310371_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

(9) Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co pliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine p Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 10Z-5--1 County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: �1
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: To 1-7
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.,
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Pullets
Other
Poults
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
jDairy Cow
jDairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Da'
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes V;�
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

v

Facili Number: I - Date of Ins ection:
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: CA63ic1/V l�i
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment threat,
notify
DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
7No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[;?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
EZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 ibs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
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
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
YNo
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspecti;�o
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box(es) below.
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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
tNo
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
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
6] 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
[ ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Il o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawinp-s of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
re,
Phone — I ? 96
Date:
2/4/20 S

V Division of Water Resources
' Facility Number - % } O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency j]
Type of Visit: rRoutine
pliance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: © Departure Time: ® County: Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: �. J r�/1 S i"0) Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Chlier
Phone:
Certification Number: 1$0
1:2-
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry , Capacity Pop.
Laver
Non -La ycr
Poults
Design Current
Discharzes and Stream Imyacts
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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0NNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes 2f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili.Number: - Date of insection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes I' I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
StructurehhI Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LAC
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): J —
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 E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environments threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �7No ❑ 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 [2/No [DNA ❑ 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 2(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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
El Yes
Z a
[DNA
❑ 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
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWW readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ 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 dNo ❑ 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
❑ Yes [� o
El Yes No
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: �y
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the pen i ? Yes ❑ 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 Ievels
❑ 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 ❑NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes J'oD
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
<o
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
�N0
❑ 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 CAW W?
❑ Yes
2 N
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
L"J o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: `-1A 3
2141201

U Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
p Other Agency . // I
(Type of Visit: 0 7outine
liance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:. Arrival Time: Departure Timer County: Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
[G"A T.= W 11 M A
Phone:
Title:
Onsite Representative: V P r"neas
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
SNszne
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
[Layer
Non -Laver
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharses and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E N
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Y No
❑ NA
[] NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
W s� to Collection & Treatment
47 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):
n p,
Observed Freeboard (in): h 1
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
O/No ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes I!1 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 E2(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
t try
mauz enaace or fmprovemen .
I L Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes U(N o ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
Fz' ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
&No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
yo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 540,
❑ 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 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Z N ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

facility Number: - Date of Inspection: �&
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. my c S O 'y
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. 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)
3 1. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes [31 o
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA [] NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes [2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
[Z l�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
;❑ NA ❑ NE
fo ❑ NA ❑ NE
iComments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional Daaes as necessarv).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone Q ��
Date: 5 k7igo
2/4 M

U Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - `3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 C mpliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: a 1 l3 Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1J3o L)Up UnpJ Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: AMe-q La-60s')
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: M 6 l f
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
y.}co
DD
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La yer
Design Current
Non-L.
Pullets
Poults
Discharzes and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Daja Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes U/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Yo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 1 Date of Inspection: a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4' is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
0 Yes
Na
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: LAGooPJ to60oO L
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
16 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes 6] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes d 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 dNo ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[3/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records &Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[3/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 ON. ❑ 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 WNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:I Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

lFacHity Number: - 3 Date of Inspection: Q_ 1'g S3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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?
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 file drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
[:]Yes [2 f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes / No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
EJ�No ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
To ❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facilitv to better exalain situations (use additional napes as necessarv).
Reviewer/lnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
�DN A RnaCt_
Phone: L I� 7 — 3
Date: Z zy113
21412011

Q) Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - © 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Q C pliance Inspection U Operation Review () Structure Evaluation 0 Technical 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: ® County: N Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: jAmes &Owo Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number: I $61 I
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Discharzes and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Da Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-DaiTy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U 1V ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Dumber: - Z Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 1J 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: d t6 � 0L) Ldciou N
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): - got
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ VresEll 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 WNo ❑ 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 environmento threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures Iack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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 fNo ❑ 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 QNo ❑ 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):
13. Soil Type(s): /
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
FZI�go
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Cf/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
6"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reguired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
LCJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists El 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 fNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilitv Number: q 1 - Arl1 I Date of Insnection: q 1i r�
- V_-
24'Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes o NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes yo0 NA 0 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Yes �No NA NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [:]Yes [�o NA [] NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? TT
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
El Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
Yes E) o ❑ NA ONE
[] Yes
Yes
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Q Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes
0 NA ❑ NE
/ No [] NA NE
2 [] NA NE
o �NA NE
No NA NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
iZC-ftAuV69 Sujo6-& , r?LAO Dom AJjID LAGi--cnJ CS.vk; L-
I I :)-LLI 2_6 t I
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -730(
Date: 5 b I Z_
21412011

W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 4 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 2'Routine
npiiance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Complaint 0 Follow up d Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: > > Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: `iYt1 �l�il�uYJ1J
Owner Email:
Phone:
Integrator:
Phone -No:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = g = Longitude: = ° = I =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population WetPoultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Puults
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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
e. 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑NA
ONE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ o
❑ Yes
wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
yNio
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
' 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structu-rye 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: I LAN
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �714 ZH
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ic/ 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 iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ENo
❑ Yes dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t eat, 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 LdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) WNo
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Annlication
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
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[; No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
a1
❑ NA El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name (} 0 P 0 Phone: glo
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: I3l
Page 2 of 3

r
Facility Number: 3 — 3 Date of Inspection I
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 00 ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
L"I Na
❑ 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
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
El NA
[I NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
,[.''No
LI No
ElNA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
'
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
,3e
L3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ )'es 4.N�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[3 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
L� 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
LOfj N
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, frceboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ N-E
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

7
Facility Number 3 `)
O Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation {
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Co piiance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit YJ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 013 / b Arrival Time: 1 $ ! 4 ,�_ 1 Departure Time: County: iWV�T Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: ' AMES Eft o► o Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude: EJ o ❑' = " Longitude: = ° = i = u
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
E3 Feeder to Finish
;2,ob
�c>
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes LI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑N ❑NA
❑NE
❑Yes
❑ Yes
4 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
El yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Faci* Number: —r7 Date of Inspection a3 I D
*ante Collection & Treatment
dNo
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: N I 130r &j 2�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): otLt P4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
EiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ 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 Apolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below_
❑ Yes
D/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ENo ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
[VNo ❑ 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
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or°any recommendations or any other comments.
Use dra-,i ings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a {
Page 2 of 3 1 12128104 Continued

^A

Faa:ity Number: 3 — Date of Inspection Et U0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
❑ Yes ICJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 Inspection�No
Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
! d o
ElNA
❑ 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
[2 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 El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
,_,/,
[I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
El Yes
/
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
_ f
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
rl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
O'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

