780091_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA .�
Department of Environmental Qual

1, t
❑
❑
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
780091
Facility Status: Active Permit:
AWS780091
Denied Access
Inpsection Typo:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Robeson
Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
02/15/2017 Entry Time:
04:00 pm Exit Time: 5:00 pm
Incident it
Farm Name:
5075 & 5076
owner Emall:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 37' 28"
take hway 130183 from Maxton. Turn SE (left) on SR 1107. Go past SR 1131 on left. Turn right on farm path
Longitude: 79° 23' 26"
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents M Other Issues
Certified Operator: Ronald Lee Matthews
Operator Certification Number: 990008
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Tillie 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: AWS780091 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780091
Inspection Date: 02/15/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Fff Swine - Feeder to Finish 17,600
Total Design Capacity: 17,600
Total SS LW: 2,376,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7075
31.00
Lagoon
7075(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7075A
26.00
50.00
Lagoon
7075E
26.00
50.00
Lagoon
7076
29.00
Lagoon
7076(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7076A
26.00
64.00
Lagoon
7076E
26.00
60.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy-13rown LLC Facility Number: 780091
inspection Date: 02/15/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ng
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 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)
❑
❑ M
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste_ Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na 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 (Lel large
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks andlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
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.?
❑
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: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 02/15/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Roufine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0 to
2% slopes
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg sandy loam
Soil Type 3
Rains sandy loam
Soil Type 4
Wagram loamy sand, 0 to
6% slopes
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?
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na He,
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?
❑
01111
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather lode?
❑
page: 4

l
Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780091
Inspection Date: 02/15/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1"Rainfall inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
2B. 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?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number 780091 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780091
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region:
Date of visit: 03/11/2015 Entry Time: 02:00 pm Exit Time: 2:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name: 5075 & 5076 Owner Emall:
Owner. Murphy -Brown LLC Phone:
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 37' 28" Longitude: 79° 23' 26"
take hway 130183 from Maxton. Turn SE (left) on SR 1107, Go past SR 1131 on left. Turn right on farm path
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Ronald Lee Matthews
Secondary OIC(s):
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-296-1800
Operator Certification Number: 990008
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: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 17,600
Total Design Capacity: 17,600
Total SSLW: 2,376,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7075
31.00
Lagoon
7075(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7075A
26.00
43.00
Lagoon
7075B
26.00
44,00
Lagoon
7076
29.00
Lagoon
7076(6)
29.00
Lagoon
7076A
26.00
49,00
Lagoon
7076B
26.00
48,00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
D
❑
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)
❑
110
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ N
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.eJ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
E ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
E ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ E ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Com, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Small Grain overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro loamy sand, o to
2 % slopes
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg sandy loam
Soil Type 3
Rains sandy loam
Soil Type 4
Wagram loamy sand, D to
6% slopes
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ E ❑ ❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 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 ❑ ❑
I& 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 Cer0cale 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?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
780091
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(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
❑
M ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA 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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
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. Al 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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
0000
CAWM P?
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 780091
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS780091
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine
County:
Robeson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of visit: 03/1912014 Entry Time: 01:30 pm Exit Time: 2:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name: 5075 & 5076
Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ■ Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Fans:
Latitude:
34° 37' 28" Longitude:
79° 23' 26"
take hway 130183 from Maxton. Turn SE (left) on
SR 1107. Go past SR 1131 on left. Turn right on farm path
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):
24 hour contact name
On -site representative
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Lagoon levels:
50753A = 42"
50753E = 42"
50763A = 38"
50763B = 38"
Records reviewed 313114.
Site visit 3119114_
Name Title
Mike Cudd
Mike Cudd
Robert Marble
Phone:
Phone:
Phone
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
[] Swine - Feeder to Finish
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7075
31.00
Lagoon
7075(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7075A
26.00
Lagoon
7075E
26.00
Lagoon
7076
29.00
Lagoon
7076(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7076A
26.00
Lagoon
70766
26.00
page: 2

Y
Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 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?
❑
❑ 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)
❑
110
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
E ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
E ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
[]
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
N ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
e ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
011
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN ? 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Gom, Wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 3
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg
Soil Type 3
Rains
Soil Type 4
Wagram
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
N ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
E ❑ ❑
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?
❑
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: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and V 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?
❑
❑
❑
2& 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 PDA 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 ❑
❑
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,
❑
M ❑
❑
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 / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
00
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
FacilityNumber:
780091 Facility Active
Facili Status:
Permit: AWS780091
[� Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine County:
Robeson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
02/26/2013 Entry Time: 01:00 pm Exit Time: 1:30
pm Incident #
Faun Name:
5075 & 5076
Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
34' 37' 28" Longitude:
79' 23' 26"
take hway 130183 from Maxton. Turn SE (left) on SR 1107. Go past SR 1131 on left. Turn right on farm path
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream
Impacts Waste Col, Sto(, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Eric L Ferrell
Operator Certification Number.
17634
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
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Lagoon levels:
5075-3A = 72"
5075-36 = 67"
5076-3A = 68"
5076-36 = 67"
Records reviewed 218113
Site visit 2126/13
Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated operations
Design Capacity
Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 17,500
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
WasteStructure's Observed
Disignated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7075
31.00
Lagoon
7075(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7075A
26.00
Lagoon
7075B
25.00
Lagoon
7076
29.00
Lagoon
7076(B)
29.00
Lagoon
7076A
26.00
Lagoon
7076B
26.00
page: 2

