820042_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAHOLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

type of visit: eidtiom Nance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance t
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access J
Date of Visit: (, ��, Arrival Time: f? Departure Time: ; oD County:
Farm Name: JA'► cT_ H Owner Email:
Owner Name: "�u', 0. ]�{ic�Gz-{ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: L' cr wA S t-3,t ✓-tU fr Title:
Onsite Representative: t(
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Region:
Integrator: 0 ( --5
Certification Number: f 7F D
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
to Finish
to Feeder 006
to Finish
Current
PoImamp.
Design Current
Wet Ppultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Cattle
Dai Cow
t
Design CMove
Capacity
Non -La er
DaCar
Dai Heifer
w to Wean
w to Feeder
to Finish
E
Design Current
Dr. Paul C•a at Po
La ers
Cow
Non-Dairyw
Beef Stocker
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
-S.Turke
Other
Other
s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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 DWR)
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 1_440 L� NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes D-Iq—o
❑ Yes ❑`No
[]"9A' ❑ NE
C11NA ❑ NE
a'KA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

FaciliNumber: WZY_ Z Date of Inspection: ov -G
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is sforage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [ N6 �, J NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [:]No Q-NA—❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
!� u
Observed Freeboard (in): gs 3 i
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
EDNT—❑ 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
C] Yes
Io ❑ 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 DWR
DDo any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
CE I es ,
—❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�❑ 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
[D-N-6❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
_Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes
❑-ITT ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2rTVO ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C -/� 4
13. Soil Type(s): &. �J' X
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [P4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes �❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [ - o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ff No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑] IeNA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
fo ❑ 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
E'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Wastc Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l " Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[]Yes
�❑
[!JNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ to ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: _Z Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes QN�❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check [] Yes C3'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey C]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?
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
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:
❑ Yes `tom o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes �EJNA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes [J —[]NA ❑NE
❑ Yes I]i"O ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [D-Na1 ❑ 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 I5g ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any adiitional recommendations ar any other comments.
Use drawings of fi sciGty to better exp R-n situations (use additional pages as necessary,}.
a --� 9-- -z- s — r (0 Sl -,zly -e_
t�,__e� ►
/
c t-{( qtp-- 3 D$
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 11 V Phone: 210 - 3 3 J 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Irk W OAA Date: k
Page 3 of 3 r 21412015

k ype of visit: ip Loroutine
nce inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up Q Referral p Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: J jArrival Time: Departure Time: %(, `� _ County: S c �� Region: �` G
Farm Name: Zydi[-`"�i y�� 4f� Owner Email:
Owner Name: - �J a �f - Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: C.cick(15 f✓cl.�t` Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: i Integrator:
Certified Operator: i J p�� �. La4 Certification Number: ! � ( U
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Des�ig Current
�� Destgn,Current Design Current
�
Swine a „C ctty .Pop.
Wet Poultry Cap ctty`� Pnp. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Nan -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Dairy Heifer
Current Dry Cow
D "Piitilt = Ca act �` P_o Non -Dairy
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
La ers Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Lavers Beef Feeder
Boars
1pullets.
ir 113eef Brood Cow
,'::.
Turkeys
'
VhnerWm
Turkey Pouets
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
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 DWR)
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 [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NE
[:]Yes 0 No [''' 1A ❑ NE
❑ Yes
D No
❑ Yes
[� Nl o
❑ Yes
No
E3 NA
❑ NE
DNA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 \ 1 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: _ Z Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4_ Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [9'1ao ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z� zz-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ 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
[21�o
❑ 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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[]'fsio
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ 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
Q-I�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑-Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes [T`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs_ ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. CropType(s): $-e rwc 56jD cor 1,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those desi�mated 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
1. o
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
F91�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E3-1 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes E21�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [:JNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes dNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes ff No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facilitv Number: _ Z 1 jDate of Inspection: '
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes Q No ❑ NA [] NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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 �o ❑ 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?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ YesE3<o
❑ 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
[2'1lo
❑ 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
[]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
FP 1
❑ 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
[ r o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #):-Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better eXDlain situations [use additional naves as necessarvl.
Slt y� Sn(G'a'I l �� ��
LC
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
C
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
3N­j9�-5f
Phone: O--
Date: - as
2/4l 015