1.4

W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit d C mpliance Inspection Operation Review Structure Evaluation Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: (p a pq Arrival Time: $ 3C7 Departure Time: County: A�t1Pt_SrJ Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: p Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Syine
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = = = Longitude: = ° = g =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
F
La er
Non -La er
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
V00
60
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
E]Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ 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 LJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ElNo
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes JZ/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

FacilityNumber: — i c.rl �� Date of Inspection D
Nyaste 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?
StrucT
l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: l %
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2No ❑ 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes �No El 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 ILE No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDliCation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes V(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes & []NA ❑ NE
[:]Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or to 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)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o
d�rNo
El 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 acre determination?[] Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
[I NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ 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 a N Phone: (U �p 3 D
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: (o
Pnoa 7 Ar 2 1212R/04 Continued

.9

=Facility Number: 3 Date of Inspection
FRe uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [I Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ SoiI 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
U(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
[INE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[P(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
bfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
El Yes
d�'
El NA
El NE
El Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 3 vJ 3 12128104

Facility Number
V Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit C7�Routinepliance inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Z)LJP LI�O Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: V Aww—S &LowO _ integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0=' 0 tl Longitude: =° 0 f 011
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish GU40
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ 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?
Design Current
Capacity Population
E3Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
o
�Zo
❑ NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 31
4
Date of Inspection I 3 A`to
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: LP 6tyj3 ( LA-6-0CrJ`Zr
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 15 . IL 5,r'
Observed Freeboard (in): 13
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 2(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes 1✓I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes L�(No ❑ NA El 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 Id No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aanlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes D<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes C No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN a 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
+�io El NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
,.._,
[21 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
D No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
� ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
��No❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: `73545
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �Q Date: : //M oh
l6/LO/V'f I-MISIiriuru

Mr
Facility Number: 3 _3 7r Date of Inspection V J
Required Records & Documents //
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes Oo o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box_ ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
EINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ SoiI 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
0"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
'Ll No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0'1 A
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ 110
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[3-Ro
❑ 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
2<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
ElYes
O 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?
ElE Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

3� w ArE9QG
D �
Mr. James Brown
James P. Brown Farm
1023 Stockinghead Rd
Rose Hill, North Carolina 28458
Dear Mr. Brown:
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Forth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Coleen H. Sullins, Director
Division of Water Quality
December 6, 2007
RECEIVE_
DEC 1 0 RECD
M.
Subject: Sludge Survey Testing Dates
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS310371
James P. Brown Farm
Animal Waste Management System
Duplin County
The Division of Water Quality (Division) received your sludge survey information on December
6, 2007. With your results, you requested an extension in the frequency of the sludge survey for
Lagoon 2 at the James P. Brown facility. Due to the amount of treatment volume available, the
Division agrees that a sludge survey is not needed until 2009 (to meet the requirement for a
sludge survey in the year of permit renewal). The results of the 2009 sludge survey are to be
submitted with the Annual Certification Form that will be due on March 1, 2010. Thank you for
your attention to this matter. If you have any questions, please contact me at
[e-mail] or by phone at [phone].
Sincerely,
Duane Leith
Environmental Engineer
cc: Wilmington Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Jonathan K. Miller, Agriment Services, Inc.
AFO Central Files
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Internet: www.ncwaterguali&rZlocation: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal OpportunitylAifinnative Action Employer 50% Recyded1100/. Post Consumer Paper
W `rthcarolina
)Vatura!!y
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 31 t Q Division of Soil and water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit
C mpliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Routine Q Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: © Departure Time: County: 0L4010d Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
1.0
Onsite Representative: %JA M 32o W
Owner Email:
Phone:
Integrator:
Phone No:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 = 0 « Longitude: = o = I = "
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
13 Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish -
El
Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream lmnacts
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 Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockei
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: 71
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 /NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4r' 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: (A 6-WO L -LA (,o6N 7-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): • S i/cl. S
Observed Freeboard (in): 3S
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 U?No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes (No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Zo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t notify DWQ
[--]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs [:]Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes �, El NA
o
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit??❑
Yes
L �'No'El 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
El Yes
10 [INA
ElNE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
o ElNA
ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
El Yes
o El NA
ElNE
❑ Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
[7XNo
❑ 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 acre determination?[]
Yes
CYNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Vo ElNA
ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[�N"o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
�
�7 p
Reviewer/Inspector Name "` Phone( l qc — / 3 ge
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ale, Date: �Z / I LL;--
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 8 01
R*g_uired Records & Documents
14. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes E(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMI` readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ y,,up ❑ Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Q 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 El
Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
ElL[ Yes
No
El NA
ElNE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
UNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
17 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
do
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (FLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ff NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMF?
❑ Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
Po
❑ 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
El-NZ7
❑ 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
�o
El NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
,�
k14'o
❑ NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
[I,[ Yes
,E.
INO
❑ NA
❑ NE
nal Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Q2 Division of Water Quality /
Facility Number 3 37 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ✓/
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit �C,o/mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit CJ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 00
�thher.� � �❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: i 14 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: go Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: J.Ames BtL*Wa Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Other
❑ Other
Phone No:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = c = ' = Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes [ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes 1 J ' El NA ❑ NE
El Yes L� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

pi
I

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?
Stntc e l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: iA ( t 0
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�7
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 ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental #great, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes /�1No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures Iack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ yes 2fNo ❑ 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 ENo ❑ 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 L'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ AppIcation Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) S a MOQA L(s) SG i)
13. Soil type(s) �bJt (S T6 N N 9,p Gb A VTR j%`/7iLL C
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWW?
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
FNo ElNA ElNE
E 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
L'J o ❑ NA ❑ NE
L`[N El NA NE
+ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name c /LA% u/ Phone: G " a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 P 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — j Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EN- ❑ 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 Cade
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
2f,_NA
El NE
Yes
ElEl[!f
No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No L/J NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes LJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
El NE
❑ Yes
,�o
L''J�No
El NA
El NE
El Yes
B1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

��
�t
1�«

JW Division of Water Quality
Facility Number �J ( 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit 95 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County: ��" Region: 09
Farm Name: s z4F.5� )e &/1i1J i! �� _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: _45 V_-�Ou//+� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:Phone No:
Onsite Representative:/ S .160& 41;/J Integrator. �
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: =' ❑ ' ="
Longitude: = ° = I =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:FZ
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 O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ZZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

4- 1
W

Date of Inspection
Facility Number: —
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S cture 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: AD
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 ARalicstion
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Evidence of Wind Drifl El Application Outside of Area
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window*
�❑
I2. Crop type(s) l l7�� /�1�+�� V`, c-. &Lletm=-�
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes
Vf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre deternination%❑
Yes
VfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
;a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes /t] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
1416A)7- Y✓F/L
64,, f_ & Py ©F IM7.0 G7-f0 ,e2 .Z r
-Av1/14a" '05 l r►
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: Q fiYl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
.1aiZ(Vv4 Uonnnuea

f
•�
��

A. . . `I
Facility Number: — .Date of Inspection � t7
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ 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 l " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
fin NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JD No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
;9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