L
Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Dale: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
IaisCharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ■
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No,
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
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.1 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives 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

1
Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yel No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Com, Wheat, soybeans
Crop Type 3
SmaA Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg
Soil Type 3
Rains
Soil Type 4
Wagram
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
U ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
ELI
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780091 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780091
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
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

i ype or visit: V uompuance inspection v operation mevtew V structure Evamatton v i ecnmcai Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: / Arrival Time: O/ 1Departure Time: pJ M County: 8�
Farm Name: 5075r3,507b-.3 l707Owner Email:
Owner Name: —A1rQdq.0 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Ale Ljd Title:
Onsite Representative: N
Certified Operator:` G�-fo kJLt
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region: 62y
Phone:
Integrator: M��y
Certification Number:
Certification Number: �-7 V3
Longitude:
m „
esi Current)
�
'.Design
Current
Design Curren#
UNION
Swine Out Crap city+ Pop.
WetPoultry, Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Finish
Feeder to 1 bed
La er
Non -La er
Fa . , . _.
Dai Cow
Dairy Calf
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
D , P,oulti. Ca
Layers
P,o
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Boars
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and 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 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 M No ❑ NA FINE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes [P No
[:]Yes P No
NA ❑ NE
�NA ❑NE
NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

1Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: 1.3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 075-3 5b?6_36
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 4 7 "
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Ej 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
n 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
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
[:]Yes
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
0 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 AcceptableCropWindow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Appliication[ of Approved Area
12_ Crop Type(s): f•+ : q S C
7�'
-Outside
l �i� -
13. Soil Type(s):
i
it 1.r Ej c( r►„
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designate to the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
lb. 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
[PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the 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
No
IF
❑ 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 [P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall [] Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" 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 P 21412011 Continued

' Facili Number; - Date of inspection: tiL -�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
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
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [—]Yes ® No
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? ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ff): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional paces as necessary).
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Rcviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
01Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Phone:
Date:
21412011

i ype of visit: 0 uompitance inspection U uperation Review U structure Evaluation U I eennical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: I Z I Arrival Time:Departure Time: I O1;Q7 M County: PD8 Region:
Farm Name:ri Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: IVI, � LjAekj 'Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: N Integrator:
Certified Operator: Of,<J C per/ Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
III
g n Current
_._� ign ...
DesSwine
Current
- Design Current
11111MIst
Pop.
Wet,Poultry Capacity.-..
PopCttleCapacity
Pop.
Tpacity
i
Wean to Finish
Layer
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
`" ::._ x
Farrow to Wean
Desi n Curreuf
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D > ,,Point'Ca ci
1?o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turke s
lBeef
Brood Cow
s -�
Turkey Poults
Other
IRL10ther
Discharges and Stream lmoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
DA 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
[A NA
❑ 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
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date 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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 5DIL- �M2 3 je , j -j
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): l� 6� fV
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
Structure 5
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No
� NA ❑ NE
Structure
6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
in 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
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9_ Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
1 ] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
t� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P
No ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, et .)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those
in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes i� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ WUP ❑Checklists [] Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes g] No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall O Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0 No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 91 No
Page 2 of 3
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑NA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: 12,
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 1!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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
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
0 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
t�] 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
mments (refer to question.#): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
F
e drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
5„�,-1-%�llZ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: qLp_ 7 32r�cv
Date: Z
21412011

Type of Visit 0 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: I �r�^I '�Arrival Time: �t7�Q� Departure Time: l0D County: � � Region:
Farm Name: 5D [ ��-J_V /b `�D7�S �p7b) Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: N
Certified Operator: 141J
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator u.;qdid' ".
Operator Certification Number: r
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o ❑ I = 11
Longitude: = o E--] t 0 "
Design Current
swine Capacity Population
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
10 Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder 1
10 Non -Layer 1
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish Z b CO
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Dry Poultry
❑ Non -Da
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood CoyA
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ I
Number of Structures:
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
L 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?
❑ Yes [;bNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
51 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
Y, NA
❑ NE
ONA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E5JNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Faci*ty Number: r% —rl El Date of Inspection Z Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No Y9NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �-Z
,53 S 5-b-7 6 A (Sb?
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): rb L.S I1 1 r ,6
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 4 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 P9 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 99 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes (INo El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? I
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ FAN > 10% or ] 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
0 Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) lFi &n Oa��
13. Soil type(s) � { , C_� � S fW
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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
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 ai necessary):
t IZeca�S `Ro-v,'etw_d qz0a .
. Stye ok'4 CC4'AC_W Vilbl I
El NA ❑NE
[I NA I--] NE
[I NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name �`�,— Q,, a�— Phone: 471,0 2,3 `3jC.b
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

