation
mip
Gurrent Design C►►urrent
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Dai Calf
Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
Wean to Feeder
rE01
Non -La er
Feeder to Finish
Dry Poultry
ers❑Beef
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
Feeder
❑Beef Broad Cowl I
Number of Structures:
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
to Finish
Gilts
Boars
❑ Turke s
❑ Other
LIFarrow
heOther
Discharp-es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
EI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
FJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
(� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3
12178104
Continued

Facility Numl Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'?
❑ Yes
T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
j�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 _
Observed Freeboard (in): Z 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
{
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
[]NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
& 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 71
No El 1-1NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
IL . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IoNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) urw. da.. (ir �'•�i.�1 C LNcrSJ
13. Soil type(s) ZdZk_ p pt
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
1.7. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
FANo ❑NA El NE
[� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
91 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
F No ❑ NA ❑ NE
P9No ❑NA El NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name r 5 -
Phone: ID 111 330
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -7T Date of Inspection Z /V—O
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes (m No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes f4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
'3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
$No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than nonnal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ 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
T 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?
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33_
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Oq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: A74bcs,,o **V Region: 1EV0
Farm Name: 19/ p Owner Email:
Owner Name: ' 4e- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative.
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
At"
No: Q� ,
Integrator: /mil " 1'ow"d
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = =,, Longitude: 0 ° = I = U
Design Current3.:
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
I
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Cow
❑ La ers
❑ Non -La
El Pullets
❑ Turkeys
ElNon-Dairy
El Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
El Beef Brood Cow
Other
❑ TurkeyPou Its
El Other
Number of S#rue#ures:
❑ Other
� D
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Gilts
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (Ifyes, 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes [29 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
09 No
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -] - Z'7 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes [?fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 93 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
[ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
[[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
1
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
V�3 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
P� 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
)91 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Apolication
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
[NNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s) ��,No A
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
R3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary,}:
0
Reviewer/Inspector Name ' GK 1Ve V 5 Phone(5fVV)#glo -15#1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: lP-.d6-ZOO&
Page 2 of 3 12/28IU4 Confinued

I
Facility Number: -7 S — Z Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ;9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box_ ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n El Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application �ZA pp ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfer ual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
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 phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
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 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?
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
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[FrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: `
Page 3 of 3 12128104

•
7 !� Division of Water Quality
Facriltty,Nttmber S 2 O Division of Sod and Water Conservation 4
, r _
r _ Q Other Agency "xa a',�,
Type of Visit I& Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: //'Z i'0 Arrival Time: Departure Time: �� County': Region: 19�-Q
Farm Name: it g I _ Q Owner Email:
Owner Name: � t;L.Y_—A8-PZ- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Phvsical Address:
Facilitv Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
�a
tV�l,t
KLJ.114 _ ___C4r
Certified Operator -
Back -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Phone No:
Integrator: _&r -e1j47 b t.✓I✓
Operator Certification Number -
Back -up Certification number:
Latitude: = 0 0 = s Longitude: ❑ o [� & �r
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La yet
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑
Lavers
❑
Non -Layers
❑
Pullets
❑
Turkevs
❑
Turkev Poults
❑
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge obserred from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (if ves. notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: E
d. Does discharge hvpass 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 ofthe State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ERNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
5' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:1 Yes
V] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

4
Facility Number: -7— 2,1 Date of Inspection T__2 -O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
n tr
Designed Freeboard (in):
4
Observed Freeboard (in):/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes (9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes MNo El NA ❑NE
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
[X No
NA NE
❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
09 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence Qf Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) BCA- 101.4,d,CA— LG VQ 2 -c S hn4 ;
a r—J
13. Soil type(s) D A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination '❑ Yes
[�d No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Eaplaiupi.ans YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments..
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages, as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector [Name � t �1/ t�5 Phone:
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: �] — Z, Date of Inspection Il-Z9-O
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes. check ❑ Yes Ili No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WDP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
❑ Yes
CgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24_ Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non -comp] iance of the permit or CAWM P? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ 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?
❑ Yes
EgNo
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit`? (iel discharge. freeboard problems. over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector tail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[Additional Comments and/or Drawings: . ,<
12128104

7
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspbction C) Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: J Jl. S O sf k Time:
L Faciliry Number
l\ot O erational l3elnK' Threshold
❑ Permitted 13 Certified M Conditionally Certified Reagistered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: __ C. G1-r'r01l li rv.n T n C _ Countv: a"
Owner Name: C arrn(I rs u 21 — Phone No: (gig)
Mailing Address: l-, 01 90Y 1J6Jscw Pj c a835d
Facility Contact: M6, W M e— i V. d Title-
Onsite Representative: fA'
Certified Operator: I a/4 U
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Intecrator• C • S
Operator Certification Number: t `-;
® Swine ❑ Poultry [--]Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' �� Longitude �' �• K
Design Current
awmr
❑ Wean to Feeder
CM r
ON Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Ca aciri• Population
❑ Laver I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non Laver ❑ Non-Dainr
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Preseut ❑ Laeoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ ]\o Liquid Waste Management System
Discharzes & Stream Imgacts
1 _ Is anv discharge observed from any part of the operation?
_ ❑ Yes �j$ 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? (lf yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes W No
3. Were there ant• adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes P9 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes [Z'No
Structure 1 Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ;�.r
05103101 1 Condnued

f
Facility Number: g — � Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [}�T0
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 �hlo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an CC
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes W No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes allo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes [ANo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes P No
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [�,No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes F!StNo
16, is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ULNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
NNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
PJLNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
PNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
C,No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
QINo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
ED/No
(] No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
Gomments (refer #o question: ExpEain any YES answers andlar any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facilit-, to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy El Final Notes N1
CZZ --- Sot f 4 �— W
CC) rCL3
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

