710096_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA �
Department of Environmental Qua

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat; notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancerimprovement?
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 maintenancelimprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding [I FAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload Q Frozen Cround _0 Copper and/or 7,1nc
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Ani
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?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes PY No
❑ Yes V(No
❑ Yes V'No
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ONo
WA-J.
Waste Management Flan (CAWMP)?
Odor Issues
17. 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?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ desi No —
Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes p`No
❑ Yes R'No
❑ Yes XNO
---.... 7�.. -'"L ;"^''^'=�^.."'a-^' S 'a.•-.... ",S."-_3-z. �".—ems« ,.a.."''.-7�'--x- -i"`? - i`--Y s'„�'•'�".' - ,� �, �-
co:s trefr� �mm
PJse drs* ags U, facsTitp3to better txpla�m s>ttn�ons. (t Pages as �'} Field C Final Notes
A.
45) j�2/i/Uf W r
T� P rwLSo� eR67 �Z"0o5 i1
�s /� A&10�r.95�
1�0 496141_'X� XIVO &t4M4 7-;
/v
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Sig�uature: Date:
r
'E
74
12/12M3 v� Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. FaiI to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �Fo
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 01
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ?(No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
J!rNo
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes p4lo
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes A No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
9Yes ❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
XYes ❑ No .
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes JeNo
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes .ONo
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes P�No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes WfNo
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
113 No violations or deficiencies were Noted daring this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Z00A
eplliZnJa 0.
12112103

P
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review gLagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine o Complaint O Follow up Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 8 Time: ,
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted O Certified D Conditionally Certified } ©Registered Date Last Operated Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 0"g7Q � �CX�IJ fRelum County: ���
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: '� rl�✓SfGG CJQdGk!
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator: 46ZAI?
Operator Certification Number:
(Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 6 " Longitude 0 1
Wean to Feeder U La er
Feeder to Finish ❑Non -I
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
Farrow to Finish?
Gilts
Boars
Subsurface Drains Present
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
ier:
Freeboard (inches): 5'
05103101
Field Area
❑ Yes ONa
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
9fYes ❑ No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ 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. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 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 or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have al] 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?
❑ Yes
ZNo
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0 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
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
tComments iefer to uestion # E tarn any YES answers`aiidlor,att �riicommendattons or an other comments. `#
(.. q 1 ya.
,Use,drawmF d4iiethty'to better cxplatn.situi#flans (use#addibonal pages as necessary) _ _ ❑Field CoRv ❑ Final Notes
6XIff&
�Tc-f - �As� CORrIrR ©F liAClao„�
0.j �'1 A2 f; f K. /�,P ,` C�� s ��o�.✓G
A&-)).
�JG � �7 Uf n �F�
I � Ol'K �J,OD�i✓� � ��ur (.� y � T
(/Q_ /n
Reviewer/Inspector Name.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: / a
05103101 `J,� A/� /VJJ!E<r �i�� Continued

Facility lumber: — Date of Inspection O
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt.
roads, building structure. and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. % ere 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 stora_e bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes El No
❑Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
-rg` 5 1,; /FmP�I AoO�T=p�AG /�O�zo�✓ �Fe14y,
D-Jco, I —Air vv ./ Z5
Bc 6�Fo. % ,l-- -3 L�l�u rh o 0
Be
%I le
�Qj�dr^r 443
j F_z:.lA irw, I#w 6A-K �7ow?�
5bv,�e��
��- LO,a v � Zvi �oFix
<q� � le
05103101