Division of Water Quality+
Division of Soil and Water Conservation t
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit A(Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Oiher ❑ Denied Access
F Date o£ Visit:
E Facility Number _ _'.� } '� �
XPermitted)JdCertified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
Farm Name: ...�,.�. 4�.- .... .... Al ....FA ...........................
Qp�
Owner Name:........:5..................a.?.h.ld�i�± ........................ ..
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:
Onsite Representative: tam- M _ .q......15 .0 ..................
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
[O O Time:
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......
County:.....,. UPt.�JY.......................... .... I ...... ..........
.
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:.... V41j 5...................... .
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ° " Longitude • 4 69
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
iffFeeder to Finish pb i ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts I IEEE]
❑ Boars I I Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from: any part of the operation?
Discharge originated au ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..... NEIJ Z'..._ .._-----------
Freeboard (inches): 2 $ 2. 1'
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes INo
❑ Yes INo
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Failility Number: 1 —3' Date of Inspection 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
C. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or El Yes INO
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? ❑ Yes /No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 0�No
9. Do any stuctures Iack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes /Tqo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type 5"—W L)CA G SMALL t*9SEE0
13. Do the receiving crops differ with tl}ose designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes X No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ;jNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ YesNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? El Yes 0C
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes/fNo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes 0
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? J
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N0
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes /No
Air Quality representative immediately.
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): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
go'jp CD poaso + vMV..'.r►%? Ba.4t'-'a G�.XEn srrvArttoa WZ-rtt
(>U4Xt3CG VV�Ay' Z�e3.
Fp►cm + REco2DS Lnolc- 600D.
OWNE2 CAP 0 OAcw,^ 9-010 C2oPS o e6q- nUOA C60
3
Reviewer/Inspector NameIn O
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 1 Continued

Facility Number: 31 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Vf No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes 91No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes XNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
VNo
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
;ffNo
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
ZNo
27_
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ZNo
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VNo
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
Zj No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
XNo
3I _
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33_
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

e:
Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and U°ater Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 3 ? 3 Date of Visit:
r
0 Permitted O Ceerjt'i'fi" ed ❑ Cro7nditiiionally Certified © Registered
Farm Name: J; T -L G S , I ire vt/?'1 r-q r+^\.
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: �- Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Z% dZ- Time: I I S: 10
not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County,. a) y 92 L-2
Phone No:
Phone No:
r
Integrator: 61 rb %
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' �• 0" Longitude 0a
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
IEJ Layer I I ❑ Da
❑Non -La er L� Non-D
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons L JLJ Subsurface Drains Present JJLJ Lagoon Area JLJ Spray Field Area J
Holding Ponds i Solid Traps No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`' (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste C211getion & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier: 1 Z
Freeboard (inches): 43 3 %
❑ Yes J1 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes IzNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ):YNo
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: ._� j — 3 rj
Date of inspection Z
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 D"'Q)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings)
Waste Appiication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Gr-e-1 11r^ Uy+' e
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plata readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design. maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AW-IMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 2]rN0
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes_,tNo
❑ Yes .EfNo
❑ Yes -EINo
❑ Yes .la No
❑ Yes .ETNo
❑ Yes —0 No
❑ Yes __2-No
❑ Yes �ZNo
❑ Yes _4fJNo
❑ Yes _J:_TNo
El Yes ZNo
❑ Yes .'No
❑ Yes _ONO
❑ Yes _'No
❑ Yes 'D No
❑ Yes _,2No
❑ Yes _[:'f4o
0 No Violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any'YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): [� Field Cot+v ❑Final Notes
�rV-- n; [0li6 0ve), �.p-'res 41,,-4 COvI✓ice4et 'F�Q !9✓nj��I SLJ,✓7P_
a c-. Sc S n o l j rl e 4 1-, use_) 46 41, e 1 e,3 a nv, e s+ i 11 14n c-ot- c d l.e� i 4 4: ,
LA_; ej I I et J1 cd Ohff
�' ✓ �+�T i +'+� C P C -icy, + r �L 1 �b r of [e,,
Reviewerllnspec#or Name 3-%GS ytQt,✓ /J
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /r Date: Leo D 9 —
05103101 Continued

Facility lumber: F) -39 Date of Inspection Z O
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, andlor public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or
C�'►'1��'Lt,y/��{. y)� Inrt'}� r�''1-r. �jra�.rvl G'"l0[ fi'b�.,✓hs^B� �Iet7SDvti n'�'
L L L 4 U cV r kz lr -n Q 14k s M v n 4
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes _Z No
❑ Yes _;�-No
❑ Yes JZNo
❑ Yes -No
❑ Yes Ea%
❑ Yes ❑ No
41ke Gev.c,e n ►nc4ad Q6ire ) 4k,s 1en] 14 y ��
G� Y AI �, gl✓1G'41t jv1 f,)C ceP0- M4 ('enA141'vn . —7-4 e reGorr d�
a ►re LAOe [.tee 11 �C e�✓f , Ti cmr e ; S a good -C OV e"15 ■ O-'
1�'BGewl Gfd�o. T1,e [a�oonS q►-�f� �og hotA.Se q.t2q
well yl�lovt �v red
05103101

Division of Water Quality
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type o€ Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up XEmergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: I le, k:!� Printed on: 10/26/2000
....._ 0 7Not —operational Q Below Threshold
IN(Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date East Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: ..... iaY`.•° �...9......................................................... County:......,..,p..'�............................. ......................
$ .....
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Title: ..........................
Phone No -
MailingAddress: .......................................fit..................-- .. ..-.----
L.IJ Onsite Representative:2„y,C .. r1 . Integrator:......
Phone No:
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
IV
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' i 'i Longitude • 4 46
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ,Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon ❑ Spray Field Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes bS(No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes XNo
c. li• discharge is observed. what is the estimated now in galhnin? "3—'•
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:........................................................................ ..............................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00 Continued on back