Type of Visit: Q'Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Q>i!-utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Tim . epartnre
Farm Name: .j u �ti 0
Owner Name: a -e'
rn, tf _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Time: y'*j V r /J-# County: J i Region: pEi�
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: • (�L14�1 50 -w CC, Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: rT
Certified Operator: J �� cti Certification Number: f 7 '? i
t
1
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
101600,3RS_ 7416 -JcG
Longitude:
Design CurrentM
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
.� y 3
UCaya'siga
Pop.
Wean to finish
La er
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
I iNon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
d',
" ` �� ' '
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
11
D , P,oult ,
Ca acts Pop
Non -Da'
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Other.
Turke Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes [!3 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No [! NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No F!f NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑'<A ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [D'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [—]Yes [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Fac#U. NumbeN jDate of Inspection: �
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No E<A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [Z[.Xo ❑ 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 E?<o ❑ 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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes [;�o ❑ 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 ADDliCatiOn
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes VrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes EJ'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy
Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): S [9 Q
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes Dio
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[:]Yes Q- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes E3 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes [?'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes (?fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[;31�o
❑ 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis [:]Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[%f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
[(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facilitu Number:• - Date of Inspection: to I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [:]Yes [ oo
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ZP?°
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:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [::]Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes D�Mo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ej K'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [y<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
eyes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
L. ]4o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]ta ❑ NA
0 NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
21412014

Structure Evaluation Inspection
Facility Number:-- Z Date:
Time in: Time out: t �0 _
Farm Name: ..�—� Farm 911 address:���•'
Owner Name: 1_*x__1 r41 Phone
Facility Contact: G',c A 3 a v ►
Onsite Representative: - Integrator: NN-�
Certified Operator: fah%& Cert. Number
Is storage capacity less than adequate? Yes ZINo
If yes is waste level into the structural freeboard? Yes No 4/
Was non -compliant level reported to DWR VCS POA received Uea
Structure: 1
Identifier:
Spillway?
Designed Freeboard (in.):
2 3
Observed Freeboard (in.): Z% I S
4 5 6
Are there any immediate threats the integrity of any of the structures
observed? Yes No
Do any structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? Yes — Noi/
Does any part of the waste management system need repair Yes No
Condition of field's Q c,_r
Condition of receiving crop
Comments:

Water Resources
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
John O. Royal
4025 Mt Moriah Church Road
Clinton, NC 28328-8821
Subject:
Dear Mr- Royal:
PAT MCCRORY
Govemor
DONALD R. VAN DER VAART
April 25, 2016
NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
John O. Royal
82-0042
Sampson County
Incident # 201600385
NOD-2016-PC-0120
Sec-r-y
S. JAY ZIMMERMAN
Dfrector
On February 16, 2016 staff of the NC Division of Water Resources (DWR), Water Quality
Regional Operations Section (WQROS) were notified by Curtis Barwick of a high freeboard
level in the #3 lagoon. We wish to thank Curtis Barwick and Mr. Royal for notifying DWR of
this incident.
As a result of this incident, you are hereby notified that having been permitted to have a non -
discharge permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T
Section .1300, you have been found to be in violation of your Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan and the Swine Waste System General Permit No. AWG100000 that you are
covered to operate under, as follows:
Deficiency 1:
Failure to maintain waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance with the facility's
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition V. 2. of Swine Waste
System General Permit No. AWG100000.
On February 16, 2016 a lagoon/storage pond level was documented at 15 inches in the #3
lagoon. A level of 19.0 inches is the maximum level allowed by your permit and Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan,
Required Corrective Action for Deficiency 1:
DWR has received a copy of your 30-Day Plan of Action (POA) for the high freeboard
occurrence. Take all necessary additional steps to insure lagoon levels remain in compliance
with your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and permit.
State of North Carolina � Environmental Quality I Water Resources
1611 Mail service Center I Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1611
919 707 9000

If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact me at [phone]
Sincerely,
Belinda S. Henson
Regional Supervisor
NCDEQ-Division of Water Resources
Water Quality Regional Operations Section
Fayetteville Regional Office
cc. Sarnpson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Kraig Westerbeek, Srnith£eld Foods

