410012_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Resourc
Facility Number ®- Division of Soil and Wateroservation I0 am
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: j tl�f�� County: &�AaA Region:. "SRO
Farm Name: 1 ` CA e T �Q'Mffle, iffh 1Q12 Owner Email: "
Owner Name: �Q, p(� � lstl to CR5 Phone:
Mailing Address: 1 W l C M(, dLtj6 - C r9DS r0
Physical Address: l� �� �U1Y�i �(�i C-Z}'p(ij�}S �0
Facility Contact: Won ALS6y Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: _Vj1 (1� ahnf_S Integrator:
Certified Operator: \% fCertification Number:
Back-up Operator: �1���Y Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
{ L. 0 6 fo e bee- Gk.
L w +ap ap MM19. �
tva eayy
Cer
� . D
Pak,
6n, ( Fo;
t�
o )A-CMf)g�, QA F&
o� AAc ConRRk, Loon
V & , � �
;x­,
vd.
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
"Cl
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
J
Farrow to Feeder
5 O
1
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dischar es 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 ,.eaters of the State? (If ves, 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
[-]Yes
® No
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of'3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 4A t - �a- • Date of Inspection: {�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: �, Q}t}}(1 Lac t10,e
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
I
Observed Freeboard (in): .3a" 6U� ij
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
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
V 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): 15MM L C Cat l�l (OYl'1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Pq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
,nI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
JZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
r-_9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
VX No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropria
❑WUP ❑Checklists Des) ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Freeboard 1� Waste Analysis Soil Analysis IN Weather Code
Rainfall Stocki ❑ Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to in maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 4 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appl Lion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA El
24.
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.�91
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No �fl 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
J�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 t. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
[A NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
no ((Avla uwk*Col-1*0'i o F WCIS-te ge�t� CW11(C ;rnn't`1
IF" r -f (c. C-t
� �f� tJU� C� I �
l J01i Ct�IUE S G�rvtPlQt�d i� no , 60 ► R* ecr r. C"ll�I t1 T
3�.. �� or stud 9� ��v�K PO � sE-aivs . P lcu► �e �u�p siu�1 � .eo-rry �Q�"��.
p"VA cl V-) v +? c t rr i yam' C7,-\ dzs;c�c� w j 5pc1 s 1n1a Nc�r
. Cl�kItibrapt~-,"al [om� la'Cl t 1 +--v11 W-Q
Sp��•a cu�PL�cc� �. Fl�.ld 5`( I�(3t(l1
L,7 tau us 40 �Y,na� I r<suf is CV-oP u;(e l
vN
wCt6V-1—, QlckvZ '•
�W\A 5lb-1
V,MJ5-1 A�
*Corsr of N0D kp it- r? PCCi -
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Abec-M (,"(A M u
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
S$ -t - J 4 'AI-1-
try.
Phone:
Date:
21412015

eA Division of Water Resource
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water, _ fiservation
0 Other Agency
rype of Visit: Wcompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (XRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral 0 Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit:
$ (�
Arrival Time:
Departure Time: County: 6AAEfMt) Region: WS Q
Farm Name:
1` _ P, IT
R*s Gm —CA L
Owner Email:
Owner Name: PAR, pF SC.\6t.10E Phone:
Mailing Address: (6,01 6- MkNW-0 IT -
Physical Address: 711 pNy tm
Facility Contact: L&Oki p-ko�es Title: Phone:t 53 L[ ' Z'j iFg
Onsite Representative: T&0 06Ro erft\o5 Integrator: Lk3%6
Certified Operator: TECH QtbRO IDP.Wx0s Certification Number: Lk M ni
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
r
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
3t., ° cw4 Oo"
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I F L
ayer
Design Current
Dry Poultry CanaeitV Poo.
Layers
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Longitude: -74k m 43 ` % b t�
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and _Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[]Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
tKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
�<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - • Date of Inspection: 01; l 6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes CjrNo ❑ 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: LJI ooW Lk6O0Wy'X V6N3
4
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a Lk
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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
NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
FrNo
❑ 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
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): (fa W , _SO'T PJ940
13, Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
JZJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
D�fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
b(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
Ej No
❑ NA ❑ NE
n as
❑ Waste Transfers
�lltrning ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections
s
Sludge Surve
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
PNo
IWNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Faciii Number: Lek- Date of inspection: asitilLic
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check KYes [ ] No
the appropriate box(es) below.
Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes El No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
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?
9 NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
F'NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ilj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No (�NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
L MPAIMd+a ? lax tit G-55J { 6&ck\56 ?Y3 AKUC* \.OQ 51'icr f;1-0 t C�
al� S o � � 1►ul>rI-�[Sl s 0 u � ?-c�>'� . �-�,�- 4�,q� `To tiv o cc�C3�
WC441�RA-t�f02 IDCA-0 t-MAMA _5, R WWI t35tO 'FOR C'EYkpwN.
3a) )�04 �<A Lk_^_s K36-\-
Y- / W f l S i 5 t 5 �aov-V N EE060 ^1-i `T *1 `nA'le- D U Cr To
NO 6-t/O-"- C S
5'To ? NN&P I-e ve L
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
Page 3 of 3
(J 2ESP ovosc ?-O A-0-0.) f3 , wku-
5 i-UD G-F- LeVC-L k6
Phone: 33 6-- 40 �— kcM3
Date: e) I iS
21412015

(V Division of Water Resourclu
Facility Number - 0 Division,of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency r i
Type of Visit: 9R Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O 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: I S-Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:�
Po �c-t e-
Farm Name: N� r 1 C,h {..Q�b Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ainj IM4 j SCI PX cV_ Phone:
Mailing Address: r o 7'
Physical Address: 7 r 7 _TF14 T-)G11 Y- u 12-01
Facility Contact: Lem n Mo5eS tTitle:
Onsite Representative: _18CA51--) 1C�r-f 'l6S
Certified Operator: 200re-i -f-'t pS
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
s -10 le +0 E. 5f. r
6rJdg-e_po rw pm•, L AAc
�y Design Current
Swine �yCapacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
'1
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Phone: 3 3 — 7 S 'J�K
lirtm sta,r vJ 4 — 7 4 7—
_)HA & 13 - 3 30
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 3�o o o4 t
D0 it Longitude: 7 4 C
43
o f
Le 14 of #spo Fra" ,
R_ Coeclair P K •
-
t
UP �-o
Other (ot} — .� aG (� 5• ' S
Other
1
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Ca aci Pop.
Layers
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
• , A- X F-4
Design Currei
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? [:]Yes DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

3/,z S
Facili Number: jDate of Inspection:_ _.W
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 lee n��� structural freeboard? CUejt✓ ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
� e
(� ( Structure 1 S ture 2 Structure 3 tructure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:} Z n ��r
d /
r,j Spillway?: �1
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 7^
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No No
V '
❑ 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 J 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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes EyNo
❑ 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 kNo ❑ 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 Evidennce�, \
of.Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 66
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes D�'<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes 3Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes,3el
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes )jPo
❑ 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,L�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other.
21. oes record keeping need i provement? ppropriate-be�t-�+ es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applic 'on Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis aste Transfers Bather Code
Rainfall Stocking ❑Crop Yield 60 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Surve
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 8 NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

3 R--
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: p
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check fXYes ❑ 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 D6No ❑ 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
J�rNo
❑ 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
h�'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
)KfNo
❑ 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
N/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes'
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
,j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
C Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use &&wings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
44oJ1bro_ "on ?Noi- u5e6� -6ru_)� appka4ion 5ince 626/6, No Ca r bra4lc
a I. 5011 A nat 4 s 15 not U't r-eA U n-� j 2 d 1-7. SC)m.e (�e 165 new %-T 1 i me
0 e ��+
S reLA C +n cx v>f-�.�, wt n��v-Lza..-lol� 65h
U)q
OLL)-ax—a-b-" C�P_� AAPA-Z�'
NrCZZ�� Lk tfA_rvL�
0heA,e,c 4ey N 15 ;i e-d uceA r n ot� t s IUD pa_ff 6
S �rce_ S, .31 ! b-5 N�Ton
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 2�►55a�o5� roe_� Phone
1
a w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date
776 - 4649 "
a/a& /zois
r�
Page 3 of 3 21412014

Facility Number L� -
U Division of Water Re"soutc
0 Division of Soil and Water
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: & VRoutine
pliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency 0 Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: 8 z Arrival Time: Departure Time: ; s'O County: r1roAA Region:Wso n
Farm Name: Ci "�Giy�� g b Owner Email:
Owner Name:, �� t�ly►'1A JGtG�� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Q, MOSQ S Title:
t4c 2-TqI
Onsite Representative: toJpn [ 1 lD� �-{33� Integrator
1.
Phone: 33� TS�
kla
Certified Operator: ( to I_—,>OWYI aS Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: II Latitude:
HOE 15P 21's (Lq'1) —> NC -&1Lc4S+
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
U O
M c Cainvwl 17.E
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
EELayer
Non -Layer
1V U[YL
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Dischar,zes 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?
Longitude:
tt`
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
jDairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Cow
_Dry
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Aly
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes 00
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[—]Yes E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number:
-
Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ktc, Z Z h
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
[DNA
❑ 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
[VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ 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
g/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
21 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
E�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > t0% 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): 010
13. Soil Type(s): �l
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
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
d o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
VNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ✓ ,
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Map/0 Lease AgreementsAly\ ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No 0 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

- I FacilityNumber:
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 aNNo ❑ 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: If
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes K6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [E�NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 5dNo ❑ 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?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes allo
❑ Yes G3/No
❑ Yes dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations fuse additional napes as necessarv).
Z0 C,G1d6ton7 o
FS, "p- pz*gwe-"� bi 1) 2DI q
2I . Sti 11( Ar1l 7s�s . Na 2013
Lam la�l ,pp era 4 70010?) jeS
N't IV,6; �ov}
417 - �.�-�� 1�, ►ems --p �Z I Q/6
iYr t� (,Or,j ! c I� W S i4gkk.- CPOx.l tin moy)
5 4" %
Oti'�TIw4+ rwm N"241pi
( LO D t�5 n j�.i�✓!+ l VGs '�o i -Y�-, F� b a
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
!rems 04-10-4 l ok,, s
4.Jf 4La�
7 ee_J,c.-c i>S l�cuSSa.✓
CDVI vUl i0-1
- rtW41d. IS
-Y�ncctn 'CtA� iMc�
Phone: 33(a.-Ilt 5wo
Date. OIL g5 t'
211120111

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number -Elk 0 Division of Soil and WaterOnservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint Follow-up Referral 0 Emergency Q Other 0 Denied Access
Dl 1E 2 L9
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: r1D Departure Time: County: 61, AfJ Region: WKO
Farm Name: � G �� � of C � rt e Re" L(J.) Owner Email:
Owner Name: of ,t iWLv_1 �c r �+t c Phone:
Mailing Address: 1 ls' in' C, M-,- I<-e4 iT� . �! �egs 6e fp N C 27 L/1 �-
11�� qq
1
Physical Address: 712 j_ FH Ua , M d. 11 If
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: Po �(a (� �; frIntegrator:
Certified Operator: �� .k-rr, bl Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Phone: "]'r,,�
60 ('E3_L/ 0
Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 7�0 0'f 08
Longitude:
.L-/O G,l L r' C-1.�
�� Pi rX Rd-/ i1 13rit11A,
;�oini ., _
� old t���:n,tedl ��
�. h 9F� ���� f.d.
pp!�
6,
Design
Current Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity
Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder 2-5V y
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
L
ayer
Design Current
Dry Pnultry Canacity Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify 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?
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes PdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 21412011 Continued

: Facility Number: - Z Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment Gl f5/Zo/ 3
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes I-9fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level in# structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [:]NE
Structure 1 1p Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: i.-o► � 2 �i�+�;n �� �;,�p,,,.�'t 3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 1 6 f�
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
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
It 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes%No
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?
Vk
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
�T
XNo
❑ NA
{M
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):
"I
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �❑ No ❑ NA �NE
❑ Yes Fg/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes j5dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