LA

lac ity Number: — 3 Date of Inspection J� Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Croptype
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16, Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20,
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
. viol"aiioris :or dei;cieneies were pgfed di�ritng this;visit; You will tr. eeeiye rit futthgr
corari*rideirce: abauf this visit: ; ;
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):
L C--c-'�CQ S -
Y��
IV

v

cility Number: 3 ` —`, Date of Inspection �--t=--t LJ Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge;Wor hplow ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (Le. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc_) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fit] pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments an orDrawings:
Ac S �/
31- �x
�v2-f� � "G 4..+►.�� t"`�`r� M1 C�- L.�t�s CG``�� �� � \r� � �'--�t`1�"`�
t4J�"L..�,� �a y,�& -c c!-2 1.�--.yes \-::,L-.--N144
L.,c. s t-vbhe►l'_ 610-€
J

I

jF TsJ'E'�}

a
Y °
N� �I
-wahal
_ _ A
— " —
iDobson
_ drape Chapel _
71,
V
l
•\ max' _ �Q`
2$5
22,5
_ u
2Q u
Kilpatrick
LIM
Cr
' � a
- • 23.a eQ�,� ; �26 I 8 � —
- •-�.:. `�� _ -- — -- - fax ,s ( i - = i
z32 Z33 55' �3L! � iNT �Orl—•GE OLOGICii 5llAYE Y. AESTON_ VIRGiNIo��gg�
CNlA'Q1IAPIN f1 KM 236apOm�
2 ROAD CLASSIFICATION
IDUO 20M Primary highway, Light -duty road, hard o
hard surface_..... �� improved surface ..._=
Secondary highway,
so0u �� 8n00 soon iUDuo hard surface..Unimproved road--__
TERS Y, Interstate Route _ U. S. Route State F
LIM OF 1929
REST 0.1 METER N. c. �
EST os METER
KENANSVILLE,
QUADRANGLE LOCATION NW/4 K£NAsl9VILLE 15' OUA
G ON. VI STANDARDS 2209 CONTOURS AND ELEVATIONS N3452.5—W7752.5/
TON, VIf2GINIA 22092
ILS IS AVAILABLE ON REQUEST IN METERS
1880
DMA 5453 IV NW—SERIE

,,do. a

Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection p Operation Review U Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Roufine O Complaint O Follow upQ Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 371 Date of Visit: 1-17-2001 Time: 1G15
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted MCertified E3ConditionaffyCertiried E3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..-_.__.__.__._-.._
Farm Name: 1AmmP_AwmYarju ------ ------------------------------- County: A.upliiln_ --------- - - .S JRR Q-- -
OwnerName: James .................... ................. .Wil............ ...... ....... .................. ..... .... Phone No: 910. 2,$Q-34.C3...........................................................
Facility Contact: ........................................................... Title: ................................................ Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1Q23-StackiAi-------
Onsite Representative: 0n=,..QWP_.0 raft .... ................. I... ............................ ............ Integrator: Bmwn'&.Qf Carolina. Inc , ....................
Certified Operator:jawim ............................ RMFM ................................... Operator Certification Number: J.80J_i-------- .._.._.._.._-.
Location of Farm:
+Tear Register Crossroads. On Northwest side of 5R 1141 approi. 0.5 mile South of SR 1957 +
® Swine ❑ Poultry
❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 01 52 _:'
36 =" Longitude v 77 • 54 ' 48
Ii lligl>t u1f ?elnt Deslgq
OR-MRt
Deslgln Ca t
Swine
Ca acitv:a iit�oa '...:M�Ca ac'
:: Vo utahen Cattle
Ca acitr P<! motion'
❑ Wean to Feeder
Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
2400
Naa-Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
' 2,400
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
324,000
❑ Boars
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Z Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field X Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes M No
Q Yes ® No
3.5
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
n7in7inr

l r�y Number: 31-371
Date of Inspection 1-17-2001
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..... _........... _.. _.. _... ......................,, ....................... _.. _.. ....... _...,............. _ ........................... ............. .............
Freeboard (inches): - - -- - -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- -- --
-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - -- -- -- --
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17. Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records & Documents
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
21. Does record peeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
22. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
25. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
© No
26. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Odor Issues
28. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
❑ No

V,I/UI/Ul
s
Facility Number. 31-371
Date of Inspection i-17-2001
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Continued
Printed on: 1/23/2001
[I Yes
E] No
❑ Yes
© No
❑ Yes
© No
[] Yes
© No
0 Yes
© No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
lw-._.--
Field Copy ® Final Notes
nspection in response to call from grower concerning release of waste from recycle line.
nington office nofified approx. 2pm. Problem was discovered at approx. 3:30-4pm on 1-16-2001. Rate of flow was a
gpm. Time span of release until discovery unknown.
Taste flowed down stormwater diversion to ditch between field and owner's house to State Road right-of-way ditch. Waste
rossed culvert into ditches on brother's farm 31-476 (Greg Brown) where it was contained by plugging ditch with dirt. Entire
itch path has been pumped out onto fields on both farms. No evidence of waste beyond dirt plug.
ote: Grower should get recycle lines buried ASAP to avoid any more problems. Grower should also notify DWQ sooner of
rch a problem. To his credit he did call Brown's of Carolina and was also dealing with another problem (more severe) at his
her farm 31-766.
Reviewerlinspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

JAN 2 2 2001
January 19, 2001
�Y:
Mr. Dean Hunkele
DWQ Inspector
NC Department of Environment and Natural Resources
127 North Cardinal Drive
Wilmington, NC 28405
Dear Mr. Hunkele:
This letter is to inform you in more detail of the discharge that occurred on my
farms, James P. Brown, Farm 31-371 and Rackley Place, 31-766, on January 16, 2001.
After talking again with my son the more accurate time he discovered the discharge
at James P. Brown farm was 2:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. He then investigated and found a
temporary recycle line separated and repaired the line. I have since discovered that, in fact,
the electric coop. meter reader was there earlier in the day in which he ran over the
temporary line causing it to separate then or later which is undetermined.
My son called me at work after he fixed it maybe between 3:00 p.m. and 3:30 p.m.
I was in a meeting and left as soon as I could get free.
I arrived home around 4:30 p.m. and found the discharged water had crossed under
the highway culvert into a ditch on my brother's farm. The water was moving slowly. I
then determined the best way of recovery) was to block the ditch closer to his hog houses
and lagoon in order to pump it into his lagoon. The water was not there at this time. I
then went to Rackley place and started the irrigation pump (which was already pulled out
from a few days before) at 5:45 p.m. I entered this time on my field sheet. The gun was
working properly at this time. I then came back and made contact with Craig Craft with
Brown's of Carolina at approximately 6:00 p.m. I went back to the ditch to see where the
water was at that time. It was still a good way away from my anticipated recovery point. I
then went back to Rackley at 6:30 p.m. and discovered the gun actuator was not moving to
direct the gun. It was throwing the water toward a low place in the field at the head of a
water way. At this time, I did not know if any water was running so I shut the pump off to
investigate. I found that the water was in fact flowing in the water way which lead directly
into Stockinghead Creek. I determined by the off set wet marks in the field that the travel
time of the gun had been working improperly for approximately twenty minutes at 220
GPM resulting in about 4,000 gallons of waste water that could have entered the creek.
I came directly back home to make contact with Craig again. As soon as I entered
the house he and Gus Simmons drove up in the yard - this was approximately 7:00 p.m.
We all then went to reassess the incidents and a plan of action.
Craig suggested we set up in 2-3 places and pump it on the field and incorporate it
rather than waiting for all of it to get to my anticipated recovery point This was about 7:30