T ype of visit: w-c:ompiiance inspection U Uperation xeview U Structure Evaluation u i eennlcai Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: [( Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (S-�O--tCL,t Cr( Title: Phone:
i
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: yi
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region: F9Z
Certification Number: 17 [ o I
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
acity Pap.
et Poultry
Capacity
Pop
Cattle Capacin
to Finish
La ern
to Feeder
rRF
Non -La erder
to Finish �Pp
`J° _"'4
Dai Heifer
ow to Wean
Design
Current
D Cow
ow to Feeder
D , $oul
Ca act
P,o ,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Gilts
Non -La ers
Soars
Pullets
Turkeys
Qther
Turkey Poults
Other
10ther
Discharizes and Stream Impact
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[:]Yes , No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E5 NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No E] 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 0--N-o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Lacifity Number: - Date of Inspection: - a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [ ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [—]No ❑-N* ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): pZ
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes []g o' ❑ 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 2<o ❑ 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 EjK ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes [�,W ❑ 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 Q'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 To
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
6 12. Crop Type(s): _ _ _ �f .,, Z -
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes [ZI,Fd`o
[DNA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
0 NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
[:]Yes B 1 _o
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
[:]Yes LS o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes QXo'_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists [:]Design [—]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ltd""'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faeili Number: - Date of Inspection: f
24c Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E2,Xo" ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [a-X-o_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [able ` ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [—]Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[ZLNw
❑ 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
[g_Nx5'
❑ 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
E 7 "o
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tle drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other;
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
B- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
� rr
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[ -Na
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer: to question ;#) Explain any YES answers and/or any -additional recommendations or any -other comments.
Use;draw►ngs oi:facility. to better explain°situations"(use"add�tional pages as necessary)��
6 �I Su- en
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3
2142014

Type of Visit: (CKompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access _
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time :11 A�lf/L I Departure Time: County: '�r t Regioj
Farm Name: 6r�� 1A Ci �K_.4c.» d Owner Finail:
Owner Name: %- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _ � 7 jKi[cA4(.0 (j�� Title: ��G Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Wf (J
Certified Operator: 1 (4 - Gc Certification Number: j [ � o z
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Desi n Current
e g
� �, � esi
Dp gn Current
Design Current
Swine Ca acr Po
ty p
Wet Poult t Pad : Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
;- as
rK ,,n_,,
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
y
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean"
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder.aci
rDes�gnCurrent
Po P.
Non-Dai
Farrow to Finish
La ers
I Beef Stocker
Gilts
-Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
y
I
Qther
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[T'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
ff�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
C�r<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[�, o
[] NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑,Ko
0 NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Dumber: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment rV
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? 0 Yes l?qo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑-ice ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E;,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
to
❑ 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
U X-o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures tack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[D X8
❑ 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
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
L -110
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
r
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [: to ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):o
13. Soil Type(s): No
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [3-- ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17_ Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes E! o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0,<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [(aWo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [�ao ❑ 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 �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 [3 No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbrcakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes LJ 'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Ins ection- iN
24. bid the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [] Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check M>ef- ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
lure 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 [ .N15_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [3446— ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
le-
❑ 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
CJ Z
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
34. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
L`7 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31_ Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[2-vo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[�1a
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[P�K6­
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[] Yes
Ula
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments refer.to fi ( gueshon #) Explain any YESansRers and/or any additional recommendateons or any other cort�ment"s.'
Use drawings`o#.facility to better explain situations;(use additional pages as necessary) . � , ..
C
a' Ac X)o�—'- ,G r
Reviewer/Inspector Name:; PhV V J J — 3w J
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: M Date:f to
Page 3 of 3 21412011