F
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 1 .)J1 '--'
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes [I 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 1g] 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 ranks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments- and/or Drawings:
AL
O5103101

Information contained in this database is from non agency sources and is considered unconfirmed.
Animal Operation Telephone Log
DWQ Facility Number 78-1
Farm Name 17681
Caller's Name jDawn Williamson
10 Reporting 0 Complaint
Caller's Phone # email
Access to Farm
Farm Accessible
from main road 10 Yes 0 No
Animal Population
Confined 10 Yes 0 No
Depop 10 Yes 0 No
Feed Available 10 Yes 0 No
Mortality 10 Yes 0 No
SpraNr Availability
Pumping
Equipment
10 Yes 0 N
Available
10 Yes 0 No
Fields
-cit. tr6
Date 17-8-2003
Time :Oopm
Control Number 13483
Region JFRO
Lazoon Questions
Breached
-1
10 Yes 0 No
Inundated
10 Yes 0 No
Overtopped
10 Yes 0 No
Water on
FO- Yes 0 No
Outside Wall
Dike Conditions
10 Yes 0 No
Freeboard Level
Freeboard
Plan Due Date Date Plan Date Freeboard
Inches
(? equals blank) Received Level OK
Lagoonl
— —1
Fv 1 o—/2 o o 3 7 - J-03
Lagoon2
Lagoon3
Lagoon4
LagoonS
Lagoon6
Ms Williamson is sending in a POA and was asked to report when out of the red.
................ I ................................................................. I ........................... I-- ..........................................
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Larry Baxley
Comments2

Jul 08 03 05:03p MURPHY-BROWN 9102933138 p.14
PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number: 78-27 County: Robeson
Facility !Name: Farm 7681
Certified Operator Name: Mark Hunt Operator Number. 25585
1. Current liquid level(s) in inches as measured from the current liquid level in the lagoon to the
lowest point on the top of the dam for lagoons without spillways; and from the current liquid level
in the lagoon to the bottom of the spillway for lagoons with spillways.
Lagoon! Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon Lagoon 5
Lagoon Name/ID: 7681
Spillway(Y or N): n
Level(inches): 18
2. Check all applicable items
Liquid level is within the designed structural freeboard elevations of one or more structures.
Five and 30 day Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
within acceptable ranges.
X Liquid level is within the 25 year 24 hour storm elevations for one or more structures. A
30 day Plan of Action is attached. Agronomic balance is within acceptable range.
Waste is to be pumped and hauled to off site locations. $plume and PAN content of waste
to be pumped and hauled is reflected in section III tables. Included within this plan is a list
of the proposed sites with related facility numbers, number of acres and receiving crop
information_ Contact and secure approval from the DWQ prior to transfer of waste to a site
not covered in the facility's CAWMP_
Operation will be partially or fully depopulated.
'Attach a complete schedule with corresponding animal units and dates fro depopulation
'if animals are to be moved to another permitted facility, provide facility number, lagoon
freeboard levels and herd population for the receiving facility
3. Earliest possible date to begin land application of waste.
I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information listed above and included within the
attached Plan of Action, and to the best of my knowledge and ability, the information is
accurate and correct.
Murphy -Brown LLC L'burq Division
Facility\Owner/Manager (print)
Facility Owner/Manager (signature)
Phone: [phone]
-2
Date:

Jul 08 03 05:03p MURPHY-BROWN
9102933138 p,15
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIE:
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): 7681
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr./24 hr. storm storage 8 structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 18.0inches
b. designed 25 yr.124 hr. storm 8. structural freeboard 19.0 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = 1.0 inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation) 184275 ft�
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3 114865 gallons
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design 180 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 253779 ft3
h_ current herd # 2400 certified herd ## 2400
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g = 253779 ft3
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k. (lines h + i + j) x 7.48 x 30 daysiline f=
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
1. current waste analysis dated J 06/16/2003
m. ((lines e + k)11000) x line 1 =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
0 ft3
95068 ft3
434896 gallons
2.20 lbsil000 gal.
1209.5 lbs. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00

Jul 08 03 05:04p MURPHY-BROUM
9102933138
p.1G
II. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD ANDlOR 25 YR.124
HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1.
Structure ID: 7681
line m = 1209.5 lb PAN
2.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
3.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
4.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
5.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
6.
Structure ID:
line m =
lb PAN
n.lines 1+2+3+4+5+6= 1209.5lbPAN
Ill. TOTAL PAN BALANCE REMAINING FOR AVAILABLE CROPS DURING 30 DAY DRAW DOWP
PFRInn_ no NOT LIST FIELDS TO WHICH PAN CANNOT RE APPLIEn DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD
o. tract #
p. field #
q. crop
r. acres
s. remalning IRR
2 PAN balance
(lblacre)
t. TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (lbs_)
column r x s
u. application window'
9b
Bermuda
2.10
202.00
424.2
Mar -Oct
9a
Bermuda
3.50
219.00
766.5
Mar -Oct
8b
Bermuda
3.00
194.00
582.0
Mar -Oct
'State current crop ending applica#ion date or next crop application beginning date for available
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 1772.7 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from section 11) = 1209.5 lb. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2/21100