p.m. - 8:00 p.m My son and I went to the lower end of the ditch to dam it up with
shovels and Craig called the backhoe for Rackley. The BOC crew dammed up
Stockinghead downstream ahead of most of the discharged water and began pumping it
back into Rackley place lagoon.
Both of the recovery teams pumped until 2:00 a.m. - 2:30 a.m., January 17, 2001,
pumping all water out then letting it fill back up again until all waste water was either on
the field or in the lagoon. Craig and I determined that he would send a crew to each place
the next morning to continue recovery in case any more waste water had accumulated
because I had to leave early the next morning to check turkey placements at my job. This
plan was carried out.
This then is what leads us to the length of time before I notified DWQ of the
incidents. It was after 5 :00 p.m. before I had evaluated the situation and I left for work
before 8:00 a.m. It was after 11:00 a.m. on January 17th when I returned home. I made
several calls to what I found out later when I rechecked was the fax number instead of the
phone number. I was also under the impression that the regulation stated notification
within 24 hours which I did so. I hope to never have to notify you again but I will try to do
it earlier as soon as I can after the first needed immediate steps are made to minimize
impact.
I have already begun making plans to permanently reinstall the temporary line that
was separated at the James P. Brown Farm. I have also purchased the bearings to repair
the gun that n alfumctiomed. It will be done before it is used again. Plans had already been
made to re -seed waterways with fescue but it has been too wet. I was unaware of the flash
board risers at the end of the water ways that you mentioned but I will pursue more
information on them.
I am very sorry that these incidents occurred. I assure you that everything possible
was done to contain and recover the waste water in order to minimize the environmental
impact.
I am also enclosing a copy of the media release that was faxed to all the local
media.
Also, I thank you for your assistance and consideration in this matter. If you have
any further questions please contact me at my home phone at 910 289-3463.
Sincerely,
James P_ Brown, Jr.
CC: Rich Shiver

hvision of. Water sty
Q Division of Snail and Water Conservatxou
Q ther`Ag _
Type of Visit ,QfCompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Fonow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
)Facility Number 1 r� ? Date of Visit: 1 1 Time: S - 45
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted [3 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......... _.............
Farm Name. ..... ;.yes 0U,r c W.` 1.. °!f e-1 County:. ..t1. 1..i.'1...........................
T.......................................................,.............
OwnerName: ................................................................................. Phone No: ................................... ....._._,.............................. ........
Facility Contact: ... Title:........... Phone No:.................................... .. .............
...........................................................................
Mailing Address:. ...................................................
f
Onsite Representative: E m e 5......� r o (v ,-+. ............. .... Integrator:............ S 04.. C_ rd I..; . 2..._.......... .......... ............. .......... ..... ........
Certified Operator : ................................................... ........................................................... -- Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ° GG Longitude • 4 44
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons —A- 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Bolding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacks
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/thin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .............. {............................ .....................
Freeboard (inches): 35 ? �,tt
j
5/00
❑ Yes )?, No
❑ Yes IQ No
❑ Yes J3 No
141J,
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes J6 No
❑ Yes P-No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facitity Number: 3 1 — 3 ? ! Date of Inspection J 1 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ,j No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes KNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
`>•. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes .0 No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 2f No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ffNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,n No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ETNo
12. Crop type h c q 4 , [� � sa,r ('L v l ►-t
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes �No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ZNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes jffNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes Pilo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes [ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
IT Pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N+A6fati#iis o"r• deficient{es were pptea ihi-t rig this:visit: - YOU will-teeeiye ono rut th&
Corn- spondence. Aouf this visit :::::: :::::::: :
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):
Mr, 3r0C_"'q'S -let c,71;� �s #iec4l, kerT..
C] Yes 'f No
❑ Yes ,El"No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes J" No
❑ Yes J'No
❑ Yes ;no
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes'ONO
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerlhispector Signature: �i I��LJ , Date: N / �41 0 1 5100

1F'acility Number: j 3 C 11 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours? ❑ Yes_,ffNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ONo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ZNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 121 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ZNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments aW rawings:
5100
5100

A
;D►visiol "'f Water`"utility =
(]'Divisimi-6f Soil and' 7Vater C QnserKfltlQn=- '
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 371 Date of Visit: 11-$-2etli Time:
13:45
rO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
■ Permitted ® Certified j3 Conditionally Certified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: • ._ .- __ __ _...
Farm Name: Ja=s 1',.Hr.Qwjx.FArAL............................ ............................. . County: Rujft.................................... }?4JR0 ......
Owner Name: Jam------------------_ 11rW1j__-------------------------- Phone No: 93rQ281-4G3-- ----- --------- --_-___----
Mailing Address: 1R2,3.,5t9.ddn Agad..R4ad.............•---....................--•
Facility Contact:........................................................... Title: .................I ..................... I....... Phone No:
......................................
Onsite Representative: dames.Bzlo]Yu------------------------.-------------- Integrator: &QYDU�s +Qf barsllin,'�.Ip�-----------------.
Certified Operator: Jamc0..FR ............................... Brown.R........................................ Operator Certification Number: lt.01.7.---.... -...................
Location of Farm:
Near Register Crossroads. On Northwest side of SR 1141 approx. 0.5 mile South of SR 1957. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 • 52 1 36 K Longitude 77 • 54 48
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2400
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,400
Total SSLW 324,000
Number of Lagoons 2 ® Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ® Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ------------- I............. ------------2-------------------------------------- ---- -•--•-
Freeboard (inches)
nelne my
35 41

v
V3/U,a/Vl
Facility Number: 31-371
Date of Inspection 11-$-2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type whest,grain,sorghum
K.unnnuea
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes to No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16_ Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question ff): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations orany other comments..
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use. additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Brown's facility is neatly kept.
Reviewerllnspector Name Stonewall Mathis entered by Bette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

t
01103101
Facility Number: 31-371
Date of inspection 11-5-2001
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
A.