�Iva�f a�
Type of Visit: 0 Corltpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:C:% 1^ 1 � Arrival Time: Departure Time: h Countyp� Region: r—/e0
Farm Name: �`�`�''!' Owner Email: T
Owner Name:t:7R!3LAL Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: {SQL _qc%,K Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:��
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
.siSwtneC CPorpent
Cg .,
Dpsatg rent
Design Current
g h
Wet Poultry t3 op.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
ra
Farrow to Wean
"y Design ^Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, P.oul_ , Ca .acih' Po ;
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Non -Layers
Boars
Pullets
I I, III gill 4
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes [gfo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
[:]No
C NA
❑NE
❑Yes
[:]No
[BNA
❑NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Ur"NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[]14o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes EJ/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - kA jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[]J'I�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[:]Yes
❑ No
EB"N' A
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): q
Observed Freeboard (in): -c5?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[9No
❑ 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
[TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
$. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ 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
[2No
❑ 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 [9/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN [] PAN > 10% or 10 tbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
A
r
13. Soil Type(s): NOA
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ 44o DNA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [E(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes [911No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes F3/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[� INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[9"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[ *N� o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
[:]Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[S(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [:]No �TA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciliq Dumber: a, jDate of Inspection: s
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [g"'No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? If yes, check ❑ Yes M"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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes []I"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?
Ifyes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative'?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Mf A ❑ NE
[-]Yes [21No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [S�4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [1 Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E1Xo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes FOINO
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
ncV1VWUJ/1J1nPcUw1 jNanuc. . pt 1 FlIVI c. -t tv w- — pJ
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412011

• �tr�►S 7/Iy�Za!
Date of Visit: Arrival Time10'4 Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: • , Owner Email:
Owner Name: cZ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �� " S V tt=�Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:�� 4
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: - 6
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
l'7go I
Desig "CurrenWJVDesigCu
DesignSwineCilctty
Trent
Pop
Cattle Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
La er
Non -La er=
- A
DairyCow
DairyCalf
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
wCnrrent
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,oult ,
WC-a_Po
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Layers
Non -Layers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
L_LqoaTs
Pullets
.a,
`
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other°
Turkey Poults.
NJ
er
10ther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
210
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[:]No
03 A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
�iA
❑ 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
A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0 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 I 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
QqZ�❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure Struc e 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: 1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):�
Observed Freeboard (in): f—_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[:]Yes
B'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
0<0
❑ 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
<O
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
VXo
❑ 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 ❑ vidence of Wind Drift ❑Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
I5. 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?
[—]Yes g3 <oo
❑ Yes 53' 0
❑ Yes EE '`'o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �j<o [] NA ❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
I Jo
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
o
❑ 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
53<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
UNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No EKA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Insuecdon:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[:]Yes [j. , o ❑ 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 [�o ❑ 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 191<0 ❑ 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 E;�<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 11 oKo 0 NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 16Xo'
DA' ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments {refer to question : Erfi)Mn any YES answeradryadilitioal rco.endationsor any other commensomm
Uedrawingsofltacility toeterexplan situations (useaditionalpanessary)46
CMr`16_0L,5 cr&JAk_:C� 14-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 9JO
Date: 7//'9 1
4/2011

8TWs z - o y- 20 /O
Type of Visit& Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit v rcoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z—DI—/D Arrival Time: Departure Time: �� 3S- „? County: _ _� SoN Region:
Farm Name: Sol. PJ iz5 A, i �ar►,� � — 8 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 7Z--0 l,,v Qo 4 0. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: 5��� ' Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:vl
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o =' = Longitude: = ° =' =
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry'
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ DairyCalf
to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
Rf ceder to Finish
O ✓�Jr�
pry Poultry
❑ Da Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
to Wean
w to Feeder
❑ Layers
Eto
w to Finish
❑Non -Layers
❑Pullets❑ Turke s❑
Turke Puuets ❑Other
El Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Ca❑
Dumber of Structures:
Dischartses & 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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NoL�Y, N/A
El NE
El Yes ❑ No L7 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑, NNo NA
❑ NE
ElYes l �No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No❑ NA
❑ NE
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?
Structure Structure Structure
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): zg '' z & k Z 2 �
Structure 4
❑ Yes �L,I NNo El NA El NE
[I Yes LI Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ 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? El Yes LINO ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes CJ 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 B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes l-'SNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
L No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu,Ln, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 14% or 141bs ❑ 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) /4o
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
No El NA
El NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes
�E
L7 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
t6_
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes
"No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
L`JB No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
9< ❑ NA
❑ NE
"Comments (refer to quesdon #) Expiain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments i
Use draw7n s of fac�ii. to better explain situations. use additional a es as necessary):
Reviewer/Ins ector Name [ iC. �e.v
p � �. � S
Phone: 910, V33, 330D
Reviewer)) nspector Signature:
Date: Z - 0 1 ` 2,010
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Z — f42. Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
L"J No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes YN. ❑ 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? El" Yes 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?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
• NNoo
DNA
ONE
❑ Yes
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes MINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
D<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
L3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments aadlar D�mags:
i
T
12178104