Jul 06 03 05:04p MURPHY-BROWN 9102933136 p.17
x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from section 111) _
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) _
1772.7 lb. PAN
-563 lb. PAN
Line y must show as a deficit. 1f line y does not show as a deficit, list course of action here including pump and
haul, depopulation, herd reduction, etc. For pump & haul and herd reduction options, recalculate new PAN
based on new information. If new fields are to be included as an option for lowering lagoon level, add these
fields to the PAN balance table and recalculate the overall PAN balance. If animal waste is to be hauled to
another permitted facility, provide information regarding the herd population and lagoon freeboard levels at the
Irrigation onto existing spray fields will continue as weather and field conditions permit. Additional land is
available for pumping if needed.
PoA (30 Day) 2/21100

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
L
t Date of Visit: S 3J O Time: � ' LLa
Facilir}� 'umber t _.... Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
&i Permitted Certified ©Conditionally Certified Q Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ ' O,Wr6 County: 3.r,. F2& --
Owner -Name: __ GC.t-rrof lit _ ?� �691 ___ Phone No:
Mailing address: i3DX ti fd f_<6,Lj 1�,�- aS>3 !is _
Facility Contact: L,,: , Col l i vO Title: L 4 M Phone No: S .�
Onsite Representative: 01-L C.I I Lino _ _ . Integrator: ZJQr ,
Certified Operator: iVl c,.rl� J� Operator Certification number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 4 Longitude ' �• ��
Design Current
Swine rann6ty Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to %Vean
O
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulatiou Cattle Ca acift Po ulation
Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Nu -tuber of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drair
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is anv discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Svrav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharze is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b- If discharge is obsen•ed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in ealimin?
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 g Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spitiwav
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 214 Z3
05103101
W No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
R No
❑ Yes
J9 No
❑ Yes
[�LNo
Structure 6
Condnued

Facility Number: — 2 Date of Inspection o 0
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?
1 l . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
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 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 1 No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes qNo
❑ Yes R] No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes FAI No
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Gj No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Eomments (refer to question : Exphun any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additiona! pages as necessary}: ❑ Ficld Copy El Final Notes
Xi e1CQ J-0
Reviewer/Inspector Name c
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: D 11
® No
® No
® No
® No
05103107 1 Continued

Facilih- Number: 1,9 — Date of Inspection O D
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atJor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
7, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there an%- evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt.
roads, building structure. and/or public properr )
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. NVere 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 corer?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary coN'er?
eats
El Yes [Ptilo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes �ZNo
❑Yes ONo
05103101

11�
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilihr Number slate of Visit: L.�G v -J Time: %cT4
hot Operational 0 Below Threshold
J' Permitted ® Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm name: — - �i9�• 74„,P1 County: S rrEw
Owner Name: ,1��� iL� C , / PhoneNo:
lllailing Address: <Ii Zti ✓ ,4 c�� /!/
Facility Contact: lSlt f C_oi�Jr Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �/a ��•S.f Integrator: /:.a,P.�a< �4
X
Certified Operator: ///�4.G/VZI� Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle []HorseLatitude a �" Longitude 0 •
SWine-
Design - Current.
f 9n9�ifa� Pnetttii►tinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
."C O"D
1 (J�
❑ FmTo Ar to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design --Current Design Current'`
Poirltrs achy -Population Cattle Ca achy -?Po Mahon
❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non-Dairy
❑ Other - -
Total Design Capacity —
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons � [] Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ S ray Meld Area
Holding. Ponds /. Solid Traps `, ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharces & 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? ElYes No
b. If discharge is obsen,ed. aid it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) El 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) ElYes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El 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 S Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes kNo
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: c
!i
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 78 — 271 Date of Inspection 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 ❑ 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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management PIan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
I6.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Required Records & Documents
„ •....
17.
Fail to have rti'fi
Ce cate of Coverage &General Permit readily available?
❑ Ye"s',KNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WU ecklists, design,maps, etc.) ✓
El Yes
9No
19.
`�
Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigatio reeboa aste 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
JgNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ff No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(e/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
ISINo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0_4Aio
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
DTNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
iVo violaiioris;or defcieitcie5 were noted clu . ii 4bis'visit' Y:oii wiil r.eoeiye do 1Fui-ther: :
4orres�oriden ' e' ah' ' f this visit •
Comments{refer to question #): Explaiiii any YES answers and/or any -recommendations or;any oilier comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as.necessary) M
WA - AM
�/S f�s�(j yam_ �w% �%t.✓.� �L /rG^� �� A f✓�� .
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
5100

Facility Number: 7,P — 27 Date of inspec itm
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 anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes '�KNo
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes �,Vo
roads, building structure, and/or public property) yam,
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? El Yes 0 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? ElYes 9NO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Oyes ❑ No
O5103101

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
for visit O Routine O Complaint ® Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit 1 6-5-2001 Time: 15:30 Printed on: W012001
Factfity Number 78 Z7
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: - -- ---- -- -- -•
Farm Name: 7!6>��_......... _....... .- - _.........- ................. - County:
Owner Name: __._._ _._.- �SxH�l�gr.inc--- Phone No:
Mailing Address: P1w?.R�oat.�S1?.........- ..............._ _.-..__................................................ BngthiA1YC........ ............. ...... ..._....W ..... ... ? 1 .
Facility Contact: sty Csu ...... .......... _ .......... _ ..... Title: T`sA�..11t............. .......-...... Phone No: ....... _ . .... _.. _.. .... .....
OnsiteRepresentative: __-----------------___--- Utegrator.Carrn11'jLEmxb-hLc.___.__--_..__—.--
Certified Operator. jytk ._ ...... _W ........ ]nit............................-_..W..._ . �.. Operator Certification Number -
Location of Farm:
Prom Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt. on SR 1001 and proceed 1.1 miles and turn RL on SR 1702 (dirt road) and A
.he farm entrance is OS mile on the right.
® Shine ❑ Routtry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 51 6 " Longitude 79 '
DischaM _4 Stream Impacts
1- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon © Spray Field M 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 it lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Yes 0 No
Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 14 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0 Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........................... ...............-......... ........ --.--.............
Freeboard (inches): ..................... ..... .............................