• FacilityNumber: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 1�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 1P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement'? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes [PNo ❑ 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
IN 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
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ 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-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
1W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[P 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
�i No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ifyes, 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'? (ic/ 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
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

g.r14'1S -f?_-- z C)10
Type of Visit Pf Compliance Inspection 0 operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit t�outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 13 `06 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County.
Rd�eSaA/
& )
Farm Name: 5- 7L-3 .4 £� ✓�®7��-3 a Owner Email:
Owner Name: At J Bt-�> L L L C` Phone:
Mailing Address: — (' Olc� S -7 0 -7 7 O 7 L }
Physical Address:
Region: o,;�Aeo_q
Facilih' Contact: /"i i Title: I —All" Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: /t1-Aeb `JAI
Certified Operator: t'O E ' k. Operator Certification Number: Z 56 Z 1%
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = e = 0 Longitude: = ° Q = "
mean to Finish
I
1LJ Layer
I
I
LJ Dairy Cow
El Dairy Calf
❑ Wean to Feeder
LEI Non -Layer
® Feeder to Finish
/ 7660
❑Dai Heifer
Dry Poultry ❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dairy
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Non -La ers ❑ Beef Feeder
0 Pullets ❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
ICr
Turkey Points
Other I 1 1[] 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?
❑ Yes ICI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ONA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
RNA
❑ NE
O�&A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

r-7g_09/
Facility Number: 7 8 — 4Q/ Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
[jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
[3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: ,s07.S3 /4 So 7S3 6 5o763-4 5- O76'3 -d
Spillway? -
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �/O 01i ,3g �/ 3
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
[0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
01No ❑ 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
[7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
)A 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 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) ►-w�.� d a. (h� l) Cav'ns - tal.u�'�— Sc.a � z:�rit , ��...a r/ 6— N
/ \
(O • S • J
13. Soiltype(s) Goldt-o va++
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes J9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 0 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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes fia No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ 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 ,��U �S Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

. - •
Facility Number: -7 $ —d 9/ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ W UP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other �,(
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes 2 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 [$No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
CA 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
191 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
[ PNo
❑ 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
rl*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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit S Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Timer: t eparture Time: ( n`
Farm Name: Own
County: 0 Region: X
er Email:
Owner Name: !' (A 1 nlr�—f h' I (L� h 1 G Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: f ' '_' 4 _ w h S Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: y "t U C
Certified Operator:, AXDld Ok I Q Operator Certification Number: a
Back-up Operator: Y"IIRBack-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = O = i = « Longitude:
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
pDg,.nVCurrent $ Design . Current r
o elationt P,:o�
per .0 Capacity Popyulat,on
ir: ❑ Layer
•attle
, , C
❑ DairyCow
Design Current
Ca aci Po elatio
p tY lr
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish_
Farrow to Wean
,�
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Cow
DryPoultry�
❑ Farrow to Feeder
,wx
El Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
;'.
El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑Beef Brood Co
Other ��
❑ Other
W
`
Number of Structures:
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�] No
11
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. R'as the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
q§ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? ([f yes, notify DWQ}
❑ Yes
❑ No
` 3 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 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?
El NA [I NE
P NA [I NE
St ruc re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 ructure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in): S u ' 1 S-3
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.) AR
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?
❑ Yes '$ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
kn
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ElYes LV No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ElNA ❑ 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 Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA Cl NE
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 type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 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
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No El NA El NE
[� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
]` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�No El NA El NE
Comments (refer to question ft 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):
A,
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date:
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 r] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No El NA [I NE
El y�
the appropriate box. UP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Sail Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stacking ❑ 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
19No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
IRNA
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ 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?
❑ 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
§3No
❑ 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
PNo
❑ 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
ElNA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:.`
AL
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 4P Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑Denied Access
PADDate of Visit: Arrival Time: C :oG q..1 Departure Time: / o:0OG h County: G 0*1 Region:
Farm Name: qC7� S. .rol� Owner Email:
Owner Name: UQ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
t
Facility Contact: i t ,M i t Arl 11xM Title: Phone No:
i� OnsiteRepresentative: Integrator: LVP6 h.QQ
rUU)l,4
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [� 0[� i E-I it Longitude: [� o= t 0
it
,h04
gn Current' Design Current
Design
Current
pacity
Population��etiPoultry Capacity Population
Cable
Capacity
Papufation
. ,
rmlE�
n to Finish
n to Feeder
` ❑ La er❑Dai
❑Non -La er
Cow
❑ Dai Calf
gg er to Finish `�
a '} ❑Dai Heifer
El ow to Wean
A
�Ur Pou1t � . - -=�
y
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
-
� � .r"�-" �. - �'_`�`
❑Non-Dai
rrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
lts
❑ Beef Feeder
ars
kEl
= ❑ Beef Brood Cow
i
her
Number of Structures:
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
egNo
❑ 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
M 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
q +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 r f 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 13—gi Date of Inspection,, ,
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? _ ❑ Yes ❑ No jffNA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: `?OZS /� `�O'2 1b'Z -- '707
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
y u S
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 3 V g 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
1P 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
LF
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
51 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 Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
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 ElEvidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) Corti w 1rh4
13. Soil type(s) ��-p%4 ; LA.
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[I Yes
,L3gq1
Ci No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16_ Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
t No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
91 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
4 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):
A.
_ Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Name lie
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes tS No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 10 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
K) No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1�1 No
❑ NA
[I NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E,r�], No
[I NA
[I NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
19 No
❑ 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?
❑ 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
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 Pen -nit? (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
Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