"Dtvisiion of Water Quality
O-Divisxori of Soil'and Water Conservat>Eon: `
�.0"0therAgency..W' � : ,. .•
Type of Visit oCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0Routine Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 2 Time- ® Printed on: 7/21/2000
O -Not Operational O Below Threshold
[] Permitted [] Certified © Conditionally Certified El Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name• s fLq.¢ k'` ek... 1 � .'�`..r../..• ..`p�C..: County �2 r..Gt-, .........................................................
Owner Name: + o b c r I �Z ' 6 i Sty e D . !� S40!? Phone No:.............................................................. ,[.............................------..................I..........�........ ..--...... ..
Facility Contact:
Mailing Address: ......•....
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: , ,.K U SSe.I..).... r ................ ............... Integrator:... et.✓hs Gl ...i �? 1..� `� ......
Certified Operator:
Location'of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
© Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 9 46 Longitude �' �4 44
Design Current Design Current Destgn Current'
h._ .-Ca ��A ci ' Population Poultry Capacity population Cattle .a- cr Po ulaSou.
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
Farrow to Finish
TotalDesign Capacity
Gilts
Boars To#a!'SSLw
_ - NaaiWr.of Lagoons KI Subsurface Drains Present ❑ 1-ag an Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Hotdiag Po>ads Solid s ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. II' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................ ) ................. .................................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 3 6
5100 Continued on back

61i6pNumber: r% — Date of Inspection S B) Printed on: 7/21 /2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel 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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ 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. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 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 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: K16 •yi6latiQris :or deficiencies were n6ted- during this:visitf • Xoir will •reeeiye iio further • .
correspondence: abauti this visit'
�mments . refer toque ion '.-._Explain any YES answers and/or any reco
e`drawtngs of facility to better explain situations (use�adsLtional pages_
to a E_,Tfct 61 5Lj q.
d 4c of Fi' Q,1d O� 'jr,eld S.
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes [I No
❑ Yes 2rNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [I No
as necessary) s ;
of a4 leotsf SO 4eef
AL
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z
5100

Facility Number Date of Visit: l0 1 Ot Time: c 2S
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ... _._ ..�-
Farm Name: ..........S......TIC - " oW County: h ..'rt......F.kAlf e.?''....._..
Owner Name: 311 is Je[k L�i SSE�� ! ; u y -�v M t........ Phone No:.................................................................
FacilityContact: ...........................................................................----Tittle:................................................................ Phone No:...................................
MailingAddress:................................................................... ............
onsite Representative: Q �. ., s. , 8r , vrse r 1. a �....I✓_ . . Integrator: f3'1D i-✓ f� t S O g, ,�.. +'
„ e................... ..
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ° 4& Longitude • 1 «
Current Design Current ,` Desiga Desrgn: v. Ci
wine = :Cii aci � Po0 Watiori Poultry. Cii aci -Po ulation 'Cattle Ca' act :;.Po
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total `SSLW-
Numbe%iLagoons ry- ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area :•'
Holding Poflds / Salid Traps_ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Imnacks
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ................ ......................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 78
5100
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes ,� No
❑ Yes ,� No
ji la
❑ Yes J;rNo
❑ Yes W'No
[]Yes j2No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: t] r —q Date of Inspection 1 Z
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 .,ONO
(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 ONO
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes gNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ZNo
_Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes -ONO
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ONo
12. Crop hype Ze,-" iMe, {,ra zee , rsev e c rn 7x _ Sr4An G._rq t
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? [:]Yes ONO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes XNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes PfNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ZNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? O'Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes J2`No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONO
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 E!rNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) Uryes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 'P'No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes J�No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes IV No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes J;TNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes J;2'No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ONO
iq yiolatiQnjs:or dgticiencies wire jnQte# dlH°t4g this visit: Yoh wilt teegiye o Como
comes' • deuce: abbot: this visit:
Use iLrawings of facility tG.Wtter,exp . ktuotions. (use additional pages as necessary)
�.
--
15. Newt �a rer-.o✓e Gar+��e �6�.. wee015 an4 back A'c'scve
t<ie1 of t/i) 5 ) 2-b 13) of not /ese✓ed •teSGVC in areas rar-k" Eercye -
recor4o je+ Qt %¢i}¢v, oc-4ille cot'vs 4o b7.er P-'c,l vo(e
-��¢ bac(c �esG✓e �;�xu+I C�ouiiS i2 �t 3]� �Ll;.r #( S�teKlol %ello �►t mc,' 4et'►�.�„J
4he bacL 'ciefd- 6� ke�lO; ea.�.�e-��'a•, doL.a., anal s1'Vu.1d also help
+t,te AovL4 F;eiv(.5 have beer �vrv,'fa6�'1,{� aF-rp_scae 6y el1e,1{a4'T
sso^,-ve o-F rr'e-'rVre-
ReviewerAmpector Name
Reviewer/Impector Signature: At Date: s`)Qll Z f ? 5/00