05103✓01
• Facility Number: 78-27
Date of Inspection 6-g Zillll
Printed on: 620/2001
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 maintenancelimprovement?
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
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the reoeiving 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? (id 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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 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
t© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Collins called the FRO to report that a flush tank had overflowed and that approximately 500 gallons had flowed into an adjacent field
re it was contained. It did not reach surface waters. The inspection revealed that the pended waste in the field was seeping in and posed
it to any waters. There was no area where recovery would be possible due to the soybean crop planted in the field.
Reviewerlinspector Name doheHesty > ...:..... .
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Nottfication O Other
❑ Denied Access
c Date of Visit: 3-30-IOQI Tune: Printed on: 6/5/2001
Facility Number 78 27
i„�. A�-m•.�-.�.�-..�..�..•.�»•.�..�--- �...�. Q Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted IS Certified 13 Conditionally Certifed 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 760.1.......... ...................................... County: RQJMaQA---------------------------------- F&Q.... -...
OwnerName: far_HeelHaicher}:utc...._,_._._. Phone No: 9�Q$7-�QlS-------------•------,--------
Mailing Address: P.Q_B�tt�.l ll.......... ...........--.... ..._--............---.._... Raet'n>rd.IBC............. ............... ........................ ---... 2.93ZG.,............
Facility Contact: �tuaty..lwstllinx............. .....Title: Eny,.Mzt. Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative:Integrator:------
Certified Operator: U$irlt..................................... That .................................................. Operator Certification Number: 25585 ...........................
Location of Farm:
From Red Springs take 71 to Shannon and turn Lt- on SR 1001 and proceed I.1 miles and turn Rt. on SR 1702 (dirt road) and kw
the farm entrance is 0.5 mile on the right.
® Swine © Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude _ 3-t_ ? • Si SSK Longittrde ;- 79 -{- 07 !` 38
Design Copt Design Ctrrretit Desrgn..:: .Current.::
swine
Ca edit . Po rtlation:
❑ Wean to Feeder
. ❑ Feeder to finish
® Farrow to Wean. 2400
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gills
❑ Boars
Dlscha _saes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the opc-ration'? ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field W Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes N No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes; notify DWQ) [I Yes N, No
c. If discharge is obsen cd, what is the estimated flow in gal/rein?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`' (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes N No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..........................
Freeboard (inches): ........... 133---------
.-- ..._.......................

!E _
Facility Number. 78--27 Date of inspection 5-30-2001 printed on; 6/512001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures obse.-rved? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes CK 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 eg 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 CR No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
9. Do any strictures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
[] Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
H No
c) 'Phis facility is pende d for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
H No
15. Does the receiving coop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
CR No
Required Records & Documents
17. rail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
CR No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, traps, etc.)
❑ Yes
H No
19. Does record keeping need intprovLrnent? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
19 No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22. fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
R No
24. Does facility require a follow-up -visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
H No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? []Yes N No
A No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ final Notes
There is a low area in the front field (water way) that has some wild mustard that will need attention.
1331b. PAN for 2000-2001 on overseed has been changed to 50 lbs. for 2001-2002.
Overall bermuda fields look good.
Reviewerllnspector Name John H E�'fPad iia
Reviewer/insnector Sienature: !V J . , Date:

^� .-• • ' �.y, v.��•-:ems.,
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 7, 2000 FAYETrEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Carroll's Foods, Inc.
Attention: Leslie Stutts
P. O. Box 1767
Laurinburg, NC 28352
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Carroll's Foods, Inc.
Farms: 7705, 7707, 7681, and 7078-1
Facility Nos. 83-22, 83-23, 83-12, and 78-27
Scotland and Robeson Counties
Dear Mr. Stutts:
On June 27, 28, and 29, 2000, staff from the Fayettteville Regional Office of
the Division of Water Quality conducted inspections of Carroll's Foods Farms in
Robeson and Scotland Counties. The inspections revealed that overapplication had
occured on the winter overseed at the facilities noted above. It was also noted that the
application fields for these farms need work to control weeds to keep from harming the
primary crop of bermuda hay.
In regard to the deficiency(s) noted during the inspection, the following
actions are requested:
1. Work on weed control in application fields.
2. Make sure that the overapplication of nitrogen is avoided in the future.
Please provide a written response to this office on or before July 21, 2000 as
to the actions taken or proposed to be taken to resolve these deficiencies. Nothing in
this letter should be taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and liability of
any violations that have resulted or may result from this deficiency.
If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact John Hasty at
[phone].
Sincerel
John C. Hasty, Jr.
Environmental Specialist
cc: Sonya Avant -Compliance Group
Trent Allen-DSWC Fayetteville Office
Ed Holland -Robeson Co. NRCS
B. W. Anderson -Scotland Co. MRCS
Central Files -Raleigh
GROUNDWATER SECTION
225 GREEN STRLET, SUITE 714 / SYSTEL BLO. FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28301-5043
PHONE: [phone] FAX: [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED 1 10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER
DENR TOLL FREE HOTLINE: [phone]