"B1M S la —a5— ;,7007
01firv—ision of Water Quality
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit
ompliance Inspection
O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
S'Ftoutine O Complaint
0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of visit. 9 /8 [? Arrival Time: /�'3Q .- Departure Time: I/,20,q,.., County:
Farm Name: oI& j Re a./ Fay►"` I ` g Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ -1 0 Le,,j Rey «j Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region: /4:7710
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Cur-+i's 134rw. c' K Title: _1 0- pex__ - Phone No:
Sot. N 2., 4J
Onsite Representative: C== Yr -,-S_ cy�.sic.k _ Integrator: L`°"'1 t- C7,xYt,^s
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ e = A Longitude: =1 ° = I =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
16000
1 q Q
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
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 conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Neifet
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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 CYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes []No N❑ E3SA NE
El Yes ElC No ivA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No lAA El NE
ElL�I Yes 40 P�LTIVA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P< L9< ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

l� acility 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?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes B No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5
El NA [3 NE
El NA ONE
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ,�,�
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes LTNo ❑ 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 D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes 3 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 DN—o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [-do ❑ 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) t_4?Yi&%,1_ L -- C G� f�4 S;�// G. r•,•'.., �D S.
13. Soil type(s) / VA .
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
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
[I NE
,. �Io
B No
❑ NA
[IN E
E 'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑dam
❑ NA
❑ NE
Woomments7
RKeg=uestioninflExplain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any otffierilcomn!nts.1111111111111111111111
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as tsecessary,):
Reviewer/Inspector Name rG !�, / :k t/ m Phone: 970,V33.333
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 2—_9_4fg__— Date: 9 —A8' Z da c%
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 82 — StZ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents �,/
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design El Maps El Other �.,,►v�
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes L7 o []NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
l�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[IB Yes
,L.
ivo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
���
E Noo
❑ NA
[INE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
9 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O-go
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
3- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
,�
LI ivo
❑ 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
01 o
❑ NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
,.,�
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
oo
[I NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
,1��,
Ea o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
H
12128104

a -T►14 s 1 os 06 JAR_
Type of Visit (-Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 6V!?_98 I Arrival Time: Departure Time: %: $5 County: J Region: IX-40
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: 10m^'„.,_.RO4eJ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title: ���'-`' • �Pe c Phone No:
Onsite Representative: C� s 1i"�i t- k Integrator: C01a Vr t Fa ►� S
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: E] o a ' E=1 Longitude: = o = 6 =
Me.urrent
Capapulation
1111=Design CurrenSwine
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑Dai co;
❑Dai Calf
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
_
❑ Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
(p000 (oZ
Dry Poultry
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ D Cow
El
u El La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
El❑
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Gilts
El Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Boars
El Pullets
the
❑ Other
❑ Turke s:::
❑ Tur ke y Poults
❑OtherI
-
Numherdf Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
El Yes
❑ No
�,�
L7 NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2 A
❑ 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
19<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Bfo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Condnued

Facility Number: gZ—Z
Date of Inspection�'O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2-5 St 22,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [lio ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes U 1vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E3<o ❑ 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-� �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:1 Yes fo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[}�E] 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) a.. C f>�•j ��r. � _� �h�al% Gr t,,,a Co. S.
:.
13.
Soil type(s) N o 4
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ElE,Yes
�//
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
B o ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
LOB NNoo El NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
I 2 <o ❑ NA
El NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? [I Yes
,
Ehlo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: q/0. f133.333'a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: $Z Date of Inspection 8—i`f-08
Required Records & Documents /
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El,
Yes L'� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes l3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Bo
El NA
El NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
,�
oo
El NA
El NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
Yes
ElW7
,L-T,
L�lt o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
O'lrlo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes L3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0To ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
O 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
D<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
�
2 o
❑ 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
ElNE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El3 Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additioaal'Comments.and/or Dr'awtngs t,
_,. Vic-
a.Y
Page 3 of 3 12128104