Division of Water Quality - - - -
Q::&rvisia n of Soo and Water Conservation,-
Q (tither Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 4 Rome O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 371 Date of Visit: 11-&2001 Time: 13:45
ro Not Operational Q Below Threshotd
Permitted ■ Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 17 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _ __ __ _-
1U1e5�.IIx....................................
Farm Name: �,�.R1�Y.k'.ai•A1- 4.------------•-•------•--•------.....--•----•-- ------..... County: --•-----•--•--•-
...-•--•--•--•--•--� ..-•---
Owner Name: damt~S_Brt13YA-------------------------- Phone No: QxQ$9_4G3--..--------------------------
Mailing Address: i Q2 ...tlJ t< d 4 d................................................................. R959.dill-Mc............................ ............................ Z8.45.0 ..............
Facility Contact: ........................................................... Title: .................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: d;#IIN,s_IC4R>a._.----- _---_._----------------------- Integrator:jClalY4�S 4t�ltuA�I�----------------•
Certified Operator:.[AMC&.I'................................. Bro.wn.jr ......................................... Operator Certification Number: l$Q17..............................
Location of Farm:
Near Register Crossroads. On Northwest side of SR 1141 approx. 0.5 mile South of SR 1957. AL
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 • 52 L 3GC6 Longitude 77 • ®& 48 66
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2400
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,400
Total SSLw 324,000
Number of Lagoons 2 ® Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area IN Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon. ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ------------- 1------------- -------------•------------ -------------------- ------ --------------------------- ---------•---------------- --
El Yes % No
El Yes ® No
El Yes ® No
? ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure b
Freeboard (inches):
nrin�lnv
35 41

V4
u.3/frVui
Facility Number: 31-371
Date of Inspection 11-5-2001
Uoarmueu
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type whest,grain,sorghum
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20_ Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
coiiuiiients (refer to question �xplain.any YES answers andlor;any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facile to better e facility xplain situations (use'additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Brown's facility is neatly kept.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis entered by Bette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

O5103101 Continued
Facility Number: 31-371 Date of Inspection 11-8-2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [] yes []NO
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Commentsand/orDrawings:_.

� Division of�.Vater Quality
©D1vis1'6n of -Soil atiotd Witter Conserv"a"ttori"
O ©titer Agency .....:.
Type of Visit © Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 371 Date of Visit: 11-5-2001 Time: 13:45
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _ _.
Farm Name: J=0.I',.Di:.RWX. FArX.......................................................... County: I)-u ft--•--------------------.--------.._. WMQ......
Owner Name:'jMg5--------------- --- DI�Y4A---------------------------- PhoneNa 4XQ�$J4Ct----------------------------..
Mailing Address: I.423. St9.Ckj=hl<ad..I;ROad...... ................ -..................... .................... RQ5.V.TillNC............................... ... M45IR..............
.......................
Facility Contact: ..................................... ..................... Title: ..............--- Phone No:
Onsite Representative:,)<�Jp4]�11_-----.---------------------.-._------- tntegrator:ZQ�u�s nfla��QOtta.Ins----------------•
Certified Operator: ,hAtAICS.F................................ D.r.O.WaIr ......................................... Operator Certification Number: Ja0J.7..............................
Location of Farm:
year Register Crossroads. On Northwest side of SR 1141 approx. 0.5 mile South of SR 1957. A
Y
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 • 52 & 36 Longitude F 77 • 54 48
Design Current
Swine C'anacity Ponniation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2400
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy I I ::::]
❑ Non -Layer 1 11­1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,400
Total SSLW 324,000
Number of Lagoons 2 ®Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray liield Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE3 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a. lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ------------- 1----------- ....—--------- ------------ --•--------.-_.__.-- ----- --- -•--------- . ..................... .......................
Freeboard (inches):
n&in3 my
35 41

V]/UJ/V t, uunnueu
Facility Number: 31-371 Date of Inspection 11-8-2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type whest,grain,sorghum
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14_ a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15_ Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc_)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22_ Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Mr. Brown's facility is neatly kept.
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis entered by Bette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

1995103101 Continued
Facility Number: 31-371 Date of Inspection 1 11-8-2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
ments
rl
J

.Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit JffCompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit JWRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 3 Date of visit:
,Permitted [ C
e
rt
ified j] Conditionally Certified © Registered
Farm Name: ......0 4 f . 7`I`Ot to (--� ,r 1,t.•�
...................................................................S.......................I..................
Owner Name: �''f�.GS own
110 Time: t 3; � Printed on: 10/26/2000
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
County: D
Phone No:
FacilityContact: ......................................... .................................... Title:.........----....... Phone No
Mailing Address: ..............
Onsite Representative: ` "'''- w
erA `1
..........—I .............. ......................
Certified Operator:..... _
Location of Farm:
........................................................................................................ ..........................
........... I....... Integrator:... ' et,✓ 7t 5.. � ...........a_ !.+ ..............
.................................................. Operator Certification Number:
swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 4 « Longitude �� �t tt
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder JE1 Laycr I I ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish 2 ,0 ❑ Non -Layer I I JE3 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE1Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? J9Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance Iran -made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Oyes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes I'No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Stl'ULAUre I 5u•u,.:�.ure 2 Struclure 3
Identifier: ........... 1.—A.................. .................................... ....................
Freeboard (inches): z4 0
5100
❑ Spillway
Structure 4
Structure 5
❑ Yes ,
M No
Structure 6
Continued on back

facility Number: 31 -3. Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes J�rNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes �No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes NJ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes gj�rNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes JRNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 9No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload X Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type C'� rig-, orb �yw+� t W� ea1
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes V No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ErYes ❑ No
c) This. facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes XNo
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Nmo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
)d No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Yes
El No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
1 No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
MO
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
VNo
24,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
NNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
j9N0
Rio violations :or def cit�.ncies were noted d rritrig �his:v......... r. e. . . .Rio i'.... r.
.. .............. ....... ..
rorresparicieitce: shout: this :visa.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommend tions of any ot> er comments.
Use drawings of Facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
�• ���e 1 s UIt �' �hc�-�'►-n� �a� l�r�s'e a+�a� Gir+c�,h..�►� � � �
V"d ' s�l�s qy i,c4v#reJ [.serer--hkeYi -
mj
+o' . a., t/1 Sq r d -� 4 a[
was cloaaed bocr-� �o w�e�s 8 A d s
C�[9 1't DvrtG �6.sfe SG"rl a G
Uj
'Irdi-t>nd nerve
�. Ove0f Fle4- - Ge0Able Aj,4-,r,,yCA Awe �GGt�/���oh 1�I�q,GdG36
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
5100