brH3 31AX10-7O-Vf
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2-13-07 Arrival Time: %.DD Departure Time: 6;30 County: Ie1065-96 / Region:
Farm Name:. l 1—z 7_Q Z4970793 Owner Email:
Owner Name: , ,._hfawAfo Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �ar+ d �t<"� Title: "vimgV • Phone No:
T —
Onsite Representative: Integrator: A 4Lnj n
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 0 , = Longitude: = o 0 , ❑
Design Current Desigu wIn
Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population lefUFOMn apulatiop Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer ❑Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder MEJ Non -Layer I Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish q' y'= ❑ Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean - El D Cow
- Dry Poultry _
❑ Farrow to �Feeder*""' ❑ Layers � El Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish ❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars ❑ Pullets ❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turkevs
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑Other Number of Structures:
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 ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
(M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[)9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
T No
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -7 $ - c]
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate`? El Yes �'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [-7No ❑ NA ElNE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 7075-/ `7075 -Z_ 7o7b-1 707&-Z_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): Z <0 Z (p Z G Z 44
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 Z 33 39 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
[� No
El NA [I NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
/
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
q 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
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
[0 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
qNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
rA No
yW
ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
1�1 No
❑ NA Cl NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, 7n, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window��l1 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C -N i �c .r B Gc AJS t114�16 n!
—
T yM b,,9
13. Soil type(s) <j p /4 Lr�l t Rek-
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
V3No ❑NA ❑NE
[;9No El NA El NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�No ❑NA ❑NE
[fN o ❑ 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 'si uA&ns. (use additional pages as necessary): '
Reviewer/inspector Name f P'1 C we�S - _ - - Phone: 910, Y33. 333-0
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:Date: Z -l3 - 7-007
page 2 of .1 121,28104 Continued

Facility Number: "1 -El Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 El Yes [8 Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes UNo ❑ 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 fait to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
E4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
(,Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Outer 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
LP No
❑ NA
ElNE
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
[R 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
[;j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit a Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine Q Complaint o Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency Q Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: 6�0(p,�O�p Arrival Time: S; 2 Departure Time: County: 912S5QA1 Region: rAO
Farm Name: r��G�G� B!/tst�/�! ��� Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ ____ _D_ _ �I �tJl�i _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: / Title:
Onsite Representative: �l Ll_
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ o = d = " Longitude: ❑ o ❑ ' = u
Design CurrentT.
Design Current
Design C►urrent
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
El
Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
/7,16
El
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Wean
�_.F
- � Dry Poultry
�j;.
❑
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑
❑ Laers
❑
Farrow to Finish
ElBeef
Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
ElBeef
Feeder
❑ Boars
I El Pullets
❑
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El Yes CYNo El NA El NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made`? El Yes QgNo ❑ NA El NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes Vj No El 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 14 No El NA El NE
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? El Yes M No El NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes XNo El NA El NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

• Facili Number:
h — q Date of Inspection D/p-b
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ONo
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No
Structure I Structuree22 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: -w [�� -70 7 (y _
Spillway?: _„nfj? �Q�� _
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): // &
El NA ❑NE
El NA ❑NE
Structure 6
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 [)PNo ❑ 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 [A 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
maintenance/improvement?
El Yes LNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 type(s) w
10 P.a /115
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
[XNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'? ❑ Yes
V No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
X No ❑ NA
❑ NE
I7_
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
[PNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
R 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):
ReviewerAnspector Name V_ - Z2 ,--Ls Y� Phone: !n/D "ls
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: c Date: G _ac. ?
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

ij
Facility Number: 7g — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 El NA El NE
the appropriate box.
ElWUP El Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[;ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23_
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
29 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
ym No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
I 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
[XNo
❑ 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
J&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
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: _ - .
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /%-21't2s Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: /::�O
Farm Name: _ /� rp r{i ti 6Yo t.Jn/ l 0 7 5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Vn t J Nl Phone:
Nailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
'title:
Onsite Representative: ��� � �_ ++.� N
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: / vr,6TT va;,✓i✓
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [= 0 0 4 0« Longitude: ❑ o ❑' ❑"
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Ira er
❑ Non -La yet
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ 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 convevance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocket
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —jg— q Date of Inspection 1—ZZ—O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes 1)9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 0 `7 D 7 (o _ -7b7 1,
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 2- {o Z (P Z.�
_ _
�r a �r rr
Observed Freeboard (in): g _ 3 $ 64/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes KR No ElNA ElNE
(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
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes [4 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 D9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [A 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 type(s) Go�-.Q Co41A,-rJ sou be<<..l s wti ec��
13. Soil type(s)
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes CgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 09No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16_ Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes C9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 5a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any reeommeadations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facJiliity to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): "
Reviewer/Inspector Name A. Phone:
ReviewerfInspector Signature:&44 Date: �f ZZ —OS
raiaai N t annnuea