Facility Number: 171 Date of Inspection 10 Z d
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 gNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes P 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 .10 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 VNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ONo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additio-omments an or- rarnngs.
. Nee-d p-4 -}ke vro�rzl G vor Oh 41,e So; 4es Sa•ti,�le—s Jo 41t,4
�v. �o1oe ✓ i't L o,M rvtE n a� t d ►, J can 6e, wi,4 e . 3e sw e 4o v s e a
wgs4e anat�s; s ala4cd vv)'4I :n bo d,re7
ft,e Zt2JP— -ZIS; recc,IGvIct+e 11,10S4 eLcce4 t�'5cve�Dvw,�;-155.
Jae ".re 4. PO f e"r'- P A N nq 4 -PV O ^1 war# e
WC04e pmt, ZqS
5100

-Division of Water Quality
Q ihvrsion of soi and Water Conservatton �s
Q Other Agency _
Type of Visit )5 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit XRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: t 1 �3 DD Time: n / D Printed on: 7/21/2000
F. ... Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ❑ Cer`rtified [:3 Conditionally Certified ©Registered Date Last Operated „orAbove Threshold: .........................
Farm Name .!K r'6Ai F r M s Tqc - SW dCounty:.. "..��-''i'l er............................... .............. I ........
OwnerName: .........l�r.................................Q!f...................".!1..... Phone No. ...............................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress:...................................................... .................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representatives ►1 r I?rr Ne %Sah f'I G "tG y Integrator: rot.. n'S CG... , A�'z ....................
..............a................1�7....�............................................................................................
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location'of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Norse Latitude • t 66 Longitude • 6 66
" Design Current Design Current = DesYgn Eorrent "
_ Ca aci Po elation Poultry Ca aci Fo ulatton Cattle_
_ Ca crt : Po elation
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish 10 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑Other _
Farrow to Finish Total Design► Ca &0ty
Gilts
Boars Totali, W
Natinbeir se
of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Prent ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray lrietd Area
W
sBorg Fr►w1s 1 Solid Traps : ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 2$No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes JgNo
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min? h a
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes fNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Z No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ;R No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes s0 No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:.................................................................
1` Freeboard (inches): / Z
5100
Continued on back

Facility Number: �7, — q 14 1 Date of Inspection j 13 Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑yes C[ 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 ,M 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?
❑ YesZj No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No
1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
El Yes 3 No
rvl
12. Crop type Perllda 6qze, re -SC
GVe rate, -5;j4a1( GOA_tl,k-
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 X No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes EJ No
Re
uired Records & Documents
17,
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
JgNo
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
P No
19.
Does record keeping.need improvement? (le/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
;R No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in_effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
;ffNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Dj�`No
22-
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
ElYes
9No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
O 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
54 No
0: K,6.yi61ait6ns:or deficiencies •*&ia holed- d&itig 4his:visit. • -"4 will eeeeive do 6ether
corres' o�iderzce:a�aut.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):
r•
ooG� S
9 �q rtd o� oil 1'ece4j y lGl�-i Pd �:e 1 A [ � 2-A .
1q; use w,s4e qna 1 s s dGt-l-eet tv+-��I. `h r �60 da.y o'arr p lioc, 1 o,.
�CK--Z� j. `
I
Reviewer/Inspector Name S-41 he lj t S
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 1 —q Date of Inspection I g7otEDPrinted 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 blelow Oyes ❑ 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 'JEJ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 2�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 79 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 M No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes �ffNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ,!JNo
Bona ; omments an or.Drawings:
J
5100