® Division of Water Quality
Facility Number gZ Z O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Z:Op County:
Farm Name: —7 aL•+.i Q®i.", Ywt -$ Owner Email:
Owner Name:-S'0i"1 i2e c.rs( PhnnP-
Mailing Address:
Region: C'�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _ Cu1+1`s_ $ctr Wic. k Title: 15AJ1/, /ua i-^_ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ,- � e'3ary.I�c� Integrator: C04_-'- c " -S
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = b 0 I ❑ 11 Longitude: = ° ❑ 6 ❑
id
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non-Layet
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design :Cur'rent
Cattle Capacity `= Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stacker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[M No
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
EM No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection �o—a3'07
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 27 Z to 4/ly
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
q 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
[XNo
❑ 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
4 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
[7 No
❑ 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 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) r irwu ct�.. ( Sill/ tf SJ
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ® No El NA El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
(4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'! ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
l Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
fUse drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewerlinspector Name Re_V f,jS Phone: 9/0- V33, 3360
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /D— d3 —zeo 7
12129104 Continued

Facility Number: 8`2 — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2 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 En 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 [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 1� 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
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
`F'' 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
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[11 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

WAr�9Q�
Michael F. Easley, Governor
December 1, 2006
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REOUESTED
John O Royal
John O. Royal #1-8
4025 Mt Moriah Church Rd
Clinton, NC 28328
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Subject: Application for Renewal of Coverage for Expiring NPDES General Permit
Dear Permittee:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Watr Quality
RECEIVED
DEC a 6 20M
[N-FAi'Ei W FSM OfflGE
Your facility is currently approved for operation under one of the Animal Waste Operation NPDES General Permits, which expire on
July 1, 2007. Due to changes in federal rules, facilities that do not discharge nor propose to discharge may choose whether or not to
retain coverage under an NPDES General Permit. Copies of the draft animal waste operation NPDES general permits and the State
Non -Discharge General Permits are available at hqp://h2o.enr.state.nc.uslaps/afou/downloads.htm or by writing or calling:
NCDENR — DWQ Animal Feeding Operations Unit
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Telephone number: [phone]
In order to assure Your continued coverage under one of these two tunes of general permits, you must submit an application for permit
coverage to the Division. Enclosed you will find a `Request for Certificate of Coverage Facility Currently Covered by an Expiring
NPDES General Permit.' The application form must be completed and returned by January 2, 2007. Please note, you must include
two (2) copies of your most recent Waste Utilization Plan with the application form.
Failure to request renewal of your coverage under a general permit within the time period specified may result in a civil penalty.
Operation of your facility without coverage under a valid general permit would constitute a violation of NCGS 143-215.1 and could
result in assessments of civil penalties of up to $25,000 per day.
If you have any questions about the draft general permits, the enclosed application, or any related matter please feel free to contact the
Animal Feeding Operations Unit staff at 919-733-3221.
Sincerely,
Ted L. Bush, Jr., Chief
Aquifer Protection Section
Enclosures
cc (w/o enclosures): Sampson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Fayetteville Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
AFO Unit Central Files - 820042
Coharie Farms
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Internet: w'wWncWatgqualitv,org Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal Opportun4lAffirmative Action Employer- 500h Rec ycled110% Post Consumer Paper
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone:
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1:
Fax 2:
Customer Service:
No ` Carolina
(919) Aaturally
[phone]
[phone]
[phone]

® Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 4; Z 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
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: 15 -00-061 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ��s e.✓
Farm Name: :7 S7z n., Owner Email:
Owner Name: �, n'�v, ^ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Z7 +9�_ _7t�� ;l Title:
r
Onsite Representative: /
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: /:ia
Latitude: [= o [= 1 Longitude: = ° =' = "
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish _
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish C)
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ 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 conveyance man-made'?
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stockei
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
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)?
Number of Structures: �F
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 [9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1A No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Z— Lf z 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
-Structure -I ;Structure 2 ,-,Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): {,2.9
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? El NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes QNo
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [SI 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 �3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 17(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E'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).utC(ddc �ya3e_ 5/�„G`,✓^f
-
13. Soil type(s) 141pA
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
59 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
❑ Yes
L9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name ���-�� j y f�5 Phone: 4C)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,j�� .� -�._ - Date:—(]g—ZF"G{P
1L/L5/U4 u0nnnuea