[Facility Number: - Z Date of Inspection /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app ication equipment as required by the permit? G /- b 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other lssues
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
l�(J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
J'T
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
IJ(I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
�"�'
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Z ii s'j pI/Cv.'f�sn Teke-1] CtiM. C��v!G'd� N�f �11!{t�!OIfiC �1�� ��x
a p� Zc �.v-P,•�� Za 11�
z j 2-0Vr\
'Z�lQ
32, WOr v4RJ `�f�'` � �z,
y,lAsr6' A-��U�lr
1 Viz -Vj = D. 1 nl
Reviewer/Inspector Name: M 4z,4z
Reviewerlinspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 135 711 - 71857-
01�jS zD 3
Date:
21412011

'Qhvf4S S-IruC+vre F rh'I
ivision of Water Quality ' -'
Elk
Facility Number - Division of Soil and Water ervation ,
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit. Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ti Q Arrival Time: ITZ7, Departure Time: ® County: 0 Region: (icy s rW
Farm Name: ELL rt+T P-01:'_lt1 � Re��L FPaC 1 �If�jter Email:
Owner Name: Z�1 '- 4 Entail F 1 Po1Le- Phone:
Mailing Address: 1(n o l F.,, \\>? i)(_. a. 3 4- 1„1
Physical Address: -71 7 X F 14 t )O I C U [! _ , Sf7 , fL R_ -7 tT 1
Facility Contact: p no Akae !` Title:
Onsite Representative: 1! fY3 o lrn 19Lrrl eTs
T
Certified Operator: I er
o PoL y0 10_S
L-P-O" -3 _ 7 S IX
Phone;
�:�f� -43.hs
Certification Number: JU29 mA j_f lam' a
Integrator:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: �(E, <7 t� 0 0 Longitude: �] q I ,�3
1- 4 0 E, aS+- t-o E . Lee 51-, eX r- , Le f + a.+ 4 rc_At.t_p . i� K+ o vJa d-ed ax Pl_
N.) Le-4 on $ridoe�Do'N nt N. , Le_ff otJo Cot) h 0- d 2d . i?4-.-.n vv-6-, OW
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
z 5otos h"e- latq s-
idht� OvLt-p )i r 11 �t r
esign urrent
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
g •3 11 .*s Vr•
Q �ji urrent
U66ry Pnultry U i3acity Pon -
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
�' f' ar m © "h¢sion AcIrrent
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
D o 90 u,r� ri� t Vets/ ;e.' t2 I I -s 4-o pto C
1. Is any discharge
ha g o Impacts y p pe� gt �� cou t i
] . Is an dischar a observed from an art of the o e a t r� ���-� t Yes
> 60
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
IbS
�(No
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes []No
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA E] NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA FINE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 1z) reeo 5", 6
O / � S: 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: ZT7 - I* Date of Inspection: lj
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ONE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in)
Structure 1 Structure 2
J'aqnorl
Structure 3 Structure 4
3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., 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?
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes P�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W - - ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental hreat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes JCSJ-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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes AK0
❑ 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): AM _AJ . AA/ A 0 d Q12J410
13. Soil Type(s): J
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes "OkrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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 0 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 ,td[No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes �ro ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Do record keeping need improvement? pprepriete beele ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applica i n ❑ Weekly Freeboard aste Analysis Soil Analysis �aste Transfers Bather Code
Ej'fainfall Stocking [1�Crop Yieldy 20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes CO'Nfo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: tj I jDate of Inspection: 1
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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail 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)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes _beo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes _flr&o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [5j4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ExNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pates as necessary).
2,C)to Sor e-,5 ? plea Se 1 t,�c )ude Cou e - p3_3e AaAe_ . CO
aS ace tO 51 uoq� su rvla Pr- NV c�-y = � 7 ' -try+wteA �--i
o l n o-� r- U` Q+ "1 ' S %t � , � 3 !va t r>v �u i reek- Sto r
��.
1,a� ool/I 1eJ e is Cure- a i 1 v�r �
_ — 4 4� r
� e�� t � v -e_-1-e— !M V ci1 oi- a C) L c uV' u-ecA,-f- I eve
ODA VN
x*(�C-liov\
vue-
1 (u-L 1� e- p /- v-v- L'
wl mot? Onto C_V`o f5 y
0,���� ���� tt yes ]eD �� -Cep+ �f
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: a aZ d
21412011

(Type of Visit (� Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0 a 0 Arrival Time: Departure Time: 1 cZ . O ounty. a u t I fir-d Region:
Farm Name: Nli i -T �OrCnnlir� _S2A1 G�1 F11"r I E � Owner Email:
Owner Name: NPAO — I"C nI i]�t& ^ ` Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: _ —71 -7 p A�4 � • r a S0 , QC, a -7 T I ' 1 C/
Facility Contact: 1. t- bn I 615eRs Title: Phone No:-?) 3 �f ' 7 , /S gb
Onsite Representative: Te oeoco {J 0j_r"r-1 n'S Integrator: ?i3 7 (o
Certified Operator: O PO—r riO3 Operator Certification Number: 3i
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Locati n of Farm: Latitude: Lag LQM 00 Longitude: 7U YJ L� 3LU
V 5 e- cl f'o r MCG C, i e Co S f're Irl wed � a to �S •
1 P " td -P-A'-vA car_, uL.>e_+1"J ce11s
y Des gin Current .
Capacity. Populatign :We i
` ❑ Wean to Finish? ❑ La er
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Non-L;
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean `<
Dry Pa
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish ❑ Lavers
❑ Gilts ❑ Non-L
1.0 Boars ❑ Pullets
Other
'�, j;Design` ,' Current T 4
Ca
El ❑ Dai
❑ Dai
❑ Dai
5�e�
Dry
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Cow
Heifer
U Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood C
�Nurny er of S
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 thghs(L
a discharge? �! r
Page I of 3 aA
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 4= Date of Inspection 2 b •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes )9fNo ❑ 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: Ua O0q} :bf 2^_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes > No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application'? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) r V e l 1 !2,r
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 � NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? [j Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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.
Usk wings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
16 . e-L 5�e�to�l i S�5 �e- S[-i L] fZ v i 5 t nn -�G�Q t,� u Pam- i r r I ah or)
ul�
c h 0. d d, v-er �- oo s`�rvc�ur� Cam' �5 s cw'r►>° 5 b_ d in w,e.�l o � u P
S5 S w i n n hca� 5' c� civr- n eo-f- o � 5 tnr�l l aolb •� Fee ,trs
1 A '--YSIt`J C L an i A �► � c ra. e �^ S 1
]Eeviewer/Inspector Name I 1, SQ {O I^p Phone:
Reviewer/inspector�gSignature: i Date: I D D
Page 2 r� jl 1 l}��j 111� 0�4 Continued
S 1 5� p1QS1f° 1►i (oar IS Qp-2,C�.p1tl'S
ne

Facility Number:91 — DRof Inspection z 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 *N,o
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
2.1. Doe record keeping need improvement? �sl� rapriatkl ZCil"A'nalysis
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applic tion L`1 We ly Freeboard Waste Analysis s
L2Rainfall �tockingrop Yield l20 Minute Inspections Y Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ((((❑ No WNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes To ❑ NA ElNE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ElYes ICJ No ❑ NA El NE
X 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 KNo ❑ NA ElNE
1f yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) �,(
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE-
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes /I�ilo ❑ NA ❑ NE
A544konal Comments and/or Drawings:
Ak
20017 co !
ao�b Soi r Sau al>°s 7 TO coW4p11e -e_d `VhiS FLLU.
a b I O 5 f u cic} e- u ry ? 2 _C6q -1 W 45 0-k .
3� nod- re v rid a� a
�'ell . n o+- n�.a�-d a+ - t-G i s -! m e_,
tv2st }-ion for # t t� 5�ud 1��I c5 0l �n R010
�te�u� o �t plan �rovv�
�! 45
c.-�-�- e r �
S�nc'e, �, k� i���-Ir �-a aid 3 a
ids
lam- wa \_-i 4,a) S�rc �ill�t �� �,ro,Nvl j�r Weea
Page 3 of 3

•
Wq r'. r��OG
•
Incident Report
NDf
Report Number: 201001649 A& P& " Q� g
Incident Type:
Non -Compliance Reporting
Category:
APS - Animal
IFc-!dent Started`12121/2009
County:
Guilford
City:
Greensboro
Farm #:
041-0012
On -Site Contact:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Company Name:
Phone:
Pager/Mobile Phone: 1
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
NC A&T State University
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit: AWS410012
Company Name:
Facility:
NC A&T Porcine Research La
Address:
First Name:
Leon
Middle Name:
J
City/State0p:
Last Name:
Moses
Phone:
Address
University Farm 3136 McCon
Pager/Mobile Phone: /
City/State/Zip:
Greensboro NC 27405
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM
DD:MM:SS Decimal
Latitude:
Longitude:
Location of Incident: JFH Dairy Road
Address:
City/State/Zip
Greensboro
Chemical Name Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
Position Method:
Position Accuracy:
Position Datum:
Report Created 05/14/10 01:25 PM Page 1

Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance:
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown Estimated Number of fish?
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type.
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft: Unknown
Access to Farm
Structure Questions
E Animal Population
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
0 Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14/10 01:25 PM Page 2

Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
❑ Yes ❑ Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
Animal Population
Confined?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Depop? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Feed Available?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Mortality?
[]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Available Fields?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure Questions
Breached?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Inundated?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Overtopped?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Water on outside wall?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Poor dike conditions?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches Plan Due Date
Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
Lagoon #2 18.00
10-01-25 08:00:00
Lagoon #3 18.00
10-01-25 08:00:00
Event Type Event Date Due Date
Comment
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2010-05-11 12:20:45
Incident Start 2009-12-21 08:00:00
Report Created 05/14/10 01:25 PM
Page
3

1
Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
DWQ Information:
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
Date/Time: 2010-05-11 12:20:45 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 01:25 PM Page 4

rvision of Water Quality jv-'.30 AM
Facility Number 6 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit �CJompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit tjQ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: i �Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: �T �i �A± E Rn r o,Lvx Pe SP Q1"L ac , Owner Email:
Owner Name: L� �.P Q� n l Q` V Lt I 'E�/1C� Phone:
Mailing Address: t 1 hl [ ; . �X �Le-i- 5 Sn Il� o►Z7 7 �f1�
Physical Address: .: F l-� 1 Q ii i- k j QA • � ,� o) �y_ a -7 I r
1
Facility Contact: (}SP 'Title: �F�TnA � o Phone No: 3 3 � -7S7a
C OirO a Qi( ° S W e Fa of 3 31p. 3 .J q. Onsite Representative:._Qfluterator:� g
o
Certified Operator: �P_� r Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: A Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: .8__6Latitude: ® o ®�� Longitude:
. - -U) U_q_t.
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to -Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
1 11DNon-Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pou Its
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes o ElNA ElNE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State [IYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility dumber:11 —I Z_• Date of Inspection "�'�T •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? jXYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
' J a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1 12,
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
(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? ElYes 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 Ar mlication
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? 0 Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? 0 Yes
ro
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 No ❑ 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):
4 6P Te.L.h 5 VeC i CL 15+ )5 re V i S
a n Jes , ✓? at r5
I� v�,
p
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone: —
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Date:
I2128104 (Jontinued

41
Facility Number: — *of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes _o ` o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps Other
21. D s record keeping nee�Zee
vement? 1 ❑ Yes L✓J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�Zainfall
ste Applica 'an
ly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis L�J Waste Transfers Stocking Yield 120 Minute Inspections M<onthly and 1" Rain Inspections �WeatberCode
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes [60
❑ Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes VNo
El yes IS ")
❑ Yes V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
9NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
V10,
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
AL
a, _ AMA
w � e
U [�/J I 1 0
d 1
�3La
a'V, . '
o?
do
412810�6_ 301b5,�

Division of Water Qualil
Facility Number I Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation : 3C A tyl
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit (P C mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for VisitRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: .'�] County:
Farm Name: KX, G*-Tr Ppirei[1,� �er�rc h �n C't�I � Owner Email:
Owner Name: �Pn� Ot ARiMCI�� Sc►eflCt? Phone:
Region: & \'S
Mailing Address: I100 1E • K, \L e_t S5+. , aso, "c a -7y11 Physical Address: 0,21c d • 6 5a 1Y a 7 L/ !,
Facility Contact: Leon f4OSe.5 , .l _ Title: ��,�U e i n 6obck h�o: 3 3 7 ` � S T
Onsite Representative: TP�o rn 2ox 1 05, 5W t n t0_ PUr. 336. 3 ; 74o 42---_
Certified Operator: Teo 1� 12_ 02— 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: FRI
o
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
q" Longitude:® o F.D. 5 © «
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifej
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ,(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
N<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — -L i Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [�<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: r mo'r.l S nLoq
05
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes V-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 Wo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes D `No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ 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 VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes P(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 ❑ Applicat
Outside of Area
6
12. Crop type(s)_1d'dbj'91,,
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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
O' 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 drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
lr �frtcQ�lionehc�.X-}? Znc.h, aPPli� haur?Ch�elL Ne'�`�` ���tG 000
NLa pre.5:5,i rt- �auge—-C6it jun p 'o riz any �PP�ieo�ian5o �u��est
ahQ1 v1� 0 uk V 0 ZZl e. trl vl q o
Reviewer/Inspector Name My 1ua o Phone: 13 1 — S
pS
Signatu�&j Date: o� �02 ap
L- 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — *ate of Inspection
Reciuir2d 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 Ryes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does cord keeping need imp vement? 1 he-app}a� . ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Appli lion 7crop
ly Freeboard aste Analysis Soil An ysis Waste Transfers
�ainfall L14 Stockin Yield 120 Minute Inspections onthl and 1" Rain Inspections eather7ode'
g Y
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
)j'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
Ix NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�{No
'9(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
DrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
C�&o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Yo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: a
Not M$ � u I r-" a— V i r�Gi Lh a-n.
GLI1dorms -t-or006f r- un f u aoo9 a
maton-," 5 yr. rquest«
Su e re,-- ea,l'I brah hqMCa�n ®� 1e55 wmaq A". P Lp�eSuhrni+
+ri'E 1 +n2 V"orrn a See VOO -7 a t_Q T vi5��Cn
0.30 #3
no
90'U'l [41A SU)CZ-112) ve�j'
1 Vl e1 UJ'L �LA 7
12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency --
Facility Number: �JQ012 _ Facility Status: Permit: NCA241012 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Guilford _! Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/1912007 Entry Time:10: i5 AM Exit Time: 112:30 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: NC A&T Porcine Research Laboratory Owner Email:
Owner: NC A&T State University Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: Department Of Animal Science 1601 E Market St Greensboro NC 27411 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:36°04'00" Longitude:79*43'36"
From WSRO: 1-40 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left onto McConnell
Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Teodoro A Barrios Operator Certification Number: 27429
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(sj - Name Title Phone
On -site representative Teo Barrios
24 hour contact name Leon Moses
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Phone:
Date:
Inspection Summary:
6. If adding wash tank, then need to revise CAWMP. Complete page i, and sections IIA and IIIA of certification form and include
narrative describing your plans.
15. Deduct rye PAN from Spring com if no crop or if not harvested.
15. Annual ryegrass stand does not appear to be adequate. Suggest contacting regional agronomist.
16. Must get copy of irrigation chart and keep with records. Send copy to DWO as well.
21. Maintain record of amount/date of waste going to compost.
21. Don't forget to record annual ryegrass yields this Spring.
24. Maintain all paperwork related to calibration for review at inspection.
25. #2 due 12/31/07.
1/22107 waste analysis:
# 1 = 0.36 #2= 0.31 #3= 0.08
Page: 1

• .•
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 02/19/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Q Swine - Farrow to Feeder 250 207
Total Design Capacity: 250
Total SSLW: 130,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
STAGE 1
12.00
agoon
STAGE 2
20.00
agoon
WETLAND
18.00
Page: 2

i •
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility
Number:
410012
Inspection Date: 02/1912007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
Z Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ ❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
Cl ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑ ❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? ❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University
Inspection Date: 02/1912007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410012
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 2
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 3
Corn (Grain)
Crop Type 4
Soybeans
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop andlor land application site need improvement?
■ ❑ ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
Yes No NA NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University
Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 0211912007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
❑ ❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 02/19/2007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ ❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

AIL
Division of Water Qualit�
Facility Number Division of Soil and Water onservation /Q : f-
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit A Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit XRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
`�[
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: � Departure Time: County: U I 1 O Region: -�"'��
Farm Name: U11 e- Owner Email:
Owner Name: ,I^I� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address
Facility Contact: I. Mk3 IV Title:
Onsite Representative:. I
"I� .
Certified Operator: O
Back-up Operator: I e0d � r7o � C�_.r— bps
Location of Farm: Latitude: i 't 0
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
1/
Phone No: __')_JY"_ 1 J `t li
Integrator:
teO -1
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
I❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Longitude: �° �, �"
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dai Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes )�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes �6 El NA ❑ NE
El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128164 Continued

Facility Number: — I Z • Date of Inspection
& Waste Collection Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'? ❑ Yes bNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 22 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 0
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): c�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes XNNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan'?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes X;Fo
El NA El NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes >{No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Xo ElNA ❑ 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 101bs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window $ E *d f W�d Drift ElApplicatio Outside of Area
raN
12. Crop type(s) 4AJkA Le" A—,u � l l � � !M 1 �
13. Soil type(s) VV
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Oo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? WYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes N/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No El NA El NE
El Yes No El NA El 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):
II i i
12128104,

Facility Number: — 91te of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. D 'es record keeping neeXWleekly
rovement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste A li ation Freeboard Waste Anal sis S7mon'thly
sis L'� Waste Transfers nn 1 Certification
PP YY
[]'Rainfall WStockin � Crop Yield E 120 Minute Inspectionsand 1" Rain Inspections L]#'Weather Code
g P P P
W e,-�PX S-jo 1 n
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
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? LOOS
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? (ic/ 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 N4NO
❑ Yes A No
El Yes !ANo'
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes KNO
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
d NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
❑ Yes
XNo
El NA
❑ NE
El Yes
�,,
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
>(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
rQ aoo� . f ��c�err.�Or�C �1 6��
s_ � ' read m ear f 1 e- - 41 . 4 a _� :0_7
3G �doa, o. 31 �j p3 = b. bV o -7
db

NORTH CAROLINA AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL
--- - �- - -- - - - - - - - �- -STATE UNIVEftSITY.---------------------------- --- --�- -
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES
AND ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN
November 27, 2006
Ms. Melissa Rosebrock
Division of Water Quality
NC DENR
585 Waughtown Street
Winston Salem, NC 27107
Melissa,
We calibrated our irrigation unit at the University Farm Swine Unit on November P.
Our results are:
• 62 psi at the gun
• Flow of 212 gallons per minute' S 3 to u I aS w u p
• Travel speed of 3.57 ft/min
• For 168' lane spacing, coefficient of uniformity was 86%, and precip. rate was
1.13"/hour 1, 07 W up , {p w u p 2
• For 196' lane spacing, coefficient of uniformity was 75.8%, and precip. rate was
0.98"/hour. I .01 Wu P 16 w u P?
I am sending an additional copy for you to distribute to others in DWQ if this is needed.
Let me know if you need additional information.
Sincere
/C /--1
Richard L. Phillips
Technical Specialist
cc. Millie Langley, Guilford SWC2 , Greensboro, NC
dd. Teo Barrios, Swine Unit Manager
ee. Leon Moses, Farm Superintendent, A&T farm
ff. Cindy Safrit, NC DENR, Morrisville, NC
A Lund -Grant University and A Constituent Institution of the University of North Carolina
1601 East Market St. 0 Greensboro, NC 27411 • [phone] • Fax [phone]

Division of Water Quality
n Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410012 Facility Status: Active Permit: NCA241012 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Oomoliano Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Guilford Region: Wington-Salem
Date of Visit: 08j1112006 _ Entry Time:09:45 AM Exit Time: 12110 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: NC A&T Porcine Researgb L born o Owner Email:
Owner: NC A&T State University
Phone:[phone] _
Mailing Address: Dgoartment Of Animal Science 1601 E Market St Greensboro NC 27411
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°04'00" Longitude: 79°43'36"
From WSRO: 1-40 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left onto McConnell
Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Teodoro A Barrios
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 27429
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Leon Moses Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Leon Moses Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Me' a 7stbrock Phone:
Inspector Signature:VIADate: V
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
3. Need to establish vegetation in corn plot near entrance (on right).
21. Field 6 needs lime per soil test results. 2.2 tons were applied in Feb. 2006 at 0.5 Ibs.lacre.
2.1. Fields 3,4,76 to be harvested this Fall and yield recorded at that time. Check next visit.
21. Check acreages in records (IRR-2) and compare to WUP. Some discrepancies were observed.
24. Don't forget to calibrate in 2006.
27. PLAT was completed in August 2005.
Page: 1

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A8T State University Facility Number : 410012
Inspection Date: 08/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Farrow to Feeder 250 208
Total Design Capacity: 250
Total SSLW: 130,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
STAGE 1
30.00
agoon
STAGE 2
54.00
agoon
WETLAND
28A0
Page: 2

0 •
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
inspection Date: 08/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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 Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding? ❑
Hydraulic Overload? ❑
Frozen Ground? Cl
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑
Page: 3

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 08/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑
Total P205? ❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all Wrnponenls of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
Corn (Silage)
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Fescue (Hay)
Soybeans
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 4

•
s
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 0811112006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ N ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
Cl
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues Yes No NA N
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 those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

•
•
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University
Inspection Date: 08/11/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 410012
Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherlssues
Yes
No
NA
NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
Q
■
Cl
❑
32. Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
C1
■
❑
0
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Q
■
❑
❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality 3D1
FPf
acility Number ' Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
IType of Visit 7 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit )� Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0: Arrival Time: � Departure Time: ® County: V Region: LDSR
Farm Name: N L + T- Po r c-I h e rC Owner Email: TLba rjZj 05 p
e n C 4 . J U
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address: b"A ' U T h6nial �SCI &n Ce_ l b I F • N1ar Key- aTP�t , dso 2711
Physical Address: �, TFIA t4:1 r�j &5 o r NAY.- a--? 41 1
Facility Contact: Leon i ►DLO&� Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: LOJOro rLeon 0525 Integrator: "'ea — , 4 a
t CV— K l I PS r DrdA Po
Certified Operator: M'Qrr t 0.5 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
®o ❑ g ®o I �jJl �«
Latitude: Db Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder O
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer - - -
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ©•
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes0� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge? r_�
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: q— 1pL . Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA Cl NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure z _ � Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes b(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 A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 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 Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
El Yes
(
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
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* = 0050
3f jobs oo�g
j o� as�oS -� � = D • �j
Reviewer/Inspector Name I d K-ad Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 - - L 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Ll I — Sate of Inspection
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes NrNo ❑ 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 El Maps El Other
21. Does cord keeping neeVrovement? p ow. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
steApplicationeekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil alysis IR Waste Transfers Annu ertification
Rainfall LV Stocking Vcrop Yield 120 Minute Inspections LI Monthly and 1 " Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes XNo
ElNA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
ElYes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
El NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
El NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes `No
❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
�,/
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
El Yes pdNo
❑ 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 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a a eve \o ►aka jo? . every `tr• 3 -
w5Q LN/A
o2 PC,A� .1oos — .tc� LT '0c'D
a Z
14,:) Wo
� *S- v�
'zoo 6)
Page 3 of 3 — 12128104

Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410012 Facility Status: Active Permit. N A241 12 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routiap, County: Guilford Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 05/24/2005 Entry Time: 0950 AM Exit Time: 12.15 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: NC A&T Porcine Research Laboratory Owner Email:
Owner: NC A&T State University
Mailing Address: f Animal Sc'encp, 1601 E Market St Greensboro
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Phone: [phone]
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36°04'00" Longitude: 79'43'36
From WSRO: 1-40 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left onto
McConnell Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment Q Waste Application
0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Teodoro A Barrios
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Leon Moses
On -site representative Teo Barrios
Primary Inspector: MeljWq M
Inspector Signature:...
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 27429
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone:
Phone: [phone]
Ext.383 IQ q/
Date:
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
21. Went over new NPDES permit requirements with operator, Leon Moses (farm manager), and Dick Phillips (tech specialist).
4I1105 waste analyses:
#1=0.40 ibs, N11000 gal.
#2=0.25 lbs. N/1000 gal.
#3=Trace
Page: 1