SENDER: I also wish to receive the
■ Complete items 1 and/or 2 for additionai services.
■ Complete items 3, 4a, and 4b. following services (for an
■ Print your name and address on the reverse of this form so that we can return this extra fee):
Card to yrou. m
■ Attach this corm to the front of the maiipiece, or on the back if space does not 1. ❑ Addressee's Address
ppeermit. ■ Write 'Return Receipt Requested`on the mailpiece below the article2, ❑ Restricted Delivery
e number. to
■ The Return Receipt will show to whom the article was delivered and the date Consult postmaster for tee.
delivered. P rz
Addressed to:
Leslie Stutts
Carroll's Foods Inc
PO Box 1767
Laurinburg NC 28353
83-22, 83-23,83-12, 78-27
5. Received By: (Print !Name,
6. Signatur : (Adore or
X.
PS Form 3811, December 1
4a. Article Number
Z 425 691 005
4b. Service Type
❑ Registered
❑ Express Mail
❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
8.
and fee is paid)
®ArA
Certified
❑ Insured c
❑ COD
O
0 requested
c
a4
102595-98-13-0229 Domestic Return Receipt

Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted C] Certified E] Conditionally Certified E3 Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
FarmName: ......._�..... 6... IF.] ..... .............................................................. County: ........ �Q...� e 5.�7 ........... .................... _.
��77 / t Phone No :..............
Owner Name:....._.1....G...Y.:.C.'tl...l..I.....$......................5.. `f�,-C:......... 2.7 6..-�S2Y.d............................ .............
Facility Contact: .... ..s..........' . - ..........e..........Title:..1r..:.....�1...1�'1.................. Phone,N,o/:................................_..._..q...Q....
Mailing Address: ...... I........1✓..f... O /(Al..r*f... JI/..G...................Z.�j..`.CJ....
... .
�^L ..y�j� f ..
Onsite Representative: ,..f........'.{. r!_7........._................................................ Integrator:.............................
Certified Operatoi
Location of Farm:
...A...-AIL.dL1(.. ......................... Operator Certification Number: ..... _...................................
Latitude =• =' =`. Longitude =• =' ="
Design __'Current'. = Design current LL..a, Design Current
,;$wine ..Capacity.'Po elation `- 'Poultry Ca an - _ "ty-Po elation -; ty: Po elation _Cattle . = Ca aci
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy
to Finish ❑Non -Layer -` ❑ NonDairy
i Farrow to Wean 2
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other - r
Farrow to Finish Total Destgti Capacity 2
❑ Gilts _
❑Boars Total SSLW
_. Number of Lagoons-� ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holden Ponds / Sohd Traps:= ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
g'
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
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: p
Freeboard (inches): ...........5...............
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Rl No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
[]Yes gNo
Structure 6
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

r
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
b. 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 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 maintenance/improvement? '
11. Is there evidence of over applications ❑ Excessive Ponding P(PAN
12. Crop type P'PnA4- a-, / " eq
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the CertiftedAnimal 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
IT. 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?
(iel 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: * •yioiitiidris at deficie� &c were itgted diking �his;visit: - Yoit will •>�ebeiye iio; f jit�tht • ;
COrrespoiiden' & ahou/; this visit. ::.. .....:::..............::::... .
❑ Yes 4�No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ` 0
❑ Yes JXNo
❑ Yes XNo
y(Yes
❑ Yes lo
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes bTNo
❑ Yes E]�No
Yes [3 No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes EQ No
❑ Yes 6 No
❑ Yes 9I No
❑ Yes &No
6 erm KGtea 1-�-i e lc ga i'~ q �A 14 ��i11 his lae_�� 1'cs�ri�q
Pork o1- 00 ,4 Y 7 �J�r� �e�s,
P
IReviewer/Inspector Name„H 5 t� -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

I Facility Number- 70— ag 7 I Date of Inspection I o '-Zr06 J
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 o
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)
24. 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 JNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No

Information contained in this database is from non agency sources and is considered unconfirmed
Farm Emergency Call Form
Farm Number
..._
Date
- - 2000
Farm Name
Time
17681
Owner First Name
Call Number
1933
Owner Last Name
of Heel Hatchery, Inc.
p Reporting p Complaint
Source
Plan Due Date Date Plan Date Freeboar
eS Stutts
Inches (7 equals blank) Received Level OK
Breached
O Yes O No
Freeboard Lagoonl
_ _
P-18-2000.
Depopulated
Q Yes O O
Freeboard Lagoon2
Overflowed
O es Q O
Freeboard Lagoon3
LQ Issue
O Yes O No
PermissionToPump
O Yes O O
Freeboard Lagoon4
Inundated
O Yes O No
Freeboard Lagoons
Flooded
O Yes O O
Freeboard Lagoon6
Pumping Equipment
Q Yes O No
Comments

�6r vv .+ +.. �— a c�a vi r r .. r.i v,. vcu...v,-.,. .. a vv.. •. +11J vvl
a
7
DATE:
TIME:
TO:
1
FAX-
-Fax Cover Sheep ��
FRa nn -�c^��af.`
G�r..r_o Its
necLZI � / PHONE, 910/276-0648
f Ed ' 2 20M FAX: [phone]
FqY
RE:_ Fa��_ OFh& - -- -
CC:
Number of pages including cover sheet:
RIM