Facility Number: (— ? Date of Intspection JJZSro—o Printed on, 10/26/2000
Odor I.Aues
26 Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes I!fNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes
No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes JW No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
6. Need
% re p a :,-
1 ea, k i, ru) P U Aq
7611k,
f;LC A
we4 b l e qcr e. S e4e4¢✓�, r ct4 r an
7 I •
eLa W'::� SILe -<4 w. �e .
�
f ll ee �, c� Ztt Dfi
Keel
ly-eebc ow- �
,r�� arks ay a
weeks trot; S.
t>�e
be- ►n�i:vt
t� �
�} �
llewi*Nce r e 1a-11-0-2'S.
a � �� W �-� � � h oar
.&I
5100
J

Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
E3 Division of Sail and. Water Conservatiow Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
Other Agency O .,,ration, Review,-
I Routine Q Cum Ip aint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
_Facility Number --.. Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection�24 hr. (hh:m�n)
Permitted [3 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered [] Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.........sJ-AKn4.6.............F.........BrawV..l........ ;r�.:rt�n... ................ County:........D.- �� �...
�1................... .........................
Owner Name:....... r �!..5.............. ........... ...WY..•-. • ... Phone No:..... ��1� .... ��.:... .........................
�j'
Facility Contact: ....JA! ^.?•_5................... ..............Title: ... ........ (2.WhQ.I................................ Phone No: ...................................
Mailing Address......j f?,.Z`� ..... 1 4................ f .: .. r3�..... (...�.1....... }..l(l.G�............ ... .
Onsite Representative-...5l vv�t5.................G] YO r�1.ki.............................................. Integrator:........,.....,��.......,..................................................
Certified Operator:....... L!Kr—s......................... . ] �pvV!!�....... ......... Operator Certification Number ....... �.��
Location of Farm:
............ ......................... ................. .......................................... .................................... ..................... .......... -........................ ,.........................................................................
...; �
Latitude 0 Longitude •
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
21,0
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Nan -Layer JE1 Nan -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
cumber of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I I[] No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes IXNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a- If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -made? ❑ Yes [allo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes (4 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon syste3n? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [&No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [A No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) Iess than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes [jZNo
Structure f Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ......Ve..................... ............2...........................................................................................................................................-................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes W No
seepage, etc.)
3123199 Continued on back

i
� • \
�
A

Facility Number: 3! — Date of Inspection
,6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ;KNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes JK No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9- Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 0No
Waste Anolication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
29 No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
JO No
12.
Crap type
—those
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N[No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Cj No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
ER No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
[20 No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
ANo
16,
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ErNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22, Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: �i •vij)latiods:or• idef cienties were noted• d(Wiog �this'visit' • Y64: ill•teeeive Rio; futtit f
corres�ondence. about this visit_ _ ..
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):
Well
Reviewer/Inspector Name
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [@ No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes �INo
❑ Yes X No
L
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Date: 1l-1,7—
lio)P;!:2r
3/23199

Facility Number: J --3ql Date of Inspection 2 I'
Odor Lssues
•
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, [:]Yes XNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes 9No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes XNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes XNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover? ❑ Yes �No
Al
3/23/99

t
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number:]—� i Time of Inspection Ehn 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered PkCertified 0 Applied for Permit Mermitted JE3 Not Operational I Date Last O erated:
Farm Name: b-LiA A .........................
� . ....... .n.....{gym.:.-�............... County: .........................................
Owner Name:.................. S.sGW.A.S............ ......... &UJX................................................ Phone No:...� �! ip�...3`�6.3.......................... ..................
Facility Contact: ................. . Title: .. Phone No:
023 Mailing Address: ...S*d.
.. ...........................................�..
..al.,.....................................................
Onsite Representative............... .......... xj.&................................................. Integrator :....... ...gFMA...........................................................
Certified Operator;............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:......................
...................
Location of Farm:
...V .�z.i .... .11..1.r..Q:.S,.x�+i�F ...... to #�..�...... ......1.`l?.:............................................................................................I.................
... . - .. ........
Latitude ' 6 44 Longitude • 1 46
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) Cj Yes M No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? Ajjk
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
JVNo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
0 Yes
Q No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
UNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
0 Yes
00 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
7/25/97

F" O ityNumber: 7,
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly clotted? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures (Lagoous.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits: etc.l
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifer. .._... �..� l -- ....... .
Freeboard(ft):............. 3:1............ ......... ..................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
5L No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
(N No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
0 No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ................. ...50�:k� V_(1.................................. ..
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
DINo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
� No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
'R] No
0 No.violations or deficiencies. were noted during this. visit. You,w'ili receive -no further
corresp6ndehce Ahoijt this visit:- : • '
Comments (refer to question #): Explain an YES answers and/or a�` rectnendati©ns or and other camwnts
Use drawings of facility tr) better explain situations, (use additional pagei as necessary):
TALL ,il is ;�• lc„�at�. I s1wLl� bz Y x dt�, tro5ian i t Si�rrr• aaH�Ct~ cJi �ca�iv�
G,h vLAtf W4( c i-- (F'Scc, # be- C.pri'ee{aC(� Gr�e7oet on {� � v i a✓ C�: �U
o F {USooti #, 2 S6A b4 4tfl-, 'U, el�y t�,+� M'Sle-Jej, Qcri o t,+ rye 0. -
11 Ia t t'� L
2-2. wvt S 1U ire S;C�
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: ) ��-___^ -- Date: � )

t

Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Or
�® Division of Water Quality
❑ Other Agency
® Routine O Com laint O Follow-up of DW2 ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Date of Inspection to
Facility Number
Time of Inspection EL�jn 24 hr. (hh:mm)
12 Registered © Certified 0 Applied for Permit © Permitted © Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.. ..NMY...F.......1'.....L.�.�el..!^....... avx.e... '. a:r Countv:.'_b..V.f1!.'y ................................. .t.. ..
Owner Name: ....... sT..a.tr.. Nts......� ........ .! A. 3........................................... Phone No:.. —11. )...2 f .1.....:.3. 1. ...........................
Facility Contact:............................................................................ Title:................................................................ Phone Nw ..B.1-0-Z°1.,, :.7h..R3
Ge 11
Mailing Address: .......D. �.........�?. ±?.l ti .. ,?rr�....... �i................. ......1[ S'[.....t.... ..�.......................... ..�1. ....
OnsiteRepresentative: .... L._-t..�1 ............................. Integrator:----.. ....... ........... ................ ........ ..
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:......-------- .........
Location of Farm:
.....l..l.`�..�.........a.. .....�.... .......�ar��..d.s
.....u�aitU.....�Y,-.1....s.. :...................
Latitude 9 CL Longitude ' ' "
Design'.; _ Current Design '. Current Design Current
...... _ ...
Swine Capacity Population Poultry
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Number of Lagoons f Holding Ponds U
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Total SSLW
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
No Liquid Waste Manapetnent S
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance than -made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in Qa1/min?
A. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
k(Spras_Field Area
❑ Yes ,® No
❑ Yes [4 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 29 No
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes -0 No
❑ Yes .R) No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ELNo
Continued on back