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 05/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
0 Swine - Farrow to Feeder 250 203
Total Design Capacity: 250
Total SSLW: 130,500
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon STAGE 1
Lagoon STAGE 2
Lagoon WETLAND 7
Page: 2

• •
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 05/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Qisrhar<Qc R Stream Impacts Yes No ,NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? 0000
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0000
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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 Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
M ❑
No NA
❑
NF
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le.l large trees, severe erosion,
❑
0 ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
B. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0 ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0 ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No bjA
NF_
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑ ❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Soybeans
Crop Type 2
Corn
(Silage)
Crop Type 3
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 4
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

0
L_J
Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University
Facility Number : 410012
Inspection Date: 05/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Crop Type 6
yes
No NA
NF
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)?
❑
■ ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
Records Documppts
❑
YPs
■ ❑
Nn NA
❑
NF
and
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
Cl
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
■
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
■
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 4

Permit: NCA241012 Owner - Facility: NC A&T State University Facility Number: 410012
Inspection Date: 05/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑
No NA
0 ❑
NE
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document and report those mortality
❑
❑
❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
❑
❑
❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Page: 5

Fietlity Ntimber.1 Lf Ii a
Division of Water Quality
0.bh ision of Soil an' Water Cci7faervation
O'Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:= Departure Time: a ice- County: Region: 1&25"
Farm Name: KX fT Email:
Owner Name: E)L AsLT U ` Ph�o/nee: �3 3�—
Mailing Address: a-1 �J�t• � �%11-� 1�-�'t ;,.L`j'rQ,����� M�r--
Phy •cal AddrMs,,,
s��] F H LJ[� v y a 771
"
Q� M,�
FacilitF Contact: C 1 Title: _ b e h TOtr !6 T4,J rl
. t+
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: , Tead nca _POLr t 0.s `
Back-up Operator:
5 Integrator: NO N C
Operator Certification Number: vZ
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:® o • ' EO Longitude: e
q-os+. fm �. lJeeSf AFf ,-fm�p �f rantip f anfo a-r
Lei on�� �rWo`tn� Lef-o fG I�?� Hell. on 4� eI�1�
1 .u, A I�� Ir'4- nn�r. -r r- N t r... PSI .
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ ❑ Layer
❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
Turketj
❑❑
Turkey
❑ 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 Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Z • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? El Yes lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) *No
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ElYes ❑ NA ElNE
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 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ElNE
(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 Dyes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El Yes
�No ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I0 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
[ANo
❑ 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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElYes
Ito
❑ 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 NameV 1 rd — ItI�' Phone: 3.Itp 1 . b L 3 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: a-KV
QS}
12128104 Continued

Daft Inspection Facility Number: — s
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes /t� El NA ElNE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g El Maps El Other
21. Doee ecord keeping neeVWCeklyFreeboard
ovement? If yes, check he appropriate 70ilAnalysis
low. �� Yes ❑,,-.,Noo ❑ NA ❑ NE
LI Waste Application ;zste Analysis L� Waste Transfers L1d<nnual Certification
Rainfall LDYStocking L/Crop Yield d120 Minute Inspections P<onthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No WA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes *0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes XNo Cl NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes RF4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes >(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ElNA ❑ NE
Vi
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
/U Pr��t�p�-axe
iafao/o4
q'Ir /0,3-
A 40
41=0.rz5— *01=o4,lg
411Y0.go 4Va — 0.25- 4- 3=r_F
I

tsion of Water Quality
tswn of Soil and Water.Conservation
O Other Agency
E
f Visit O. Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Eval. O Tech. Assistance O Conf. for Removal
n for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 41 12 late of Visit: 12QQ4 Time: 0920 rO Not —Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ........................................ . County: G.ull[Q1Cd .............................. N�..�,9�'>:..�a�rci�.e.l��s��,rl:fx.l..abQx�kQxy.............. !?!'SXtQ........
OwnerName: ................................................... ................ Phone No: 33,6-33-4:--7547...............................
.............................
Mailing Address: A.CAArtn0.�Alt..Qf.�ln.itlaal.S�ien.��,.li?A1..�,.M�1}�� ......... ...NC .................................................. NALA..............
Facility Contact: VX.:.RRY..KeA';i.amie.......................................Title: ........ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: �?IsAt.�hllllipS,. Ce.Q..axxiAsa.a�eQIt.NLQSeS..(k,�CI0.1......... Integrator: „•
........................................................................
Certified Operator:TvodAr.Q.A............................ Harda5............................................. Operator Certification Number:Z7 ZQ.......
Location of Farm:
rom WSRO: 1-40 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left
tnto McConnell Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right. .
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 36--le F 04 00 « Longitude F 36
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pannlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
184
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 3
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca ac ty Population
❑ Layer I I airy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 130,500
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. 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? ❑ 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: ..........Stage-1.................... Sta€;e.2.......... .......... W.eilaad......... .................................... ............................. I..... ..................... I.............
Freeboard (inches): 4 60 40
12112103 Continued

0
Facility Number: 41-12 0 Date of Inspection 10/14/2004 6
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 ❑ Yes ® No
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 ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack 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 ® No
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 > 301
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Soybeans Sudex (Hay) Rye
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
Odor Issues
IT 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?
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 ® No
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 ff): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or anyother comments.
Use drawings of facilityto better: explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): [_NF ield Copy ❑ Final Notes }
5. Embankments look much better.
15. Grass field (pull 92) next to soybeans is bare in some spots. To be re -seeded within 30 days. Operator called DWQ 1111104 to
update us the WSRO that the areas have been re -seeded already. MR
2. Operator needs checklists for his records. Mortality needs to be updated to include new incinerator. Operator called 1111104 and
stated that he had found checklists and they have been added to the CAWMP. Technical specialist sent letter to WSRO stating that
update would be completed in December 2004.
30. Facility received general NPDES discharge permit 3 weeks after inspection.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis a Rose4rock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 41-12 © f Inspection 10/14/2004
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® 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 ❑ No
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?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
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 V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
VW
12112103

(Type of Visit %Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit
Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility NumberEw
Date of Visit: Time: of (�
.,.,.. , Not (Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted [ Certified .© Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operat or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: .! A A-:1...&.�_tne— County:
Owner Name: /.. �°i .��, T f .. �.�!n.� .�.a�7 1. .. Phone No: _.............. .. .
Mailing Address:I r l7l1'L'.1'1
Dr y Minn e, A-5:U -. bean der E�T �-��0 � env �
Facility Contact: i'
Onsite Representative: jL ..ph jl.f�` 0.YMSS��. �. Integrator:
Certified Operator: , _. �l. j , , ._ O}�erator CerdScatign Number: a 77 a 9 __.
Location of Farm:
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?
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 'A No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway [:]Yes �No
Structure ``l CS eture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:y------ _. �.J�j j,�.
Freeboard (inches): TLT-*
—i 0
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — D 6 fInspection •
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 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.) Vyes ❑ No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
0 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? ElYes y
o
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
.Y:
�.�
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
��-" �: "
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
F `
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the C,-ified AWMP?
❑ Yes
o
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
P(No
31. 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? Iq 11 3 +�r*_'e aA I L
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? f2acTL \1 rt
❑ Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms Bqed improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
_QSIocking Form ❑ SUo Yield Form ❑ ai'1 [:]Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form Ik a xr, 1 60- r r8 v 10us
ne
13 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about tfiis
visit.
ddrttonal Coininents and/or Drawings•=~� � =W> `
-r.si�.... z.....-,-- tip': �a aY..•�.z "�"- _ - �.r
3d t� Lb. ve- � a,003 d tsc� F�c t- v ritid M
rot- NPDE� m�+.ju�Q�
aPp y I& �TP. .osh,
-4w OL�J�
�� t/� /�V 4-
12112103

Facility Number: 11— x Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i ty 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 ❑ Yes �3QO
closure plan? J 1
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public stealth or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Ayes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes X
o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yeso
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes o
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [I Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Kitt i U � t]f'CIv r Irl a U G
13. Do the receiving crops er with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? 00 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? AYes ANoRf—,
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 1*0
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes N
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes o
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 ONo
Air Quality representative immediately.
'Comments (refer to question #)F.xplaut°any YES axtwers anlor any:raeoruaprtendations or y�otiier comments.;
UUse drawuigs of faethty to Getter is iain tuattoiss. (use addttta77-
na! P d r3'i Field COPY ❑Final Notes mm
/S (IrQSS
2/1 4� a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Date:
12112103 X, Continued

ical Assistance Site Visit Repo
Dien of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Natural Resources Conservation Service
0 Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 41 - 12 Date: 130104 Time: 1 9:05 Time On Farm: 180 WSRO
Farm Name NC A&T Porcine Research Laboratory County Guilford
Mailing Address Department of Animal Science Greensboro NC
Onsite
Representative Dr. Libby, Dick Phillips, Donald Ford & Chuck Talbot Integrator Inde endent
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
IN Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
250
102
Phone: [phone]
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
O Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27411
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
1 Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary Finishing —�
Level (Inches) 24 38 50
CROP TYPES lCorn, Grain I Small grain Fescue -hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES EnB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27411
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
1 Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary Finishing —�
Level (Inches) 24 38 50
CROP TYPES lCorn, Grain I Small grain Fescue -hay
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES EnB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

a
Facility Number 41 - 12 Date:
4/30/04
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
El
El❑
❑ 11, Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18, Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
ReQulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
El
El
El Other.,,
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
1 - The waste plan was revised to add field 6, new
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
irrigation equipment and hoop structure.
2. Additional fill was added to the lower wetland cell
49• Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
embankments.
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
El
New irrigation equipment was purchased and
calibrated.
52. Buffer improvements
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
6,
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

I Facility Number 41 - 12 Date: I 4130/6T-1 J
COMMENTS:
Waste analyses: 10-20-03 AES (1) 0.21 Ibs.N11000 gals. I, AES (2) 0.17 Ibs.N11000 gals. I
AES (3) 0.03
The last soil samples were dated 10-27-03
* I recommended keeping a separate Irr. II sheet for each irrigation pull.
I do not recommend agitating the sludge and applying to the irrigation fields due to potential Phosphorus
uildup.
I still recommend converting most of the application fields to grass to allow more flexibility to the
pplication of waste.
The grass seeding on the lagoon embankments looks good.
The planned road and grassed waterways still need to be completed adjacent to the wooded lots.
Records and facility look much better.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST JRocky Durham Millie Langley
SIGNATURE
Date Entered:
513/04 1 Entered By: JRocky Durham
03/10/03

vision of Water Quality —11
vision of Soil and Water Conservation •
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O• 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
Date of Visit: 09/17/2043 Time: 1190t1
Facility Number 41 12
0 7Not —operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally' Certified 0 Registered
I -arm Name: >YC.A&T.Porsiae.Rocarch.La oratory ...............................
Date Last Operated or Above -Threshold: .— ..-.......
County: C&Lkiiffird......................... ........ W� RQ-----•
Owner Name: •-------------------____-- i~1�A�T�t�Ye_U�li�lrTSi�l'-------- Phone No: ----------------
Mailing Address: �itA�xlt1l.CAt.9.f.E�t11[t7.�L. S.1�Al��..................................................... ..N.C................................................... Z7.411.........
Facility Contact: Dr.,.HaxMcKinvig.............................Title:............................................... Phone No: ......................................
Onsite Representative: QQualstF4rd.-Djskj!b!Wps.Al'.-[,lhhy.-----.------ Integrator: -------------------------------------------•
Certified Operator: Donald..A►,............................. F.9.rd ................................................... Operator Certification Number: 2.4.4Q3.............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: 140 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left �
onto McConnell Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right.
® Swine ❑Poultry ❑Cattle El Horse Latitude 36 • 04 00 Longitude 79 • 43 36
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle CaiDacitv PoiDulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
262
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 250
Total SSLW 130,500
Number of Lagoons 3 10 Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DiseharLTes S 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 dischar-e is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (I f yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes [:]No
c. If discharge is observed, ghat is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (if yes, notify DWQ) El 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 Cl Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _.. - -� -........ ........ Stagc2-------- ------- I? iMaML.------•--•--•--•--..--------------------------- ...........................
Freeboard (inches):
05/03/01 � �� 9 � - / Continued