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Name of Farm/Facility —7 [ - ^ �' �O - - "
Location of Farm/Facility F-f::- :5>,R 16 C) L
Owner's Name, Address t tSS _L_ p Vz tt=- _ _ `TL 0
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection 1'X7 Names of inspectors A Z!
Structural Height, Feet 7 Freeboard, Feet %
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres _ Top Width, Feet
Upstream Siope,xH:IV _ SI = L ✓ Downstream Slope, xH:1V
Embankment Sliding? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Yes —",4— No
Yes No '
Condition of
V dative Cover 1
(Gras , rees) Ot7d
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? _ - Yes No
i
Engineering Study Needed? Yes No
Is Dam Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967? Yes No
Other Comments

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Name of Farm/Facility _ --7t q (o —
Location of Farm/Facility C/ f� )6 C -50
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream Slope,xH:IV
Embankment Sliding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
ass I 13yz cK— � - ~r �JC4 E)r•'"
_ 9-0 )
3-7
--7
iv Naes of Inspectors ?✓
�r
Freeboard, Feet
+ Top Width, Feet '
Downstream Slope, xH:1V
Yes No
Seepage? Yes _ No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of
V dative Cover
�(G�r�,rees)
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes No
r
Engineering Study Needed? Yes No
Is Dam Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967? Yes No
Other Comments

Rzvised January 22, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number -11 - 94
Farm Name: ,
On -Site Represent tive: ct -gl 11 f�rcK
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: ,rW&, IAJCW�
Date of site visit: Ili
Date of most recent WUP: ) )Ll V4-
E/ Operation is flagged for a wettable
acre determination due to failure of
Part 9 eligibility itern(s) F1 F2 F3 0
Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Annual farm PAN deficit: --1 zoz.5D pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: 1. hard -hose traveler, 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wlportab)e pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART 1. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D203 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as veri led in Part Ill. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11 - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part 111).
PART 11. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part III.

Revised January 22, 1999
Facility Number It - �(.
Part 111. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBEW-2
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES-
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
I,y.
2$
16. 5
I S °I
96.4
33.14
1s10
4q z
+ 7
141. Z
FIELD NUMBER' - hydrant, pull, zone, or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers depending on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system. if pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspector/reviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBEW - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS3 - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres and having received less than 50%
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

Division of:Soil.and Water. Conservation =Operation Review 3
© Dision of Soil and Water Conservation -Compliance Inspection vi
- jpDivision of r Quality -Compliance Inspection i
Other Agency Operation Review r
JQV Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow -tip of DS% C review 0 Other
Facility Number Pj Date. of Inspection
Time of Inspection '-00 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted jj Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered 10 Not Operational Date Last jOperated:
Farm Name: .....�...5.1�.h. (IQ 11 I... rin ...t....!.i11( �.......................... ................. County:...... r&D-.....pa l.C.i—.................. ......
Owner Name: ...4ty ...-�l ;L,}.f�5..7 �4.��.SS.c}�.e..r....i i�� �I7Uh Phone No:
` 1,�......./......................................
Facility Contact: ...-.......24. S1..l.l.......- itGi . ......... ......... fitle:..................... ....................... ........-......... .. Phone No: l�.?�1.. 'S~'-L1�- ..............
i44ailin; Address: 3 V ........................... ,�.........
........L.........I�lri><+1.lt........t..........................................GS.t...�rxari ....tali.....
%Onsite Representative: ............. C, {ti,,,.- VAInte rotor- .....
Certified Operator:.............. ............................... Operator Certification Number:.....;L)g9.6.................
Location of Farm:
.r........'�otl.!�... ............. ��...4.f..........C�(.ifaD1.,....J....lh�.lk.....s~....o..f.......`5.IZ..��............................................ ......
Latitude Longitude 0 • °
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
4060
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle _ Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity Lo*
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
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -made'.'.
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/inin•?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ..............3............... .......
............................. .................... ............... ......... ........................
Structure 5
❑ Yes [M No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes EP No
❑ Yes' [0 No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes P No
Structure 6
1 /6/99 Continued on back