Facility Number. 7g - 9 Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 50 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 ® 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 [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23_ If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes (A 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
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
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
® 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
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Draw-tn' s:. r
12128104

r
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit QORoutine O Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number i Date of Visit:�b Time: f
18Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
IN Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ C4 CC'01—4t e> 4 County: -
Owner name: e- r I:a-r-nn- �d Phone No: ' to ;LIZ,"S
Mailing Address: r d _ u i ��` S 6-vs '
Facility Contact: ffi4 ?K DA('.k&A &Z 2 f' Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: IM tr * MrLkew. ba Lk—r� lnte=rator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number. I iE i'-J D
Location of Farm:
09Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude r0 ° " Longitude ' •
Design Current
Swine ('anarit, Pnnnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
19 Feeder to Finish
p
❑ Farrow to Vk'ean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle. Ca acih Po ulation
❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I LL I LU Subsurface Drains Present 1IU Lagoon Area 1U SPrey Field Areaj
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes j� No
Discharrye ori--inated at: El Lagoon El Spray Field ❑ Other 'T
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in 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 Collectiop 8 Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 7-0 j .S 1 -?-0 3'G [z O jg �'
Freeboard (inches): 4-3 _ g 4-9
05M3101 4(
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 5 No
Structure 5
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.) IQ
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes P No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ED 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 R scno 6 _rAc _� S L"n __ G-v--c" " , U' _S C..t}....-. 4- 0 k.-cL _._.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA WMP)? ❑ Yes No
14. a} Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ( No
I& Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Reouired 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 No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes U No
20_ Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes V9 No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes W No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes N 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 ER No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes P No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
7[rrtN1 f C`e C.' !!ram (- L �-� d the �' 0
Reviewer/Inspector Name UMMINDOMMINAMEM
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
43E, Ply 4- ce c t.,
Date:
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: bate of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentltemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional,Cou meats arid/oroDrawutgs
05103101

� .�� � .,�i _� � ���wr y4.v a/i�a yaa�v�,w` �u au�u .� aac■ �.�uxa �au�su � y„ T4 � r` '�'-- F -p-��
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason far Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility \umber Datr of Vkit: �� ! U_ Time:
Not O erational Below Threshold
Permitted IM Certified ❑Conditionally Certified ❑ Re istered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ S_l-,i"at_ s� 1 ►-�G —_ _ County: r i
Owner Name: C'j-f� h 7-Q4-5. Phone No: 5 1 a 2L -.S fo3 �
;bailing Address: P4 . t� UX LJ' 1�._" 0 4.C..
Facility Contact: V, Title: t Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ac nk, C-,C: (u r, � Integrator: i ,r:r tin ((_S'_
Certified Operator: 3,,—1 _ _ Operator Certification number: _ (
Location of Farm:
Sft It oT 10 3 (r 31
[Z'SWIne ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 . Longitude ' 1
Design Current
Switle Cannrity Panniatinn
❑
Wean to Feeder
®
Feeder to Finish
oo
❑
Farrow to wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acitV Population Cattle Ca adty Population
❑ Laver ❑ Dain
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non-Dain,
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons IL I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon area Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps E= ID No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impaey<
1 _ Is anv discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes WNo
Discharze originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is obsen•ed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notifj- DW Q)
c. if discharge is obsen-ed. what is the estimated flow in eallmin?
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 8 Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier_ 7-0-jk# 3:e� La
Freeboard (inches): 3 t _ 3 D
05103107
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ®No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: g— q I Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ire/ 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? El 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 [A No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes W No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes [53 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 , �Jkg � *, . ' Q 4., mid GL.' ,4--sk A _ s�
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?
Rewired 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?
❑ Yes [V No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [9 No
❑ Yes [N No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes IV No
❑ Yes Q No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
23. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes [ZNo
K3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ictltty, to neuter ezpuun stmanons. t.use aatnnonat pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
......._
revs c� - re Los rd� l r�,`C &4co PAN t G� o avry c`r�
t rn & � v jz eA D k.,t. Come- -r, & 4t> ram -, us&A+.,
J�"tC Z Ja�.a,,J �.l(��'cA, _41Z ir)-kcr CDnrr,e_ckJ 6Y �ve-a v-'CC.GG,--
�� . kf-f 5(2�R'J-7 .
,f CJSj ) .0- Cexot;sA G,', H,
Reviewer/Inspector Name - RO&MMI w�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: J .& V Krr� ly�lc Date:
05/03/0] Continued

Facility Numher: Date of Inspection may'
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior bclou-
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there anv evidence of Wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt.
roads, building structure. and/or public property)
24. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters. etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent+temporary cover?
Comments and/or
❑ 1'cs �P No
❑ Yes []S�No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ® No
.3 Yes ;� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [r] No
05103101