Z/01/00 WED 16:41 YAa 810 L75 2590
CARROLL-S FOODS
[a Do
February 2, 2000
Mr. Jeffery Brown
Division of Water Quality
225 Green Street Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28314
$3_9
Subject: gown Hpjghts/ $3-I a -q
Farr 77, N096, 7570, 7078-1, 7704, 7579 805
7706,Y76385 7171, 7682, 7572, 68 7575, 7576, 7578 ��-At53-11 71-2� W-11 18-10
Dear Mr. Brown,
As weather permits we wi;l pump these lagoons down to at least the 19"
mark. To our knowledge, there is no surface water getting to the lagoons. We
have plans to install pressure reducers on these farms. This should cause a
reduction of water usage. Due to excess rainfall and snow, we are ahead on out
lagoons filling for the spring pumping.
If you have any questions, please call me at 910-276-0648 ext. 432.
Sincerely,
i
Leslie Stuffs
Farming and Waste Manager
Laurinburg Division
R

VL/VAI uV Wri) 10-.4Z rA.& PAU 410 Luau 4 12/1
FE-B 02 '00 10 1 57AM CARROLL'S FOODS
9. Review CWAW and begin spraying on coasW beimuda as
soon as plan., allows (follow all regulations re: runoff).
9- Obtain required permission from adjacewhamdowner to
spray on designated fields. Amend the CWAIAP before
any fields not currently on the CWANP are utilized.
✓ 10. - investigate the feasibility of installing pressure reducers
an water lines.
Additional practices too be used:
Daw— i2-2-01000 - -

FED 02 ' 00 10 t S7RM CAR2OLL' S FOODS
Date: -,Pwo
Division of Water Quality
225 C-ffm Street -Suite 714 `
Fayetteville, NC 28314
Subject. Plan of Action
Name: e AT&W1/s -:;6
Farm Name:
Facility No:
Address: �+..
Phone:
P.12
Checked below are the items to be carried out on the above fare:
✓_ 1. Check inside and outside of buildings for water leakage and
water usage.
2. Repair and adjust any problems concerning excess wafer.
s/- 3. l spect berms around the lagoon(s) to make sure that
water is not entering the sysWm Repairs will be made
where problems are identified.
4. Review flushing and pit recharge schedules. Reduce
flushing and 'pit recharges when possible.
✓ 5. Closely monitor the soaking and clean -out of buildings
between herd placements. Reduce time and amount of
water usage as munch as possible.
6. Check the moisture levels and crop conditions in all
Way fields. ' Utilize applications on winter cover crops
according to CWAW (original or amended).
7. Utilize the 30 day prior to planting practice on those fields
to be planted in row crops.

46,
13 -DSoil laiia-,,Wa&&6n�e i�vision of S 6 iFVa ion OperationR
i -Water--Conservation
v si dt So'i d -and -Compliance Inspection­,:!�
Div
ision of -Water Quality.'= Compfia'iice Inspection
.0"i
DthimF-Agenc: 4
Op!erati(in,11600
0 Routine 0 Comelaint 0 Fohov,--up of DVVQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facilitv Number Date of lnspcctioj)
Time of Inspection F7d 24 hr. (hh:m
Permitted El Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: cc r_County . ...... ..........
...... ....... /1W ....... W47 �))'I ..... . .......
Ownerfl .................. ........................ ........................................... Phone No: ....... 02 10/-.
y Title: Facilit Contact: Ph( e 0:
. .. ................. .... ..... ................... no N ...................................................
Mailing Address:
... ............................................ Integrator: ......................................................................................
Onsite Representative: .... Le5
.................. ... .......... * ........... .........
Certified Operator: .... ....................... ... L.1 ......................... Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
..............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
............................... ............................................... .................. . ............................................... I ............................. I ....... ­­ ...................................................... I .........ye
Latitude Longitude
Design
awme
E] Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
0 Farrow to Feeder
I 0 0 Far -row to Finish
El Gilts
.E] Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
JE] Layer E= E] Dairy I I
JE] Non -Layer I I Non -Dairy I I
E] Other I I I
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE] Subsurface Drains Present j ALago.n Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps F❑[IR, Liquid Waste Nlanagement System
Discharges & Stream ImpacLS
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
C:
Discharge originated at: E]Lagoon DSpray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-inadc'!
1). li'discharge is observed. did it reach: [j Surface Waters [] Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed. what is the csiiinated flow in gal/min?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any 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?
I 4=
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier;
Freeboard(inches): ........... / ....... ............. ............................. ................................ .. .................................... ............................
El Yes 1KNo
El Yes �No
El Yes XNo
. / Yes %No
C3
El Yes /?No
0 Yes gN No
E] Yes IVNO
Structure 6
1/6/99 Continued on back

rFa _6 flit)K umber: — Z Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
8. Does any pant of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, 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'? ❑ Pondinr El% Nitrogen
12. Crop type ......... ......:............................................ ..........
❑ Yes 'A No
❑ Yes PCNo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes P�No
❑ Yes ONO
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in.the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes )KNo
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) ElYes �No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes T,(No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes !(NO
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes 91 No
19. Does record keeping need improvement*? (ic/ irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes KNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 01No
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes N0
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes INo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes o
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o
N�o.vioJations:or dei'iiciericies.were' noted. during ttiis.vis_ou will.retceive no further
eorrespofidehee: abbfA this visit.: ; ; ; ; ;
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any_recomrnendatioris or any other comments...-
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)-,
"d 164i oders�e�l sue,
iewc-,,rkej `fib Si�:e 7te(
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 13 -031-9 , _ I116/99