Facility, Number: Date of Inspection 3
5. Are ,here any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, El Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are�there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8_ Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 0 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, 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? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
❑Yes
( No
j
12. Crop type ............ �kvf.mvl.............yva e............... �'-S.Gvt....yj?i..7i,r'..................... ...............................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
[IfNo
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
1% Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. 1s there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
9 No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[RNo
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
W No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
[OYes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
CO No
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
22- Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ieldischarge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
Im No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[�DNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
P No
0: NA:vi(antions:or. deficiencies :were noised during tiilB:viSli:: Y:OII �ariii:recelve no ftirther ::: :
eorr-esboRidehee'A6"this visit.'.'-:-:•:•:•:-:-:-:-:-:•-•.•.'.-:•:•:•:•:'--.•.•:•:•:•:•.-:•:•:•:•: •:•: .
ComMents`(refer to question#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations. or any -oilier comments
Use drawings `of facility; to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)
w:}ti uw�5s ea r
Olr LJ I�ol�o w t ry
b� a� e � r�:rn rir - \
�'1}19
!J UP `Ytn4' fYf J it-1 ro !o 40+61 atYt2— +v, e& USeaiiLL
C3_C,rt"e for Was �i cA>� [on -
1A. Co�ve c �- P R ►v s hot,l(� 1�e �A►�ic on.ecc�/i�fr1 s ►,z q ,
5� � rc coves _
Reviewer/Inspector Name 4ttiA
r _
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 3
1 /6/99

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
j Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWginspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection `, p Q 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3Registered [3 Certified © Applied for Permit Permitted 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
L 1 !'a
Farm Name: IQ ^ �f. ook .s. - ``�................. County:........-- ` 01......................................- ......
......................y............k-._............ N.......-..............
Owner Name:......-- .c lC ...� e-fte .......... ...... Phone No: .....9.f a.-. Z S .....�. �.J.-.3....
........................
.S '
Facilit Contact. iZ SSC�r �3! Title: ,..C.� r �``� d '� Phone No: . �S- Z IJ 3
y u ... ..... .........
Mailing Address:................................................... T 3 .......................................T�,° & L✓ G 2 Zl ......................
}...................•............. n!.....5 !.............. ..pp..... b..
Onsite Representative: .......3 .......................................... ...�.=1,u5..................................................... Itt.........----....
...........
Certified Operator: .............. r�.v55�...�......�3r'c,G �.... ......................... Operator Certification Number:--- -I.`..
Location of Farm:
C
G
Latitude =' =' =11 Longitude =• =, ="
sign :; Current
-- �r
Design " Current Design 'Cuff
:
Swine ` - Capacity`. Population
W
Poultry :.
:. .
Capacity P6pulation Cattle -" Capacity `Population
[] Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
:'.
❑ Non -Layer
L
ID Nan -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
p v
=
' ❑Other
a _y
Farrow to Feeder
ak?#
❑ Farrow to Finish
Toial Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
Total SSW:
❑ Boars
E
Number of Lagoons I Holding Ponds
❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑Lagoon Area
ID Spray Field Area
<
❑ No
Liquid Waste Management System
-
t.<<
r
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes VNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes t�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) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
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 VNo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes VNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes VNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes �No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes *o
7/25/97 TTTL���

FA ity Number: �-( —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lagoons,Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No
Sicture 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structuie 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(tt)= ........¢Qe-........................................................................................................................ ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes �fNo
11, Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes tFNo
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 heilth or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes] No
Waste Annlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes] No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15- Crop type ...... 3..� .... r... ----------------------------------------------............................................................... ...............................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes O(No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewrinspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0- No.vialatioins-or. defcieRcies: were-nated-during this.visiL You.rviH receive-uo-ftirilier"
c0rrespOndehce: d out this'visit.: ............
❑ Yes [Vo
IdYes ❑ No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes tKNo
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes �No
ift Yes 6-No
❑ Yes (KNo
❑ Yes )(J No
.( r; 6�f +o k1 If' Ge-ds; `A14 1�
F;[,I{2�otf�•-...-:��n clq`}/- Gahr�+�� la c�.s�ft opt ]�o�c SPofsd�soon►,,¢!(.
I0. GDKti�t }y ivotk Grl lvt,,�rr`v��, �1L �.1-tel fi �!. °5 5�l�'J�r�.L Z N`in#�`f �.5d.
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7-0-