Type of Visit 9 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
Facility_ Number Date of 1`isit: 7`ime: t O o
B Not nnerational 0 Relow Threshold
B Permitted M Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Ad
n7A %.F f ;707141, _ County: Zx .r6.J
Owner Name: .Sh►r �•�,__ �au�s,� Phone No:
Mailing Address: e�lX %] / . IPOSW 1411,
Facility Contact: KG -44 S Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: &r Integrator: S I �-
Certified Operator: �J dleJ _ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 0" Longitude 0
Design Current Design Current ..Design;- Current_ '
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity -Pa ulation Cattle _Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish /7 pp ❑ Dion -Laver ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ goy Total SSLW
Nnrnbtir ofLagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present La oon Area JE1 Sp. Field Area
Aollding Pond.0 SoUd Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im acts"
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? El�ENYes o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes Z No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0jrNo
C. If discharge is observed_ what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify D%N Q) ❑ Yes )iTNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes allo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes O�No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes /K No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): Ar
05103101 Continued

11
l;aciliity Number: 7,? —
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel 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 anv 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?
❑ Yes NINo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes )RNo
❑ Yes �K No
❑ Yes XNO
_Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes KNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? El Excessive
`Ponding El PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes NTNo
12. Crop type L•GffD?d.1-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ElYes XNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes KNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ja No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ;R:jTio
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes �FrNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes XNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ONO
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUYhecklists, design aps etc.)
✓ � ✓ ✓ ✓ �✓
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
KNo
Oc/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23,
Did Reviewerilnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
CgNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[LNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
ONO
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to questzoit #j: Explatl< any YES stuwers and/oran� recommendations vr;any.other,evmaaents. _
Use drawings of facrity to better-ezplain situa#ions: (ase adtiraonsl pages as necessary): (ot,v ry❑ Final Notes'
. -. El
/
/�� 7� C.13.eirl� 6� �l.Et/.F'f�r� /Q�e'.sT.� %ice ` .+.� !1�✓ Cil�/4�i4/ r�J.✓G�n-�
Ole
.v,/' � 14 it ✓a>�.r
4 /
� / � ��,d,� L�ifi�c����-- ��..✓ / %�ee�c�c� �.Y.usrsE -
H,
Reviewer/Inspector Marne
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 t/ % Continue

Facility Number: 77 - Tr Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
'2Q'No 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes q-w
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Rg No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 91 No
Toads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes 19 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
3L Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes JRNO
Additional "C(iinitiedts,andler.. Drawings:
05103101

Facility Number Date or visit: Time: E==Printed ow 7/21/2000
Not -Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ❑ Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or bove Threshold•
Farm Name: �E / n/ (> (`ounty:............................................ ....................
.. ..
Owner Name: ... �/ arr-c. ••„ c Phone No:
4.�/'Q....... s.....�....�.........................
` ��[
Facility Contact:.�u.sipf.......�D......!.�..d�......................'ritle. G� v Phone No:
Mailing Address.... .......................
Onsite Representative: ............................................................... .............. ..........
epresentative:.....................................................................................
Certified Operator: ......
1 !�'1 A.... yl/ .. L�
........_.. ---......I—.......
Location of Farm:
Integrator: ......... ...........................
Operator Certification Number:
❑ swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • L « Longitude • 1 4A
Design Current Design Current Deegan Current
x.
Ca .. ci Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca '.Po ation'
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish Z71 6v 10 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
es Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
:? Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity 741 Dlj
Gilts
Boars Total SSLW
Ntuti�er of :tom:: Z ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
❑ spray Field Area
3 w;Holltiiag P6ads / Solid;Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ElOther
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes KNo
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes KNo
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flaw- in gal/min"
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �&No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes MNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ERNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier.........................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
O 5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection
M'aste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ................
.......
......
..........
Freeboard (inches): ....__....5ce I.z
Structure 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc_)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9_ Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type 1)errnL4Aa / SM4 It Gca;r.
❑ Yes V o
Structure 6
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes 1XNo
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes [�No
❑ Yes t[ No
❑ Yes XI No
13_ Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 6No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[f No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
ff No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
&No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
k No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
Wo
17.
_
Are rock outcrops present'? AA_
18,
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records & Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
�(No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
VNo
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[� No
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) El Yes (�No
25. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes O'No
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
Odor Issues
28. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? rd
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection S- -o! Printed on: 1/9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below XYcs ❑ 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(No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 0No
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 O No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes j No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Yes ❑ No
-Addifioornments an or rawrrrgs-_ - _
/ AL
T
5100

t
Routine 0 Com taint 0 Follow-ue ofDWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection Zy-�
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted p Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: �a � ................7...p� County:...........'.ram............ .......... .......
.......................................... i........................
Owner Name:.C-ca-11�?r` .. �. _.._..... ...... .......... Phone No: L 7i2..... b.Z...................................
Facility Contact: ....5........T ............................... Title:.... L...... .. Phone No: ......................... ..........................
Mailing Address: it f ram..! t�. �f ....-.....Q 1 yP.. .......� JrS 1C .fit tti.?.....11fCI...................... 2 �3 5
Onsite Representative L .ice .5 4.6 ....................... Integrator: ............. ....................................................................... ..
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. . Operator Certification Number: ............... _.............. .........
Location of Farm:
Latitude =' 4 « Longitude =• =1 =11
Design ;
V Current ,.
_. .. -
Design Current "Destgn Current
Ca act _
Po, illation:" Poultry
Ca aci ty Po ulaban ... Cattle
Ca act Po `eilaaon ,
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Dairy:
Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
'5
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
°
Farrow to Finish
Total Des1 E$ P'
=' ❑ Gilts
° ❑ Boars
Total SSLW
w.
j Ntuiaber-of Lagoons "
❑Subsurface
'
Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
❑ Spray Field Area
z
Holdtn :Ponds'/.Solid-Tra
g ps
._
� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharp,es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge orieinated 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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): .......Z3.............. .................................... .......fl.................... .........................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, - ❑ Yes �No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes rkNo
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
V(No
Structure 6
I