FAA 1;ty Number; —
w
$. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lazoonsdloldina Ponds. blush Pits, etc.
❑ Yes allo
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes R1No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): Z . ..................................................... ............ ................... .... .................. ................ ............. .......................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes El No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
R Yes
IR No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
RLNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...tA t1Q............................. W.lA-iL-k.............._............._............................ ............... ..
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
2 No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for Iand application?
❑ Yes
®'No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
iT No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
lK No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
1I No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
[Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only,
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
EW No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
& No
�$ No violations or deficiencies. were'noted during this visit.- YouAll receive no fuarthier .
cofrespondence about this. visit:
Comments (refer to question #):::Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any.uther comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessarv):
I1. t7kc cat- row-e rrie� in d:1C&, w&I{. T-l-e.[f- roes
--EjLa t v All,, t v a t i t la a� i-�-yy 0 t
o.-d-" t-c to Y c f o L OL k W ,,. w kv. , c tYV L h o­j C M r Lk ILL, � z
w u t LS t k o u l.rL sax r e t� t x df
Z2 • Giy i w Y rt.v.-� S a i } [ 0 -�-- i i-r� k e^^ • �t t s a J ,,n� l`k rt 8.4k v +- 1a �vz in
,,- ;1 a 4-; c Y% r2 4- o Ord Ga
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r,, I
Date: 1 � 1 1 W ! 'i i

�r Y
Site Requires Irnmediate Attention:
Facility No. I - 3 iL 1
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 2 10C , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: 4f _ f? oL•t• �+�
Mailing Address:
County: -
Integrator:... l 4 _ Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location: N tics s f+ ter vn I-e Sw J� ,c.NS t qs
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: a Y W 1/4 Se f Number of Animals on Site: O'i W
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: tLongitude: Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 2S year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or Vp Actual Freeboard: ___j_Ft. _AZ Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o �'N Was any erosion observed? Yes or&
0Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or&
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? Yes or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or No 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
Additional Comments: �_ Ice..��`(a+.tT�+..•---�=,i- 6 r�
Inspector Name
Sign ure
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
f
Use Attachments if Needed.

OPERATIONS BRANCH - WO Fax:[phone]
Aug 1 '95 10:30 P.08/13
Sire Req&cs L=cdiare Attention �•�'
•
�J
z
t
u
r
7, .1
Fac:?�ry N�ber �" �3
SITE VOTATION RECOn
DATE: ,- -1 R _ , 1995
Owze:_ Ia �yt*�►yr( �.... Farn Narzze:
CL)() )L1,,4
Agent Visirng Siie: �' _ ,. Phone. (C - 2 : z, o
OPmtor: _ -- _... _ Phone: _ _ - _.3 -3
On Site Represent4ve, Phone: to - .2"7 q
Physical Address: 0,1 sP 11q-1 u M I< t✓ -i=
or
NYaMr-g A.ddrzss;
Type of Cjpera-don: Swine _KPoultry =� Cattle
Design capaLky: -11+,y N=ber of A1imaIS on 5lte: .�
Type ofSnspection: Ground Aerial _
circle Yes or Nti
Does L%a Animal Waste Labours .have suMci=t fre--ooard of Y Foot T 25 y= 24 hour storm evenr
Cn
(approxi=acely I Foot f 7 inches) Yes or 1.� Acrwl Fre;3oard: Fzzta ,Incnws
ror facilities MrL morn LI-nn ona lago6n, pleua address rha other agaons' frsaboar3 under the
comment; secxian.
a '
Was ax:I seepage observ,--3 Fro= the boor-(s)? Yes or No Wzs there erosion of the d=?. Yes or No
Is adequate land available for land avpiicatioii? Yes o; No is the cover cxop a iequata? Yes or No
,A,dditio.al Con=enrs:
Fax to t919) 7I5-3559
�Signarur?, of Age=
I

• • • i

L
Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE:/ , 1995
Time: t ; >
Farm Name/Owner: 3v� +-- 2 Ad*�
Mailing Address: / a 3- S���c'- ! C / S-P 1-4-1z j� Z%5:
County:
Integrator. �`id��� _ Phone:
On Site Representative: i- J.Aro-,Phone:" 6
Physical Address/Location: e � t y I tj ( 01 ij sX . :Avg ;1 e t r-JOV,-
A e t I_
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle -
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ° T�-' E^1 " Longitude: S� '_" Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
{approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches} or No Actual Freeboard: F t. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or 0Was any erosion observed? Yes or 1�)
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or Nog Is the cover crop adequate? � s or No
Crop(s) being utilized: r
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? Yes or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or No 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
Additional Comments:
1 tr�y�`r
Inspector lame
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

rt
I
•
61
•

+�- OPERPTIOI%I BRANCH - W Fa',x:919-715-5048
Hu.g 1 `(-D5 10:30 P.08/13
Site R--quires Lmmediat: Attention -
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DA fM: -Z X- , 1995
Co LM Y . .D L) of- 1).4
Algwnt Vssi:,ing Site:
Qpetor: Phone:' " 33
on Site RegXesenLtive.
P;sysa caI Addres5: G'„ s r� l ( u
Mailing Address; o 7-3 1 da Ra!qn- -� --
Type c f Operation, Swim X Poultry CattlY
Design Capacity: `� . � Nt jr - of Animals on Site:
L.adrude: ° !, ' " I'rcagirude:-
Type o f Inspection- Ground _�_._ � Aerial .....
Circle Yes or No
1 saes the . x.ixnal Waste Iagocra have sa cieut aezI=.rd of I Foot + 2-5year 24 hour stc� evcnc
� m
_ cry (app:roximacaly 1 Foot +7 inches) Yes or V Actual l=r~w�oarc�: __.L_ Fie.'=���oi•=s
For facilities wit . more tin one laaoan, please address the C}�f IagOvns' Lee -board m8er the
y � COm-menv sectica.
"as any seepage dhsezvd uam the lagov�(s)? Yes or Na Fr aserc ernsicn or` [fie dam:': 1'cs or fir+
Is adequate "and availab!s for land application? Yes o= NO Is the ,adequate Yes or No
Additi=al Comment~:
Fax to i,919) 715