Facility Number: 41-12 Dale of Inspection 09/17/2003�
,
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees,severe erosion,
El Yes
XNo
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 Avolication
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 Sudex (Hay) Grazed barley Rye
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 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
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
3. Swine have been removed from the lower three pens in the woods due to evidence of sediment and waste run-off from the pens.
Extensive repair and grading needs to be completed as soon as possible. Vegetation must also be established to assist in stopping the
ash of sediment and potential animal waste into the creek. Animals should not be returned to these pens until the above work is
completed and waste and sediment can be kept from the creek.
7. Continue efforts to grade and seed the the tops of the lagoon embankments.
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,V , Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility,. Number: 41-12 D�if Inspection 49/17/2003
•
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/orDrawings:
16. Facility began using new irrigation reel in July 2003. The reel, however, uses a different diameter hose and the new equipment
has not been calibrated yet. Must document, within 30 days, that the irrigation equipment has been calibrated and an accurate
application rate determined.
17. Facility does not have a copy of the Certificate of Coverage (COC) or animal waste permit onsite. Permitte needs to obtain a
copy and make sure that there is a copy onsite at the porcine farm. It would be helpful if the swine unit manager, Animal Science
Chair, and Technical Specialist also had copies of the COC and permit.
19. No record of weekly freeboard. Per the animal waste permit, weekly freeboard must be measured and recorded (stage 2 and
wetland lagoons).
13. and 25. Waste was applied to pull #1 of field 5 during August and September 2003 onto sudan hay. The CAWMP does not list
sudan as the crop for this area. This pull is supposed to be planted in either fescue or alfalfa. The CAWMP needs to be revised
and/or the appropriate crop planted immediately. Fescue was suggested to the operator.
13. and 25. Waste was applied onto sudan hay in pull #3 and #4 of field 3. Sudan hay was not listed in the CAWMP as an
acceptable receiving crop. Again, the CAWMP must be revised and/or the appropriate crop planted immediately.
13. and 25. Waste was also applied to grazed barley in pull #3-2 of field 3 during June -September 2003. Again, the CAWMP does
not list grazed barley as the receiving crop. Need to revise the CAWMP immediately.
25. Pulls 5-1 and 5-2 are not available for waste application since these were planted as research plots. These fields must be
available for application or removed from the CAWMP.
15103 Waste analyses: Lagoon #1 — 0.28, 42 — 0.15, and #3 = 0.06 lbs. N/1000 gal. ,
Ray Mc Kinnie - School of Agriculture and Environmental Sciences, Assoc. Dean for Extension. 336.334.7612
David Libby - Interim Chair of Animal Sciences Dept. 336.334.7547
Chuck Talbot - Adjunct Assoc. Professor in the Animal Science Dept. and Swine Farm Manager. 336.334.7672
J
0510.3101

FIN
Division of Water Quality
Divislon of Soil and Water Conservation
O,Oiher:Agency
Type of Visit 1ACompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time:
Facility Number
�Permitted 0.Cer{tified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated o Above hres old:Farm Name:Nl/ County: rri-
Owner Name: Iv1111 h4:1: 1'C' j Phone No: 7 ' -7
Mailing Address:`���_�1�L�C�t
Facility Contact�1+ lt1 h r\PAA Title: Phone No: OZ
Onsite Representative: +^'*t ��' �I �q Gh�«"` Inte rator:
Tdt
tbwt r +[ r� E�1zq
Certified Operator: Of Operator CertificafU Number:
Location of Farm: 33&, ?j �3 4% ( q.? GLea'')
Co(eT, aG Yl
ty(swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' ° ®u Longitude 0 ®1 ®•°!
Design Current
awme
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I FE01
Dairy _
❑ Non -Layer Nan -Dairy I I
❑❑ OtheI I I I
Total Design Capacity �Q
Total SSLW
••
Number of Lagoons1-7
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ S ray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischare_es & Stream Impacts l32
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes � No U
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ElSpray Field ElOther
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in 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 o otential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ,kes ❑ No
Waste Collection && 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 10 No
t cture S cture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: AW Z lkhwam
Freeboard (inches):
/Ol Continued
�3 a bt F 3 P -e 3-� t, 7 I atAt4)
�- — r�ra? A w%= u� Po

Facility Dumber: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion`, El Yes No
seepage, etch`
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 ves. and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? es ❑ No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 1WNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes gNO
V aste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes -nN<o
12.
Crop type .7 U f C o y
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with t e designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CANNNP)?
Yes
❑ No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
El Yes
[No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
16_
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
;qNo
Reauired
17.
Records & Documents
Fail to have rtificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
] Yes
❑ No
18.
Does th acilit�l to hVe/ail �onents of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W"UP, checklists, design. maps. etc.) /
❑ Yes
No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (i . ration eeboard 'aste analysis & soil sample reports)
Yes
❑ No
20.
is facility' not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ YeszqrN.
o
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
22.
rail to notify regional D«-Q of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
/0No
(ie% discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did Reviewer,Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
IXNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
jNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified Au'MP?
VVYes
❑ No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit- You will receive no further correspondence about this visit-
4'1•.'�#;` -- ..- ".•.-: t did .xi .�:': .":
C6ir eats`('rei efto gaestion :.Eiip]alit i y. YES' answers'andlor any recommendations or any other.rnmments
Use drawtnl s of facility to better explain sitnatiozis. (use additional'pages as necessary) ❑Field Copy ❑Final Notes
q- a - _ _
[(� 1v�L') re-q- Lzenza.
UDa ! K use- dr) To 2-003� + teas h4 e'en
Ali 1o�-�ec lei.
Neeaqs CQII �ra,+ed as sc, as pass i ile,
FayiII kA needs
qtP (I' bro-je tvl 3o0jals,
I mac_ I kdues
no+ hawf_w Q i �vrii_oe�� r)
{
Reviewer/Inspector Name
' ' ,= v;=�.A"` : „i _ ;>:• �, �
Reviewer/Inspector Sib nature:
Date: 6 11
O5103101 , co'"7
5wivie- ur�f�� VKO- l e__r v" n . S� r . �- 7� c f� , S,� e c IQ t Sfi
also h"e e � o

j eon.4 -:� p. d
•c tL 2 0 1S—
Facility Number: —
0 3
Date of Inspection
104;�z
q./I
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? ❑ Yes bdNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ff 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 ONO
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 DOo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes JRJ"No
ments
�c. K-� n n 336. 3.3
33�e 33 7 37
Assoc . Pr-o-c 4's A- SG. 'Jep+ • — �.� 7—a,l � a+
334P334- 7 � 7 L— L 5 Lo', pe Mq r
2, DS f �i- • , , . It.
•
d4tZ�
Oo n -�71 vi u e-ViCoo r4:s -f-C) r6k-4,C,/Seed
� 05103101

�ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
type of Visit O 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
bate ur Visil: 10/14/2402 Time: 0950
Facility Number 41 12
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold- 101.01.199.5.,
Farm Name: .......................................... County: Guilfo d............................................ W5RQ........
Owner Name:.... ............................................... N.C.A&.T..Sta 1.U.Wyt r ................. Phone No: 3�- 4-7 �t7..............................................
Mailing Address: ?eaRt,.a .AoAna A.S�Ie�stt,..,G...W..�bb.ktaAi�.S.u.10t............ Grt:gnabQrD..NC.................................................. 2.7.411..............
FacilityContact: ....Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: Mtr...Aomald.f.a rd.ttgtd Dr..Clwrlm.KQ.d7,exc............... Integrator: Indl2pt~ akat...........................................................
Certified Operator: DoinaJd.A............................... For.d................................................... Operator Certification Number:2.4.403 .............................
Location of Farm:
+rom WSRO: I-40 east to E. Lee St. exit. Left at top of ramp. Right onto Cedar Park Rd. Left onto Bridgepoint Rd. Left A
onto McConnell Rd. Right onto Old McConnell Loop Rd. Right onto JFH Dairy Rd. Farm on right. w
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 04 6 00 µ Longitude 79 • 436 F-36 f,
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
142
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
F
Layer ❑ Dairy
Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
r.. Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 130,500
Number of Lagoons 3 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Magoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 10 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 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• Stage I S e 2 W' tland Story
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ® No
[I Yes ® No
[I Yes ® No
Structure 6
.......... ............ .......... tag . ............ gn........................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36 24 60
05/03/01 9-! q Continued

Facility Number: 41-12 0 Date of Inspection 110/14—/-20-0-2-1 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste ADDlicatlon
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
I I.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Fescue (Hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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 all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ief 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
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
s$
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
6. Need to add description of new hoop structure to "General Operation" section of CAWMP. Need to also add waste from hoop
structure to "Amount of Waste Produced" and "Amount of PAN Produced" sections also. Update other sections as applicable. Waste
from this structure is to be land applied with a spreader to a field/crop in the CAWMP per operator. Waste will need to be sampled by
operator and application records kept on SLD forms by operator. DWQ to send forms to Mr. Ford.
7. Vegetation around overflow pipe of lagoon #1 is to be cleaned -out today.
8. Pipe for lagoon #2 to be replaced within the next week. Replacement part is onsite.
8. Need to build up the low corners of pen #l. Waste is starting to run-off from site during rain events.
Reviewer/Inspector Name IMelis Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
v l 05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-12 oof Inspection 10/14/2002 ;.
dor 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? t ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegeta_ti n, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public• property) Ql�
29. is the land application spray system intake not located neat 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.) 1 ❑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 andorDrawings:
17. COC and permit have not been issued, yet.
A6
19. Per operator, no waste was applied since last DWQ inspection so no application records or soil and waste analyses are required
today.
19. Per operator, the 2001 soil analysis and 12/2001 waste analysis are dated 5/22/02 because that was the day he went to Raleigh
and the results were printed for him after payment was received. Soil and waste samples obtained in 12/2001 were hand -delivered to
the lab. Suggest he get a receipt when hand -delivering samples next time.
3. Also spoke to operator about streambank erosion and sediment wash -off from damage caused by beaver dam and tree removal.
Suggest seeding area as soon as possible and installing silt fencing to help keep sediment from washing into stream.
Contacts: �f
Dr. Charles Kadzere, Chairperson, Animal Science Dept. -336.334.7547
Mr. Donald Ford, Operator, Swine Unit-336.334.7642 or 336.334.7643, NC A&T State Univ., 101 BC Webb Hall, GSO, 27411
Mr, Dick Phillips, Technical Specialist-336580.1526
•
�
tn'VDr.n'. Ray McKinn* Asn xt.- 334.7691K
�d "
x
� `� Z '2o
a-7 q
O5103101