Facility Number:'— ?Z Date of Inspection-'f�-
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'? ❑ Yes 11 0
(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? AYes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenarice/improvement? ❑ Yes &No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 00
Waste Application "V��
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidenceofover application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type r K d02
13. Do the receiving crops differ with thos esignated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
1 S. 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 & soiI 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?
13. NO•viol'atioris:or• deeci6neies -were h4ted• during this:visit- • Y:oU Wiil•reeeiye ti6 further • .
,,.......................... ....
corres oriclence. a�ou this visit
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes Iro
❑ Yes �] No
❑ Yes /A�No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes ;�No
❑ Yes 4�No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes .0No
❑ Yes JVNo
❑ Yes Of No
❑ Yes *No
❑ Yes CI�No
❑ Yes AD:$io
C1se drawings of facilrty to=better explain "situations {use addrbonal pages as necessary)N
74
-07, l`grrh 71�"?Sv�1�CdS Saxes :,jark )Crna �� e �wS%�e S�nPe a� l�yaors
/�
bek-,r,� e
&rt►.tud-r, C;re(d looks Qre#� 16,j�
Reviewer/Inspector Name - r-- xi max-
=' '==� ss.�. _'. e4._si•: 11--...;u:s-m Sr�'>T ,..,..t; ..s �:r '.rc"
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date:
r.
3123/99

� w
Facility Number: 7f — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ 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 qNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes�11 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 P"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 9344o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes f2NQ..
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No

0 Division of _Soil and Water_Con"servation - Operation Review
Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection -
'Dw�s�on of Water 'QuaLty = Compliance Inspection
- 1` "0 Othee_Ag6Ty-OperatiowReview
J1Q Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date or Inspection--3/-5
rime or inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
#Permitted © Certified/ (3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered � Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ll �S rnti S .%O . %O & County :-....... � r� ..
Owner Name:......1.:a '1..1{..�5............. Av"VI'S ��C 7C2...�. (� ........................
/.......................y...................................- ........ Phhone,lo:---...... .....-
1•acil€ty Contact L eS S> ...Title: - /t,fl �.`.!. !�. Phone No:....-.. ...........................................
p.. ..............G.-.-... �..�.../-...... -
Mailing Address:.../.....���........-.C7.. f...!f .-.. �.(luar`f Q er ... /V .�..�.— .................. 2-- - %
Onsite Representative:...... e�. .-........ Integrator:....................................................................................
................................
Certified Operator. h•CF} Yl l .. f L ................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
L.................. .......... .............................
Latitude Longitude �• �' �"
Design Current
awine
❑ Wean to Feeder
Fccdcr to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 17
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ID Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? El Yes No
Discharge oririnwed at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance inan-made? ❑ Yes PNo
h. If dischargc is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the Slate ❑ Yes No
c. If dischai- e is observed- what is the cstimatcd flow in gal/inin? AN
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon .system" ❑ Yes No
2- Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [ No
3, Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes o
Waste Collection & Treatment ✓T
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes jg�No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure h
Identifier: N 7
Freeboard(inchesy ........7: , r.......... ..............V ............................... .................................... ..................................... ....................................
I/6/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 7� �— Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
4 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 pact 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? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type............................f`Wtd.Q...!!k ...... V ..........................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Reg uired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (le/ 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 certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
No _violations ;or deficiencitrs .were rittbecl dtu'ing .this;visit:. You will.receive no further
correspaidehee; 4bbut- this visit.; ; ; ..... ; . _ .:. ; . ; .
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 9No
%Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes rMill No
—
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes kINo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes VrLNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes M.No
❑ Yes Vf No
❑ Yes ;}-No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. _
Use drawings (if facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) T_
� e5e j are I?eid �(—Mf Gad 40 1///'r,'c, a�,'mti Aas ,t1 e.ee' - O er1 4arn i rd
rke ba: -T f or a4 -i 4 rra1oO� Aa5 Sa�ue ervS'ICrr� �- .--al nee j g
j
Que+-� Il rw�S �t e look,''1-i J °0J-
r,
Reviewer/Inspector Name p w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: I 1 /6/99