RECEIVED
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment JUL 2 3 1998
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality FAYETTEVILLE
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
REG. OFFICE
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
.Tune 26, 1998
Tar Heel Hatchery, Inc.
7681
PO Box 150
Raeford NC 28376
F4?•
WAA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROUNA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Reissuance of Certificate of Coverage
No.AWS780027
7681
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage and
Application System
Robeson County
Dear Tar Heel Hatchery, Inc.:
The Division of Water Quality modified the Swine Waste Operation General Permit originally issued to
this facility on September 9, 1997. In accordance with the issuance of the revised General Permit, we
are forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) to Tar Heel Hatchery, Inc., authorizing the operation
of the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with
General Permit AWG100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but
not limited to, the management of animal waste from the 7681, located in Robeson County, with an
animal capacity of no greater than 2400 Farrow to Wean and the application to land as specified in the
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
COC No AWS780027 dated September 9, 1997. The COC shall hereby incorporate by reference any
specific conditions of the previous COC issued to this facility. The purpose of this COC is to allow
coverage under the revised General Permit. Please review the revised General Permit (enclosed) and pay
particular attention to Condition II.10 regarding tree removal from lagoon embankments, Condition III. I
regarding inspection frequency of the waste treatment, storage and collection system and Condition 1II.6
regarding notification requirements for system failures, spills and emergencies. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations
as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the
General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance
with NCGS 143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive
relief.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recyded/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS780027
7681
Page 2
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this
COC or the General Permit, please contact Katharine Keaton at [phone] ext. 533.
S' cerely,
for A. Preston Howard, Jr., P-E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Robeson County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Robeson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

#za,e 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation Other Agency IV=ZM
0 Division of Water Quality
f'
10 Routine O Complaint O Fellow -up of DIVO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection . 30
Facility Number a .
Time of Inspection E�= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered XCertified U Applied for Permit Permitted 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated
Farm Name: ........................... 2... ,� 1 o mil..............
...�?. �-----..................................-....-----............... county:...................... ................. .......................
..................
Owner Name: ... Phone No: �`�....:3 . tr. afe........ g1.a....- ... -3�t�..............
Facility Contact: .............��..r e........ ... .. .?.?........... Title:................... ......... Phone No:......................----.........................
Mailing Address:..............f -S. & r 956 Wa rSct u�1.......1 Y C
/......................• ---- ....... .............. .............----
( .. Integrator:......�r,(.9
p .......t ....(:C.�........
Onsitc Representative:caa.il ..... ..../. � �a.l:G........................... ....
Certified Operator: ................ UC,tZli1.5.............. ........ �.rf.. ft .5............................. Operator Certification Number:........----------------...............
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude �• �� ���
t x Design Current- Design Current Design ` Currents
Swine ¢nCapacity; Population Po�l[ry° Capacity °Population ,CattieCapac�ty,Populatton
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
a t7
❑ Farrow to Feeder
S
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer
L❑
Non -Dairy
❑ Other
:. j ta! Design Capacity a
Total SS%W�
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes P(No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes J9No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [I 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 dischar,ge 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 [agoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ;ff No
❑ Yes [KNo
AM
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes Pf No
❑ Yes JffNo
❑ Yes CK No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes JXNo
Continued on back

{
Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed.,
Structures (Lagoons.lfold ing Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13_ Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff ente;-ing waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type..............COqs{ ../.........�e� r ..............................................................................................
..................... .
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'!
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Qnly
23. Does the facility fait 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?
No.violations or deficiencies rvere-no' te'd during this visit..You.will receive no further
correspondence about this.visit.• .
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes ANo
Structure ()
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
XYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;(No
❑ Yes J4 No
P(Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑' No
❑ Yes ArNo
❑ Yes fi4 No
❑ Yes ;KNo
OUYes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes PQ No
Comments (refer tic` question#)i Explain any YTS answers and/or'any recommendations or any other, coauunenis ,
Use.drawings of f'acthty to better expla'. situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Aa. Last b-q4s 40 be
I � `
16- cnw m P dJ 44 1S ir ` I _5 zmq
5u14 wit catnica1 inn C� �Ct�wMp
� I
�° �t�tM:S► P�n�
err wtcX� ss��
as . jksX
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name .. ,. `e�ni" ' .• .. ; 'p�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -j — �— Fp

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Wyatt Upchurch
7681
PO Box 150
Raeford NC 28376
Dear Wyatt Upchurch:
A&4
�EHNF=?L
September 9, 1997 R EC E V E ®
S 1 21991
FAYETTEVIL7M
BEG. CFFICE
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS780027
7681
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage
and Application System
Robeson County
In accordance with your application received on July 14, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate
of Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 78-27, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection, treatment,
storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached). This
approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of
animal waste from the 7681 Farm, located in Robeson County, with an animal capacity of no greater than
2400 Farrow to Wean and the application to a minimum of 56.6 acres of land as specified in the Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001. Pursuant to this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions- and
limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of
wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater
than the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual
increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation- of this COC. `
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] PAX 919-733-2496
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

If any parts, requirements, or limitations -contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC. or the
General Permit, please contact Mike Lewandowski at [phone] ext. 362.
Sincerely,
�A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Robeson County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Robeson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