• � o
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit C mpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of "V isit: e:
?:acility Number
Nat O erational C _Below Threshold
O PermittedX
Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated o Above T esho d:
1/n� I-,
Farm Name: N[,, f�l Al1w i ji{� lLt��Q �iy County: �7
Owner Name: N)CPhone No: _l� 7
pIOJP+ s r• t• At4
Mailing -Address: r it
[Facilit _Contact: D C1NV\AQA4 Ofitle: Phone No:
� Z
Onsite Representative: c Integrator,
Certified Operator: p o l T Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Lee Sf E , urn 1 e CL5 5'
F WS�O, � � �5f fa f �
6 r lid •� onfo $ rld a�n+ Lf: on
� ( C.O[lw? f_ ontb o .
�J Swine l__.I Poultry _© Cattle • Home u e ' ®" Longitude
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population Poultry
Ca achy Po Illation Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
-
❑ Laver
❑Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Laver
I
I
JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
arrow to Feeder
❑ Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
d
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
s
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S rav 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? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ElSpray Field ElOther
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? El 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? ❑ 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
«'ante Collection S Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus stone storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes KNo
tructure I Struc re 2 Structure ' Strucrure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freboard (inches):
05/03/0I Continued
G4•

rFacility Number:YJ — 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?
Oyes
❑ 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
Ito
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?
ElYes
- io
P1'aste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
.o
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Over oad
❑ Yes
vo
12. Crop type AA& 'e a A A'ff.- )7'� - Aa OZAe�-
13. Do the receiving crops differ ith those designated in a Certified Animal Wast anagement Plan (CA MP)?
❑Yes
o
€4. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
El
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
io
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
t'r4o
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
es Ej 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
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & so" it sample reports) ❑ YesX`01
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Xio
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
El Yes
�/
^qvo
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
-
23.
Did Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ANo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
- io
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
30
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 answer`sand/or _airy. recomm6ndations.or any other.comments. _
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use.additional pages as necessary): Field Conv ❑ Final Notes
Reviewer/Inspector Name � iir:� L• •_ - -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
llllA �.r@n�

�Facilit-v Number- 1 — , Date of Inspecliun
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? ❑ Yes `o
29. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt, ❑ Yes 10
roads. building structure. and/or public property) 411
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes - o
30. 'Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts.. missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc.) ❑ Yes o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes A
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes AXo
arnments
7. &JA---' AL&V
3 , -756-4 7
r. Dona I d Ford -- ©l C 33& . 3.3 . 7 4o -7 624,3
nU�Fla- - 5 vm v. lot BC �e bb
N a- �P 1
� _ ' aft
h l I PS �e�e-� Spe- �- . iL sa 6 6'
�'� • RKc ILI v► ne SO�erPQ + ' <5 3
q o7h 9l
co-'.. zo o l�
ck-a� 30

-vita
y
- a:
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
Facility Number 41 12 Date of Visit: 9/19/2001 Time: 09oQ Printed on: 9/19/2001
0 Not Operational Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified -:13 Conditionally Certified.:©.Registered - paltj Lastpperaeiarplltww s�Jis ��..
Farm Nar. r. NC. A &IL..Por.dixe.Rma rch.Labor.Atory.......................................... Coumr Guilford :................................ .................. WSR.0........
Owner Name: LYE 14► cT Stag l]ixtx�l lxX ." Pbooe 1 3f� 34..
MsWi� �►�e,:: )p�F�t�a�ia>k:alf.A laatx.;it�nt . _..:
- ..
Facility Contact: Dx .Ray-McKi ntaiv Title:....................................................:........... Phone No .3 4,.7.ftl : aicrtx..:......
Onsite Representative: l?>?rtatls�.kntt�, rtl�. itliWs.�Milli,�lt�ex�sa,IR,.Dt,..
433Y-
Cert>fiedOperator:Mnald.................................. i:ox4d...............
� � a.•G �.-
Location of Farm: L3
Integrator: ......................................................................................
Operator Certification Natrnber,24 Q ...........:.................
:ast side of J.H.F. Dairy Road. Approx. one half gast,EH Dairy Rd and one-half mile south of the intersection of +
3olts Chapel Road and Ward Road �¢l1
® Swine ❑Poultry ❑ Cattle.'. ❑ Horse Latin 36.._ ' 04: 00 Longitude 79 . *. 43 - &F 36 K
Design . Current
Design Current .. ..
Design'" Current
Swine Capacity Po ulation
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder "
❑ Layer .
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
JE1 Non -Layer
I
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
176
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity.
250
Gilts
_
Total SSLW
130,500'
Boars.,
7T=
Number of Lagoons 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray FieldArea
r
-Holding Ponds / Sohd Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Strem,1mm_ p4Cks -
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [I Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b: If discharge -is observed..did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharoe is observed. what is the estimated flow in tal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`? (if yes. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
aYes-allo.'-.
❑ 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:............ Sxagr-I..................... Sta,get.......... ..Wutand.,S=age.................................... ................................... ...................I—— .........
Freeboard (inches): 1$ 30 k 44 '
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 4t-12 Date of Inspection 9/19/2001 Printed on:
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?
9/19/2001
❑ Yes ® No
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 Avohcatitur
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? :.
11. Is there.evidence of over. application? a Excessive':Ponding ' QPAN QHydraulic Overload-
12. Crop type Oats Barley Rye Clover
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑.No
❑ Yes
® No
Q Yes .
Z Nb.-•
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
t5. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Js there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required RMQids &- men
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 ® No .
QYe's- CKNo''_
Q Yes .0 No
❑ Yes
® No"
-®-Yes
❑ No'
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
CJ Yes'._ KNo
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Q Yes o
Q 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 faciiity_to better explain situations. (use additional pages as; necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
4..-Need.to pump #2 down 3-4 inches onto clover, field'as soon.as possible.
_
Need to clear vegetation from overflow pipe at lagoon #1.
19. May want to get copies of irrigation calculation for records.
19. Need to specify individual crop application windows, acreages, and PAN in WUP.
19. Still need to collect soil samples for 2001.
27. Mortality is buried now, not rendered or picked -up. Need to revise WUP to reflect this change. Burial is confirmed to be >300'
from creek.
bout 48 swine are confined to experimental lots outside where their feed and waste is contained to the lots.
rw
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 v I Continued

Facility Number: 41_12 Da10Inspection 9/19/2001 18 Printed on: 9/19/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30, Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan.belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32.: Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe.or a permanent/temporary covet?
[]Yes []No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
QY&;s
.199 No :...
❑ Yes
. Q 1461.
a Yes
,Q No :. ` ,
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
05103101
05103101

� � 4 tic pr
`„� - ivisiva of• Wafer ty . -
� _ �
_ ���
t
-
ivis on oi.Soil:imil Water Conservation
D Other Agency
Type of Visit
Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
�C/ompliance
Reason for Visit
4p Routine
O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification
O Other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 10 ime:
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: County:.....QU.I..1jCd .........................................
Owner Name:....N. ` ... .. .1............................................. Phone No: 3.a�[�?..:. �J.:iT� � �. T35 ........
.
Facility Contact:..:...'..'!Lli11.................Title:...................... ..... Phone No:e ...tP...l.......
...
Mailing Address:....�Vr.Cr+1�...`'.C`...��...L......................................................
I l �' ,.,,j � 1
OnsiteRepresentative:.t!(,R.U..njS�.l ��,�Integrator• ]Q!.........T
F�1? . • .......
nn
Certified Operator:.�&A F6 �. Operator Certification Number. v.3...........
i . tfi e1.................... �....................... ------ ......
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 0541° « Longitude E7T• t EaP­
Design Current
Design Current
-Design ' . Current
Swine, Capacity PopulationPoult,
Cactt Cattle
ulation
Capacity 'To ouiation'-r,:
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer
I❑Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
10 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
arrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
b
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
0 pp
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area `
❑ . No Liquid Waste Management System Holding Ponds I -Solid Traps - '
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? A Spillway
Structur I Structure 2Structure -3,Sttructure 4
Identifier: .................. .. Qr. `. . Wi?.�... I. �'1a...........
Freeboard (inches);
ad( ) � 3 4
5/00
Structure 5
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ANO
❑ Yes XNO
Structure b
Continued on back

Facihiy Number: 41— � Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
&C,
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?
A Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
%No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
XNO
Waste ARplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
X No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
?I No
12. Crop type O hQ�,�l l , rt/Q do V6,"
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
X No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0, No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
jXNo
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
RNO
Reouired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
o
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
kNo
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
4Qo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
NNO
22,
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
��
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
El Yes
�-?rc
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
A-14,0
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
rNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
0�10
N Ab1h00gs.or dOfciendo •wire ho .;ed during this;visit; • Yost wiii•teeeiye Rio fu th
correspondence shout this visit
Comments (refer to question #): Txpla
Use drawings of facility -to -better expW
(° a lkUr' L9
t any:YES'answers and/or any recoimmendatrons oi,,ny,other_coinments.._.
71
situations. (use additional pages as.,peces )
os� r-tc�l F/ e «�e,q+. e
P- a d�
Reviewer/Inspector Name It
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
5100

•I Facility Number: —LN of Inspection I Uy
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?
2$_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
q�9
❑ Yes VNO
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes No
0 Yes qk"o
4. d-
7.
ADA 'CC eez,,� -,e

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation QRM
Reason for Visit ArRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
1 Z Date of Visit: iq ZS Time:
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
© Permitted Of Certified Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: T �QI~.�-6.Y1—.l�Gl.l..�1.t County: �'?.�.?.f..�.lr............................._....._......
Owner Name: ' �+.�,r...... °� r.....V i.V�S Phone No : ............................................ µ......
......... ..... ................... � 3 3 4E -7 ►�
Facility Contact: p M1/� C. l e- ..................
_ �r:...l�.�....!.".1. _�........%�.L-------------- Title:...........................-----.....------•-----------......... Phone Na:
Mailing Address: �!-(� " . „ } .... n t Q � r �vL.....-... e2 y 1._I_...
....1�. ...I.�n.......�_.�.......rr�.....1....�...............�.._.%..........�t.....Ct.............
i ,j }� �y� B-c• W. k) Ha I I
Onsite Representative:.YIt�A..:eIrY1..iA��iL.0 1�1j' ............................. Integrator: .........
Y1L1! 2'....._.....................
Certified Operator:.... .:.>.na!A..._. Fo r.cl.................... . Operator Certification Number: ._.............................
Location of Farm:
Approx - I& m', I e_ -east a-F J'FH 3 i rl 12d • * Y.-;i- m e- SQu`k of F-Ho 1-Es cnapo- l -tv�l rd
1QC�5. l n-l-ior-SQC-�IoY� . �'
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ®° .4 Longitude • ®6 it
Design Current
nwme
❑ 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 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity orb
Total SSLW i3p S�
Number of Lagoons ID Subsurface Drains Present ©Lagoon Area 10Spray pield Area
HoldingPonds / Solid Traps I JE] No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges b Stream Imi2acls
t.,
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) El Yes ❑ No
c. I€' dischar�,c is observed, what is the estitnaled flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
?. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Vrer 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? El Spillway ❑Yes ❑ No
Struc:wn, I Suuccturc 2 Structure ; Structure -1 Structure ? Structure 6
tecnuficr: (ae .......... ......... .T.111�. .... 4?.h..CC............... ............. ......................... ............ ........................
.~rceL�;a;a f incites': ,
5100 Continued on back

FaeibtyNumber: q1 — IZ Date of Inspection OW/7/011 • Printed on: 1/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to th grity of any of the structures observed? (ie0, severe erosion, ,❑ yam, ❑ 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 ElNo
Waste Application4
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
I,2. Crop type
I3. •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 XNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ANo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? •❑ Yes ❑ No
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 g 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?
Ito •yiol'atidnis'ok- dehcie-neies-were di�•r'irig this'visit; - yott will •reeei*6 riu ]Further
ctarresnorideRce: ab' k this .visit. .: . .
. i
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
14No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No