Facility Number: F� — Z Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [I Yes ®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 IN 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
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes]
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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
P9 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
W 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did ReviewerA n spector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
R) No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
E0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
:. r
Addrfoial Catnments:and/or Drawings: . r;• _.ter ` "' x 3.
VW ,
_
12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 19 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: f/ % 3��' Departure Time: County: p-s c,A-) Region: 1✓ ky
Farm Name: � a� r. R o u� - Owner Email:
Owner Name: e ` + —n d u_C), Phone:
Mailing Address: y 02S 1.y��.. yy/Tiohi � Ccy( M*orl C,
Physical Address: +-�t e- _ C. Z Gfa c4 C_- _
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: 4 ? a 41-V Y.Vi 7
Onsite Representative: ZYGAI, IL412AG k r � � � sR 4 V L- . c6egrator: G to 1. a %r t 4- FQr
Certified Operator: SO 11 ►i a� C Operator Certification Number: 1 -7 q b I
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 =. Longitude: = e = =
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish ana
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkev Poults
❑ Other
Dischart?es & 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.'
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
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 [2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Faehity Number: 8.2— d 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: / 3
Spillway?: ./a /rolp"Us G 0'm P"- `7 0.e Ar 1 fa . _S� t V G-- � _ _ l:rz, e.R
�—T
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 31 " 3 ill
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ Iarge trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes R 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 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 4 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) e. w a a.� > f_M rr►u�
S}.�rG / S �?
O S
13. Soil type(s) _ _1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
EgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination,[:] Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name RRMW 4--.?a : , w* Phone: 21-"C /J
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

[rFac`tlity Number: �,Z — t!a Date of Inspection 2 -u_ a.
Required Records & Documents
t.
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ®Design El 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
® 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
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
CO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[5� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
EP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ERNo
❑ 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
[l No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments andlor Draw' ings:=
1ag0o/%�s a
1 CQ�C �.j �`C�� �S� tL }Y •. C 1=. C,a rCk i GVc.1-�'�rGl�l LL c
Ck
21- 1 1e&.,c- 17 ��� ��1� laL0- +�c. C_Orr N+S C-_rprQV tC�
Ro V- �c r C-ti`G d Gr� GL �-. 1k r 0,Z h-c a- l`, I r L
12128104

[Type of Visit (5 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit Q'Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number $'',
Date of Visit: � Time:
rQ Not Operational Q Below Threshold
13Termitted WCertiiied 0 Conditionally Certified
//�� II
13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...---- �....
�
i ....................... Farm Name: 11 �Oi�. l
�--------•-- County: .. ......��..�°...................................
Owner Name: 7°6!l......... � �_ R°}�`� .. _n.�.....j ............ Phone No: _... 54.. �� ......_._ .._.....__.... .
?VUuhngAddress:..._ .. as...... Mf .h'1°r'.a ._..
----G46
Facility Contact: ............................. ..Title: BwreR Phone No:
Integrator:......_ R6r1t....
Certified Operatar:._..._-..�.J;4 ..... Operator Certification Number.
y - '� -- --- »......._..._.......... _. ...__.
Location of Farm:
EaSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude
�• �� �« Longitude �• �� ���
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 3<0
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance than -made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [1To
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
Identifier:
Structure 1 Structure 2 Struure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes [}'No
Structure 6
...........3 .................. _.............3_�......._ ..------------a5....._....... ------.---------------------..... _._........................ _ ..................... ...... ....
Continued
Freeboard (inches):
12112103

Facility Number: Q,Z --
Date of Inspection R a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancerunprovement?
1 l . Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes 2 No
❑ Yes YNo
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes UrNo
❑ Yes 2No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certttied Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ErNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ErNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes GrNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes QNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e_ residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately_
I- com'.'L +. &%U-')r- art IS "'
Reviewer/inspector Name =`
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
ca'. P4}4_-'/" g-e U
❑ Yes [9-1Vo
❑ Yes ["lo
❑ Yes [RI�o
❑ Yes 3fio
❑ Yes [R10
❑ Yes QTio
Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date: 5 / as /o
r7n1ml

Facility Number: ga — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keepirpeed improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes [6No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes 5No
❑ Yes G'No
❑ Yes ❑`No
❑ Yes ENINo
❑ Yes ETNo
❑ Yes [°f No
❑ Yes O No
131Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes [" No
❑ Yes JgNo
❑ Yes ff No
❑ Yes eNo
12112103