❑Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
0 Division of Water Quality E.
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection a : pD 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered Certified [J Applied for Permit XPermitted J73 Not Opera Date Last Operated:.........
Farm Name. r'0... -5 / County• ..........
!.�...... 5 / t7 C� ra
................. l�Q.......
...................................................... �.......-----.-----
Owner lame. l T ll.. ....... �........ -,(I�'.r. .......................... Phone No:............LLD..-.. �..-...:3z ...--
Facilit Contact ��sli e sfu ........ Title: I......... Phone No:
Mailing Address: .......... p�..Q,..... �ax....... NC „a38
....................................................... .......... ... .............................................
Onsite Representative.* .............. eG.f..,� �f u s ......... Integrator........_ ,cl.-O l5 �... c
Certified Operator. ...................... i ehn.r5.... .... ................. ,(,rd �Ul!..�r............. Operator Certification Number .........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 4 « Longitude • ° 66
Design YCurrent 4 Design Current
Swine Capacity Popttlation Ponliry Cap acity,:Population 'Xiitle
El Wean to Feeder
vE
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
T,,
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ Dair;
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non-
.-
❑ Other
;Total Design Caps,
A 'Total SST
agoons ! Holding Ponds JE1 Subsurface Drains Present J10 Lagoon Area
W ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
0
Mr:
i Current.
ty ; Poptilatioi
irav Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need main tenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
2. 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 convevance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes PA
c. If disch rge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? rt
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notifv DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 14 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes No
7/25/97 Continued on back

y r
Facility Number: g-
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes va NO
Structures fl.a oons lloldin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I $tructure ? Structure 3 Structure 4
*
Identifier: ?S
.....2.....r................................°..........
Freeboard (f)_ '
......-�r..'............T........._Jr......................I...................---.....
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)
❑ Yes ANo
Structure 5 Structure 6
........................................................................
......................... ............ .................... I..................
❑ Yes 9K No
❑ Yes 9 No
Ayes ❑ No
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes No
Waste :application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff enterin waters of the State, notify DW ' \
�� �� ... ` 15. Crop type ............................... ...... ....... �.. 'vl ems .....................................
................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ANo
21, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative" (] Yes ANo
22, Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes XNo
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes 14No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit" ❑ Yes f(No
0 No.violations or deficiencies were noted during this.visit. You.will receive no further
correspondence about this.visit..
n s—.(refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations orany otli4.c6mmeni
.drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Uv 5( U Pd- W
8rK
7/25/97
w
Reviewer/Inspector Named gfy-1 r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _jam-u Date: f— ��

❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
fjD Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DNYO inspection O Follow-up of DSNVC review O Other f
Date of lnspection -ZS-
Facility Number
Time of Inspecliosn ; d a 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certified f r� Applied for Permit OPermitted 0 Not O erational lDate Last Operated
Farm Name: a_ r`?.l..i-.�S_.......7b 7'�` %7 4 County: fd f~? 2SQK ..........
Owner Name: .....�ai.C.",. tj............ [-- S� s..... ........ Phone No: 27b...�o6..T..��...........................................
Facility Contact:. ....:5�....................................... Title:..;EA.V't-............................... Phone No:.,-54++1' ?...................�.i...
Mailing Address: ....Pa.. rQ�!.......g��qr�Q;�c�....A/..c..................................
.....................................................
Onsite Representative:... e1.... s .... ..............................................
Certified Operator: ..................... ............. Operator Certification Number ..........
Location of Farm:
Latitude L 1' 1 __ 11 46 Longitude 1 81 6 u 94
f Design, Current
Design Current :' Design Current
Swute Populatioxt , apacity Papulattan Cattle s CapaCety Popttlatian
_Capacity
i x„Poultry
_
y�A Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
❑Non ❑Non
-Layer
-Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
- ❑Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design CSpaCtty w0�
Cl Gilts
Al
YSLW
❑ Boars
A -Total S
EZ�Number of,Lagoons /Holding=Ponds
��
re
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Am, Spray Field Area
', No Liquid Waste Management System
❑<.:
s
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field [IOther
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`'
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water'? (lf yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
Continued
on hack

Facility Number: 7f —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (I.,aeoons,Eloldinp- Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ..........D ............. Lf.! 1IM...
S ..
..........s NO....1.. , .... ..
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-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes #No
❑ Yes ANo
Structure 5 Structure 6
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ............ e%rY�S M. C�.,l.../ke....................................................................................................................
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 Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No.violations or' deficiencies. were ntited-during this:visit..Youi .'Will receive -no further
. correspondence about this:visiL,. •:.... '
HOT Aa✓e Lee, r lac ed ' w el ^ 17 1 � IDus,e,
Farm I'S A e uj/ yt 0 i r r-,f rt` c.j . I h e f e r✓�5 r M ed tr
( j Q r Q O Co ves e-A— cL,_ k�
7w�— 60,-Wl rS .5411 1 I � J AJp ��
S D..
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes fi(No
NoYes
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes j�No
❑ Yes o
ElYesIzo
❑ Yes ANO
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes a No
❑ Yes �No
7/25/97
Reiiewer/Ins ector , arne
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Elate: ��-

. . WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
NPDES PERM1TRENEWAL - 2007
REGIONAL OFFICE - APS
❑ asHeuaLE
FAYEITEVILLE
❑ MOOREfVILLE
❑ RALEIGH
❑ WASHINGTON
❑ WILMINGTON
❑ WINSTON-SALEM
FARM No: 78 - 00q f