Fability Number: — Date of Inspection Printed'on: 1/9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fai o 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? ❑ 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?
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
MoUonai..£:omments andlor Ilrawin s. -.
? Mr. _bI C IC. N'111 i p 5 - r o + L FP- ,
. C.hL>C JC Ta l 106t�' - gdV r25en�l19 f o I
bv5w me- Fm
L7r Q" Mc 1<t n n ie - An i mal 5ci e n[e-
�.�p¢.
EX+. 5w 1 ne f-r'M .
P 1
d n lcarrvl arN�32r- swio
ne
For �
5100 _

vision of Water Quality
[vision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O 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
date of Visil: 4/70/2001 Time: 9:35 Printed on: 8/29/2001
41 12
O Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ......................................... �'i
County: Gullfud ........................................... W.SRQ........
Owner Name:
................................................... NC..A►.&,T-Sb1 U.nixe[sjijy................. Phone No: 3,31- C.42................................................. ........
Mailing Address: Aeh nat*Int..Q.t#t�innaA.S�ienc..................................................... G.r"A5bQr.Q..N.0 .................................................. 2.7.411..............
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: DoxiWd.Foxd,.GkU.rjk albol.................... g ......... ...... Integrator: ........................................................................
Certified Operator:I2waits................................... Eord .................................................. Operator Certification Number:,Z4.493 .............................
Location of Farm:
East side of J.H.F. Dairy Road. Approx. one half mile east of JFH Dairy Rd and one-half mile south of the intersection of
Holts Chapel Road and Ward Road
0 Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3G ' 04 G 0046 Longitude 79 ' 43 1 36 «
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
180
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I[] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSL W 130,500
Number of Lagoons 3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area Io Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DischaWes c� Stream Impacts
t. 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 ❑ 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? ❑ 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
Wa-ste 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: ..........Stage..! ........... .......... Stu.ge.2... ........_Wr_tlandxurLoff......................................................................... ......... ....... ....................
Freeboard (inches): 24 24 26
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-12 Date of lnspection 4/10/2401 Printed on: 8/29/2001
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"siructures 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
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ 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 Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Rye Clover
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 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
IN 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.
'Comments (refer to question #,): Explain an�YffiSansw�� s and/or any recommendations oranyother comments , ,tier
explain sitdd�t�onal pages as necessary)
tom. field C final NotesY.•:
19. Use a separate lrr-2 form for Barley, Rye and Oats.
Overall everything looked good.
Operator is irrigating waste on oats today.
Ld
Reviewer/Inspector Name lRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Fa i ity Number: 41-12 is of Inspection 4/10/2001 Printed on: 8/29/2001
dor 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
Additionalomments an .or _tawrngs: _ fi: n _ r
A.
05103101

0 *ton of Water Quality .
ion of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 9/13/200o Time: 1300 Printed on: 9/15/2000
41 12
0 Not operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .....................
Farm Name: .......................................... County: Gmillord ............................................ NY'sRQ.......
OwnerName :................................................... Phone No: 33.4-(42...................................................................,
Facility Contact: A1C,.Ray.McKimiai.e......................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: J)eAarknn�ntt.Ql.AI}ilanal. iellce.................................................... Gx��x► ba><o..................................................... 2741.1..............
Onsite Representative: X?Qxt�lsl.k Q.rd.,.Ghuc. l aAboKtA.D1i�l�.hi�liRS................ Integrator:....................................................................
..................
Certified Operator: DQ]t Ajfj................................... Ford ....................... ........................... Operator Certification Number:2.4.4.Q3.................-.----.--..
Location of Farm:
East side of J.H.F. Dairy Road. Approx. one half mile east of JFH Dairy Rd and one-half mile south of the intersection of
Holts Chapel Road and Ward Road
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • Q4 00 4. Longitude F3671i
Design Current
Swine Canacitv PonuIation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
115
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer El airy
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
. Total SSLW 130,500
Number of Lagoons 1 3 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 10 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
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? 0 Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:Lagojan..Ul ....... ...............LagoonAZ.............Lagsuom.#3...................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 19 24 23
5100 —3�' /sv v7z`_� Continued on back

Facility Number: 41-12 Date of Inspection 9/13/2000 Printed on: 9/15/2000 '~•
5. Are there any immediate threats to th*grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trrsevere 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 M 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 M No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Clover Sudex (Silage) Soybeans Cowpeas
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes M No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes M No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes M 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; No violations or deficiencies were;notes! dstting•this; visit.• .You willI.receive•n6•further.: • ;
.. correspondence about this visit: .:. . :::: :.: .:
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
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):
4. Need to start pumping out of lagoons immediately. Are near maximum level now. +
7. Facility is replacing 2 inch return line with a 4 inch line presently. Will repair and reseed dam aftwer completion.
3. Recommend putting in horizontal pipes/wood for marker prior to permitting.
Z
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Melissa Rosebrock Millie Langley
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

d_ility Number: 41-12 Dat Inspection 9/13/2000 Printed on: 9/15/2000
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 omments and/orDrawings:
5100

on of Water Quality •
on of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit )q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit VRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Uateof Visit: 'imc-: Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
❑ Permitted Certified [] Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
e
Farm Name: ...L.\l.{..�...f7 '...f C?.� �i1.i�.�......... .S.f ....... County:....... J.
..fdj`j4 .......................................
Owner.1......°:....J....5tj... ... .......... 1'6one No: ,............ .. ............................Name . ...... ....
K-
Facility Contact: MCLU ...... .... ............................. .............................................. ....... Phone No. ...................................................
.........
,. lailin Address: 1 e
�a
� �itn t m al 5 c.l Q_n e e '� . G • .b..... .
On -site Representative: •...... ( .�,�......f••C lr ... [ntegrator:
Certified Operator: ...... [nalJ...Err........................................................... .
Operator Certification \umber:......... . 1 O3
.....................
Location of Farm:
IWLIARKIZI
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagmin Area 10 Spray Field :1rea
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges S Stream Impact~
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. [I'discharge is observed, was the conveyance; man-made''
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
c. ll'discha ,c is ohsurved. what is the estimawd flow in gal/min"
d. Does discharge hypass a lagoon system? (li'yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes *o
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes 'o
Waste Collection & Treat.ment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? )Qe<pillway ❑ Yes - \
Su•ucture I %Structure 2=5trlCture 3 tructu c 4 Structum 5 Structure 6
Identifier:....................�i.t...Q..�G�/1. 3.....�olkla� ..... ......
Freeboard (inches): 1 ��
5100 Continued on back

'acility.Number: 141—]ZO Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inteUrity of any of the structures observed'? (ic/ trecovere 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?
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?
I. Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN []Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'? 0 /-�-
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? Oe/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of desi-n?
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; Rio: yiolaticj,is:oT deficiencies mere itdfe'd' during {:his; visit: ;Yoit will'i-eceiye iio; further; • ' • ;
corieso6rideike: about: this vesit. ' : : ' : ' : : : : : : : : :
❑ Yes 90
❑ Yes*11_0,�
❑ Yes 1411�0
❑ Yes >6No
❑ Yes gNo
? ❑ Yes
o
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes
jNo
Yeso
Yeso
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes o
❑ YesfNo
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes X.J No
❑ Yes to
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
OLC I ri re+uirn h nf- O/oc 4 (VIC
P 114 o a r+ rze w,,J J Q m�� d
9 /��oMmend p viv�� ✓r horn zan- JI, 14� Aq
d -FAr U m f a �' o �' r i Q re
Tzw= TM 0
Reviewer/Inspector Name �G '
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,0iVVJ,0 1 A } Date: W11 5100

~Facility Number: — I) Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues W f
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? OMIT � .
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? I
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged Fill pipe or a permanent/temporary clover?
AW65
NOW& finp1led
Puk
+
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
U
.&i
5100
IVI

Q ision of Water Quality
tision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
(Type of Visit O 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 41 12 Date of visit: 6/20/2040 Time: 1t:44 Printed on: 9/12/2000
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.... .............
Farm Name: .......................................... County': Guilford............................................ WSRO........
Owner Name: G. Q►cYi.� .St�1I�.I�ftl�:�t S{XX................. Phone No: 4-x(.2 ....................................................................
FacilityContact: ................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: Ae��rxrla�r�t..Q1f.�ninnat.Ss ienc. .................................................... Gxt:i nsb.Qro.. K.................................................. 274 L...
OnsiteRepresentative: h41Ck.�a1b.R,.�?S?�1�11d. oCSi,. jgJK.r'hjjljP;j................. Integrator:.............................................................................
Certified Operator:.0xds1Qit111liX'.N.................. Quitch ............................................... Operator Certification Number:1.91.35........................... ..
Location of Farm:
East side of J.H.F. Dairy Road. Approx. one half mile east of JFH Dairy Rd and one-half mile south of the intersection of +
Holts Chapel Road and Ward Road
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 04 00 Longitude 79 43 36
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
250
120
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 130,500
Number of Lagoons 3 1 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischartes & 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? (lf yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ 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:..........Stap.1........... .......... Staga-2.....................Stage.a...................W.c1land..................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 24 36 48 2
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 41-12 Date of Inspection 6/2Q/2QOQ Printed on: 9/12/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treeevere 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 Annlicatiott
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 Sudex (Hay) Fescue (Hay) Fescue (Hay) Rye
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management PIan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel 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?
Nd.viblatitilis:or deficiencies•rvere'noted duriilg•this visit.;You'Will recbive-ii6•ftrther.. ;
ctirre* idence. ab64 this .visit. .,
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES an and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
The waste utilization plan needs to be revised to reflect areas that will not be irrigated due to open lot test areas. Also, crops (i.e. rye A.
;rass) need to be added, along with windows of application for the crops.
2. The lower wetland cell overflowed due to a 5 inch rain yesterday. The nitrogen level from lagoon three, which takes the overflow
rom the wetlands, was only 0.09 lbs./1000 gals.
# 4. There should be 6 inches of freeboard on the wetland cells, according to Mr. Phillips.
t 13. Rye grass was applied on in March and is not in the waste utilization plan.
There is a garden planted in application field # 4 that needs to be removed or have the field taken out of the WUP.
t 21. Mr. Ford is a certified operator, however, he has not been designated as such. A designation form was left to be sent to Raleigh.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Rocky Durham Millie Langley
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 41-12 Dat- of Inspection G/2U126U0 Printed on: 9/12/2000
Odor Issues ib i
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 omments and/orDrawings:
5100

? p Division of S Water Conservation - Operation. Review•, "
_ p Division of So..-.�nd Water Conservation - Compliance lnsp �-
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
Routine 0 CoInp antt 0 Follow-up of DNVQ inspection 0 ,o on' -up o 5 ' ' review 0 Other
Facilily 1\umhcr
Date of Ittspectiorl
I-ime of Inspeciion ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Permitted E Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered p Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Far•nt Name: NCA.&.T..Parcis[r-Rcstarr-h..La.ttmratur.y........................................... Comity: Guilford WSRO
Owner Name: .. NC.A&T.,S1 to.lLuiversit�y................. Phone No: JA34-1642....................................................................
Facilitvcontact: ............................................................................... I-itle:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
,Mailing Address: DcpartAnind-alAaitul.S.cienre.................................................... Grtens-,baraAC ................................................... 27.411 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: .......................................................................................................... IIItegrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Opera1or:C)art[stapbr_r.1.L................. Caucb ................................................ Operator Certification Number: 19.135.............................
Location of farm:
:as .s e.� . aary.. as pprax..txn1�. 1n1A .cgs .a . airy.. an .on1�- tlUl c.sczu;r .o ..t c.atltPlSCCiIDIn.O ........ ;
-Laits..Clxapcll. oo.d.and:Ward..R,aatd.............................................................................................................................................................................................. —
Latitude ®&® ®:: Lon-itudc ®0 ®:
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
❑ Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ airy
❑ Non -Layer 1 1[3 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 25
Total SSLW130,5=
Number of Lagoons
❑ u sur ace DrainsPresent rd agoon rea p spray rc c
rea
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
tSC tarzes & Stream 111111acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Other
a. Ifdischarle is observed, was the conveyance ratan -made?
❑Yes
❑ No
b. IfdischarLe is observed. did it reach Water of [he State? (If yes. notify MVQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. Il dlschamle Is observed. what is the estimated flow in ;al/mill?
d. Does discharge bvpass ,i lagoon system? (I( yes. notifv €)WQ)
❑ Yes
0 No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
). Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
®No
Waste Collection & 'I'r•eatnleut
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
®No
SIRIC1111"C I SIRIC1111V 2 SIRICIUM 31 StrllClure 4 StRICtnrC 5 SlrnCtlrre
6
Identifier: .........lagQQn.1......... ........ Lagoan.2........ ........ l.zggaoa.3......... ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard(inches.): ............... 22........... .... ................GQ................ ............... 6.Q............... .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
116/99 Continued on buck

act ity Number: 41—t2 40 Da' lirspeclioll
6. Are t ere structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a w itanagement or
closure plan? p 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?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
1. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
12. Crop type StnaJl..Grain.(.1Yheat..Barley.....................f..........................................................................._................................................................................
Milo, Oats)
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? [3 Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? p Yes 1:3 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reouired 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 ReviewerAnspector 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?
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes M No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Yes ® No
R 1�V raVt,et tlHII1 J• V1 "L■'s VKWIALZca rr \.rL•uVtVu.","I■t{g tpi a•r la�e. 2!Y"*rrau •{eVGava uv:w tuCA
> orrespondence albnut tills 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. -(rise add itional as net essar
pages y): '
19. Fax a copy of the latest waste analysis data form to WSRO when it received from the laboratory. A.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Eric_131�ck
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