- 'fJL^-- _ �.}... =� ..yam •r •.1�: - .- -- - _ - - -_-
, 4 - DSWC 44nianalZFeedld Operation Review
Q
k -:.: - - -
M D.WQ malTeed!6(0perafioa Site Inspection ` = ,
n
.Q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ ins cction O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection S L q
Facility dumber
Time of Inspection : O D Use 24 hr. time
Total Time (in hours) Spent onRe%ieiv
Farm Status- Cattc
H
_
orInspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name:
v — So County:
Owner Name: $&I,
•1 `I I; Phone No• (9 1013 ` Z. ;7 00
lYlailing Address- '
-
OnsiteRepresentative:
gucapdj txz' k __. Integrator: "
Certified Operator.a
o Operator Certification number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude �• �`<i
10'Not Operational Date Last Operated:
-- T}-pe of Operation and Design Capacitv
ffie C `um a
-'Number PoultryE;.. her Ms
❑ Wean to F=der ❑Laver I _::. ❑ Dairy
N ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Laver I ❑ Beef
Farrow to Wean 000����..� v,
Farrow to Feeder`; ' - - `-g-�=a n•�T
Farrow to Finish ❑Other Type of Livestoc};
��-
:..��,:"'..'A.' Y"�" M1»�°+•=� -x—?.�.�". ;��'"�-�'�-. < � `�" x�� .••.wick +4 Vie: - .c•. � ._ .:..i., .' � _�'Y.'sr<'""..i =t y�r .xr'^
-
�i`umber ofi;agoaas f S6ldiagPotitis ❑ Subsurface Drains Present _
❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any disc . -large observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, n-as the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Rater? (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)
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? _
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
®ISO
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
E[ o
❑ Yes Q No
[]yes. M No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes K No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require C? Yes ❑ \0
maintenancerimprovcmcnt'? - -
ra;TT rrrjwd

6. Is facility aot in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1197)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures fLatyoons andlor NoldinQ Ponds?
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
❑ Yes N No r
❑ Yes 19.No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes N No
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 La_oon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes H No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [9No
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 adquate markers to identify start anal stop pumping levels? ❑ Yes RNo
N aste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes $�No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type S-c%1 4.
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? ❑ Yes[\To
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?. ❑ Yes No
18. Does the cover crop need improvement? Yes ❑ ,No
19.. Is there -a lack of available imgation equipment? ❑ Yes K_N=O
For Certified Facilities Oniv-
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes & No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal. Waste Management Plan in any way? ❑ Yes 1.No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? INYes ❑.No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 0 No
24. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewfmspection with owner or operator in charge? ❑ Yes 9 \To
5. FOrcti'"� :,vas obie�v�0. Ir-OV -j,,, y-I.J adJccC_'A {�t7 T�.e la e.�,_ The1e areas v.ee�.
im �e {hLlec1. 1,.. dd�,btay,� 5-+�at1 bk.r,. s +nt�t1 {� be�v� If a•-pu,�� pr,Se
r` e* •C. p C-j e-- �
� e td ( 5) -, e e -ki � lb'e t I e-d,
12.- Bare o.re� ale �od w Ll1 K {o Le. +2.vt f -te-ei to
�Q,r-e .t 1 o n
i, a a o Y. v. a 1it, L e ✓+^ o w C-0 Y r e c t a ,. a c- w k �
h� L�C1a,,u
�•t'z �� i c�,tle.a a.�� revs �,���.
vJeed �+'oialev,.�s er. P� rb v,.v �tt cr. sern� Sp e_L�t•
't�dJi r• a e-IL o b 0- CA " r @ G't
t0 L e r e'04 ty a v cc
Reviewer/In Spector tame-�-�51� »- -
t--
- ..,,
==,�•=�..,.. •
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
i g
cc. Division of Water Dualin•- l arer Oualiti, Section. Facilin• Assessment Unit 1 111 4/46