State of Worth' Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard; Jr., P.E., Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN _RECEIPT REQUESTED
Carroll's Foods Inc
7681 . -
Box 1767
Laurinburg NC 28353
Farm Number: 78-27
Dear Carroll's Foods Inc :
A4
now
[DEHNR
June 11,1997 RECEIVED
W, 1 0 1997
FAYETTEVILLE
REG. C:FFICE
You are hereby notified that 7681; in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1OC, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has thirty 30
days to submit the attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with
Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any
owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date.
Your application must be returned within thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the
application as required may also subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for
each day the facility is operated following the due date of the application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal
Waste Management Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is
incorrect please make corrections as noted on the application before returning the application package. The
signed original application, one copy of the signed application, two copies of a general location map, and
two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to complete the application
package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Permits and Engineering Unit
Post Office Box 29535
Raleigh, NC 27626-0535
If you have any question concerning this letter, please call John Jallah at [phone] extension
364 or Ed Buchan with the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone]
Since ly,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Fayetteville Regional Office (w/o encl.)
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled11G% post -consumer paper

Roritine O Com faint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other, a • f :.
�4'
Facility Number Date of Inspection 7� � 7
Time of Inspection, . f,7�IIse14 hi -ttitn '
Farm Status- ' Total Time (in hours) Spent onRevif
or Inspection (includes travel and precessing�l
Farm Name. 7 S l Count,.
:'.�.
Owner Name: - ��'�'`�l/r �� 1 Phone No:
Marling Address: Fa, /� ( 2L 3
Onsite Representative: �� ��` ! Ati % integrator.1{n'Ro�l
Certified Operator...., 12�9zL Operator Certification Number.- - '
s ar
Location of Farm:
%
Latitude Longitude Q• �' 0� ���
10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
sSwine� �NumirerPoultry JNnmber_�Caumbers
Wean to Feeder El
1
t
Feeder to Finish ❑Nan- ❑ 13oef
ON
Farrow to Wean aNs
Farrow to Feeder. ....
Farrow W Finish �❑ Other Type ofLtvestocic g
� 1.r'.P°ti b;,�• '� � ; , 5 .� �i�,.,�' t e� t tv� ---�V r �& �.-,' �,3'h �^�, w.� � 4'S�`� 't} ' dr,,; �"" '! �` � 3 v�r � e'�•
k E Rv%
Number of Lagoons frHcldng Ponds " ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Lb"Ir r
F
1*2
ihlY Lagoon Area spray F �Ar . a:
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancertmProvement? ❑ Yes MNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Z No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes IgNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) E] Yes P 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 g�No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes- M No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? _.: 3 Yes ;(No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require EL -Yes ' . U No
maintenancerm4wovement? —: -. _-, _ ---aves
Continued on back

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
S. Are there Iagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding`Pon�
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (fi): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 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)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste AvOication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
.(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
IS. Crop type
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
I7. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
IS. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Ong
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes )q No - •
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes J•No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes P,No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 91 No
❑ Yes ,EI No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes X No
El Yes EJ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )W No
❑ Yes ,M No
Cornmcnts (refer to question #)- Faxplain an aad/or y YES answers ariy recomme�ihons o%y co Ether ttm;entsy T
Use drawings offaciltty to better expla}n sm�ons ,(use addttional.pages as,�aecessery) ����;���-.g,,�� � „ � w _
29r.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviwerMspector Signature:
t
Bane:
cc.. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Foril-tssessrnent Unit
". 11/14/96

r
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Ai
County: —
Integrator:
Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. 7 APV;�
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: / y , 1995
Time: 10' 0
J
Phone:_ Cm ► toAEis
On Site Representative:_ _f _ Phone:^�
Physical Address/Location: o, 5,z e7o;, j . s.�,�.: - .,�, SUao 1
f
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: D S AS/
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: "
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) Y Se or No Actual Freeboard:__3_Ft. _6Inches
Was any seepage observed from the la n(s), Yes or ® Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? Ye or No Is thepover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized:''°°
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? Wor No
100 Feet from Wells? or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes o No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue ine: Yes oQ
Is animal waste discharged into water of a state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or(No-O If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste anagement reco s (volumes of manure, ]and applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? es r No
Additional Comments:
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

•rv_t
a t
tuck
-3wn by many local
mown being ground
am marmot
ember of the widely
and is actually a big,
g member of the
family. It seems
ate small -tailed,
ig! woodchuck
-m. , tree -climbing
we remember also
gophers, and ground
:asier to understand.
inally reminds us
-rel ancestry by cGm-
=s or to keep a better
sitory•
calied typical hiber-
=. When the tem-
In late fall, about
ichuclC; fat as a
rawis,• down to his
the We in after him
the passage to the
for the winter.
ibernation, nothing is
�e r W be omwerted
1xida oii of the blood
tie contrary, the lungs
'here is an occasional
talardon of breath -but
y oxygen in the lungs
Nn by. the slow heart
3n of gases. %
n, woodchucks do %
wir•'-, sleep promp-
se 1, to watch for �• ,r
w , _ xth as the case
3 become restless and
frequently during late
finally :coming out to
is gorse and tender
fields. y S
p ' n
1m
1S.
11R
1M
V
1�
L
�'`
117u
u
,•
3 Ux
JAILno
WS
1i
LM
.i� fYL
LAU
/
1 an
V
Un Wl
j1U
I e 1=1,
IF
la�r- -",a,

I

Pk