Site Requires Immediate Attention: t-16
Facility No. IZ,2 -4.Z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7_ �1TAy , 1995
Time: 13 ` I $
Farm NanWOwner: e�.,eL I 0 I- S
Mailing Address: Ry t s 3 NCB
County: So m n.4on
Integrator: VfV7e,-,c ,s Tic _ - Ph.
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location: 52 t s
Type of Operation: Swine X Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: t0000
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: ° 2g-' .35'"
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) (aor No Actual Freeboard: 3 Ft. & Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes orb Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No y 1%0
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? or No
100 Feet from Wells? Lor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or 19
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or(&� If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No ;1�
Additional Comments:
-T : s ,,,� ►-: nA,1
�3 ■ �.w1\� C�1 V . i W iSF
Inspector Name c4k. iAt ?t �..a! Signature
Su+ 6c -1+4 wac" —CL eick. g
r y etk":t[e NC Saw 1
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: Na
Facility No. Q _ 4 �Z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7 as- , 1995
Time: 1.3 t $
Farm Name/Owner: _NV, 1 c, I -
'Mailing Address: Rj, N tAok t S 3
County:
Integrator: Cp.« 1 s T7ejnt�s _ .,c _ Phone:
On Site Representative: . n . Gz.#4! lb Phc
'Physical Address/Location: Sit t335- '/a_
Type of Operation: Swine X Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: coo oo
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude:. ° n (a Longitude:-7,7 ° 25' -35''
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) 4e or No Actual Freeboard: 3 Ft. & Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or® Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? or No
100 Feet from Wells? Lor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or 10
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or�l If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No s -04 t-4 -a cCL aV �..�
Additional Comments:
d (1ae.o n titc s1: -�� ep �-
Inspector Name r,.-kk,;l[t ?0-,, at o MCC Signature
5-o 1.c 7+4 waC�eV:a Q[d.
COY e� ��•:1Ie NC .28301
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: nks
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: as , 1995
Time: IA! �S
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address: t Rex C.
County: ?io -� 4
Integrator: Ct�,;m\V& _ Phone:—( s-A A o f a 1
,On Site Representative: k , ".,6sa" Cal-mul end % Phone: t5+o) 2 A I AI
Physical Address/Location. S R 13 33 s,g aas- y _ tsx—a
Type of Operation: Swine X Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3S am" Longitude: ° _!RTI-4
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
Actual Freeboard: a Ft. Inches
Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No vas ^p;-
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria?
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)?
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No
200 Feet from Dwellin s? r No
100 Feet from Wells?or o
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes orW f
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No +•col` eoJoJe�l
Is animal waste discharged into water o -11pe state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or Now
Additional Comments: _4._ 4_ : se�r`c►-:d..,
T ; S V �� �(Zr e i Cf +n & Mole Ak n �-a %! -S% 10�SCMI-i' W, un A Io @
Inspector Name o �' a Signature
5%,; r- -714 Old.
S-ao y el-k4:ile NC 283o j
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: N6
Facility No.
DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: _Ts 1995
Time: 13'. a,5-
Farm Name/Owner: `� d L..�, `t�sydl - irOtw, " 2. _
Mailing Address: t C
County: `hb - 4 4
'Integrator: C_'� l�s Fcx,r].s i..c . Phone:_ Lgio S-52 o t 41
On Site Representative: A,,.s to V"san , a.mU lids Phone:I con s a, ^ I S1
Physical Address/Location: 3-7 ,.,:le 4 sd= d 3
Type of Operation: Swine x Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: _ ��+essr�
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3s 19 " Longitude:
Circle Yes or No
.Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: 2. Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
:Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No-�
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? r No
100 Feet from Wells? or o
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes orqw
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No No! e.).1.,,kj
Is animal waste discharged into water o the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No s r.eL c"C-JV a.LAd L%.
Additional Comments:
T:S wnL S& 61ne.S- 1► r-,ote; *4dntm*4:nhn=,,'a "DAL 6, -
i 4� nSF-
Inspector Name' e4,kv;fit ?qx^al (3 Mte Signature
784 +k,)ftC"":oL Rick.
r yttlet.:tie NC a6301
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.