F;i
[3 Division of S0i I Water Conservation [3 Other A
9-W
Dn of Water Quality
w.
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DIVO inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other I
Date of Inspection
Facility Number j I
I I Time of Inspection D Z 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Registered 0 Certified 1] Applied for Permit [3 Permitted Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name:A/, q. 7 R e.o� County: ..... !.... �!.2 4--1 ............................. .......................
Owner
33
....... ................................. �O ....................... Phone No: ..... ................. .... ....... .. ..........................
FacilityContact:Ae e,' TitleSOZ��' t- Phone No: 17.16' .............................................. ........
. 0 -2 211 1
Mailing Address: ....... o.r ..... -C . ........... ...... ......... ................
On.site Representative:.......... �4. S ...................................................... Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator;.......... .5 . . .. ............................................... 11 ............ Operator Certification Number-, .........................................
Location of Farm: 6_j�ioc L e?_ �/;;;.
P1 ... .... MaE .... :T.eEnl .... 9 ../. 4 z ... Al . ..... ...... P7 .... .. C-Cnc.t-1 ... e . .................................... &
......................... . ............................................................................... . . ........... .............................. . ......... . ...... . ... . ........................................................... FV
Latitude Longitude 0
MMign Current ' 9n-Current I -Design: Curren
t t:
SWMe Capacity Population Powtry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Poipulat
El Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
ffFarrow to Feeder,
a S-0
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? 0 Yes U'No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon .0 Spray Field [:1 Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (if yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters, of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
0 Yes [V No
n Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ❑ No
0 Yes El No
0 Yes M No
0 Yes El No
0 Yes 93 No
0 Yes 0 No
El Yes ANo

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes �No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds, Flush fits, etc.) ,
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes g'No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier. /a cad), J /4 dr- Z /li ate.
li. ..................................�.............................................................................................................................. ...................................
Freeboard(ft): /.8 .........5r 8............................ .......�19 ................. ............................................................................................................
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
t�(No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
M'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
RNo
(if in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Cra �4 �z/!/.1...............................................................................................................................................
p ty� .............
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
M 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
0,No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
[5TNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
0 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
JkfNo
No.vialAons•or. def�ciencies.Wvere'noted;during this:visit.-.:You:will `rec've:no•ftirtlier
: c6rres'p6hdeitee ab:out this:vis.if.
`Zz) Fny- 4 L-5eu4 repo-• fi- 12-h1 6 `px- 4�1�(� fL 10� .Sa—Vie- +V0 aSO 0.5&
1Gr �pti-n I�fiJ
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: t/ <<, ' I~ ��� 3131
G� � It—=� Date: i

r� n
Complaint O Follow-up of
IFacility Number I
Registered 0 Certified 13 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted
Farm Name :...../�..�.......19......%`c...:.1....................
Owner Name: ............................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:...........
Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 6: 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[] Not Operational
Date Last Operated:
County:... (I ! .. ..^..rf : � � Itq` k•
PhoneNo: .................................�..r' (;�'c301
.............................................. Phone No: ..............c. . .................
Mailing Address:.................................................................. .... ,� .! 'sI. ..
}G�1r " G
......�.................�........ ............. ...... ...'.. .. .y. .......�..!•Y.; .. \
i
Onsite Representative:.. l.7 ............... ............... Integrator: ..............................................-.....'Ei
CI ...........
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
I .................... .... .. ....................... .............. ........... ..................................................... HW
Latitude • =' 66 Longitude 0• =' 0 «
3 „tt Design Current°
;x
' , '
Design€ 'Curreiitt" Design Current
`Poultr
Swine _ Capacity:, Papnlatton° r; Ca act Po` itlatibn _ Cattle act Po ulatton
to Feeder
❑ Layer ❑^Dairy
FWean
Feeder to Finish EE
❑ Non Layer ❑Nan DairyFarrow
to Wean
- .4x x,
�
Farrow to Feeder
5` ❑ Other �_ r £�3
❑ Farrow to Finish
40
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts..'
tig3
�f W
❑ Boars
y '�TOta1ASSLW=
Number of Lagoons /Holding Ponds
❑Subsurface Drains Present❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Feld Area
❑ Waste Liquid aste Management System � � �.� a
.�'�.
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does.any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
mai n to n ance/i m p ro ve m e n t?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes -No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes INo
❑ Yes ((((((EfNo
❑Yes No
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes PNo
Yes
❑ Yes VNo
ElYes ❑ia
Continued on back

r1 -
d
Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
W10
Structures (Lagoons.Holdint! Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
'6 No
cture 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ....(...F +M .....
Structure 6
Freeboard(ft):......... Lt... I ........... ...... ....Iy....... ........... ......... 3..................... .................................... ....................................
....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
VNo
It. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
ONo
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ONo
(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
ENO
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes W(No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type -- f E�......................................................................................................................................................
,
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
J2'N10
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E�No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
PINo
19.
is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
Cl Yes
[*lo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VN0
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
PO�es
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
A
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
16 No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
KNo
[3-No.violiti6nsoc deficiencies.we're-noted,ditring this:vWt.. Yo':wii11 xeceive,no�furiher:-
colrrespQndeh0 d oid kthis:vWt:- ; ' -
j Jef-erg `sloe 7*TT klZx���N
LIV*6
�_V F<-> - U 40
G fz a7O
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: Date: ��

1
i
°'❑ DSWC Animal'eedlot Operation Review
w ��
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
Q P P
e Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DIVQ ins action O Follow-up of DS%VC.' review O Other
Date of Inspection S`
Facility Number Z
Time of Inspection 1 13 D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E3 Registered f® Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated: .................
Farm Name: ,IY..C.AJ.-f...fad.G. .G...>!{<S.SsfF:L........County: ..... .7.41. ZA�:01......................................................
Owner Name: 7 rl.vCrri!` Phone N`o /736 3y— `76
lV .......�� .s .....,a ... L .... (i�....................c .................... ..................... ..............................
Facility Contact: ..��.... 4� �c l��ti Title: 2e e�D� 1
.....�.................�....n.:C ................... ......;�........ ................ .... Phone No:r�3(c„1..Z�q .7J�.�IP........
blailing Address: .-Nek...%.af ..a/k.r.".^ .t...... ��i.C! /5.. ..........%Q../ kh�.b...1 !J........... QQ.y../ C......... 7 1.�.............
Onsite Representative:...........CducL-- ....... .... .............. - IntegratErr:............................................................ :...
Certified Operator. .......CY+.tn.5.. c7 A.ef..... 6,,..L........................ ��
.................... Operator Certification Number;.......�.......... .
Location of Farm:
..T........_S7. ic......Q..........�. J. ... -......t.;-I!.................�r..r,,C.....-- .. ....H..°! .t....�✓A............. Q......... .....5....Q..7. c1.......0....................
.......... ....... ......... ...... .......... .............. ..... :... ............. ..................................................................................... I ... .......... ........ ..... ...... ..... ............... ..................... .....................
Latitude ®' �' dD `a Longitude `
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish JE1 Non -Layer IFJ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean '
VL Farrow to Feeder Q ��� ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds 10 Subsurface Drains PresenDIRLagoon Area 1EK Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need mainten:uice/improvement'?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharr*e ori-inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Oilier
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made"
b. il'dischar,c is observed. did it roach S€trlacc Water" (II'ye , notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in
d. Dares discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il' yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any,part of the operation?
=I. 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 tinie of design"
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
Continued on back
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge'?
7/25/97

Facility Number: — e
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lavoons,flolding Ponds Flush Pity etc.
9. [s storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structurrep3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ... �.. _...-�........ 9...... .................... .... ..!...Y� ...I.............................................................................................
Freeboard(ft): ..l.'!0......................................................................................
� �/�(_ ....fib....[���9...................1..�1...............................................
10. Is seepage obser ed tr&M f the structures? ❑ Yes J� No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N( 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_
W.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
runoff
Crop type ....0 ....... . U ...�.lv"S� ...............................................................
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
® 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
W 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
I] No
® No.viQlations•or. defeiencies.were-noted during this', visit'. Aoiu.4111. recei've•rto•frirttie r-:
;:•correspondencealzoutthis:visit.-�•:-; ;;� -,- -:•: ;: ;�_ -.� •:._�;, ;�.�'-�� -��_�"
Dry [,off - Cc4v_�,,uUs � we (xopv r-ewaveef
Reviewer/Inspector Name
1-ias bwo,v-&/nwed
C16 _IOS 9" #_
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
05fcel. .S112_1576)
Bate: Sl � I i

'10 DSWC Anima eedlot Operation Review
® DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection4
O Routine
O Complaint O Follow-up of I)%VQ insp[xtion O Follow-up of I)SIi'C review
G Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered ®}iCertified n0 Applied for Permit ©Permittttteed 13 Not O erational Date
/Laa�st Operated: ..........................
Farm Name' 1�1.J 4 � y [ C--.1.�. t?.. L� County : l ..l�l.,� .........................................
0-wrier Name:..s�...� ...........0................ ��....G......................................
Facility Contact: ..:....... .... tn..r�. .Title:... ....................... Phone No: .....`7,`f5
Nlailing Address: `1�E'�Q ..... . i.y�-i•..........5.*w ..!.:G ,..e...Si.,-...........,1 a�.......f... .:....lN /7¢. ..............�4Q........
Onsite Representative:..... �....... ►:..... U?--......�--�Q........ .......... Integrator ................ ...
Certified Operator,..._ '1.Y p...4............ .......��..t ...................... Operator Certification Number:..... �9.1.11.5....
�....... ..?..................:......1....._-......r............ ............ .... y...,........................... r,,.......................................
Z
..........m......... ....... ..1...................................................................... ........ .--............... ........... ._............................................ .
Latitude •Mn' �-1 Longitude •1•4
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
4
oZC)
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy
❑ Non-LayerI I 1E1Non-Dai­j
y
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds; ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was Ilie conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, dial it reach Surface Water'? Of yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in allmin :
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (It 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 lagoon,4holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement? 4`4--
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time ofdesign?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ®'No
❑ Yes ;9'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
;X No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
,OlNo
Continued
on back

Facility Number: — 2
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed"
Structures (I y;oons.Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes t[No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):.............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 [9No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)'?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by saute agency?
21. Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspectiori 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.violatiohs or dericiencies. were noted during this visit.- .You.,�i°ill receive- no further
corresp6hdeitce about this:visit:•.
❑ Yes 9;-No
❑ Yes allo
❑ Yes W'No
...............................
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes R1 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #1): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situatiij-ons. (use additional pages as necessarv):
`�- lv. 'ate/ � 1 ¢� � � •Q �d:l rio � t1,�. � r t e'� vY�-v ✓ � Tg
Q,j
l %?
r. a �t
+
f 7125/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name €,•:zf
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

p Division of Soil anWater Conservation p Other Agen�
0 Division of Water ality
16 Routine p Complaint p o ow -up o inspection p o ow -up of review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Ninnhcr
time of Inspection©24 hr. (hli:mm)
® Registered o Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: NCA.,&.T..Pont:cineRo arjrh..Lahnratary.......................................... County: Guilford WSRO
Owner Name: St,ate.DEXC.......................... NC.A&T.Mate-Viaiversitty................. Phone No: 3.34-76.42............................................ ........................
Facility Contact: Dr...Ray..McKituiey......................................Title:Director.............................................. Phone No: 9.111133.4-2936 .......................
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................... 2,7.41.1...............
Onsite Representative: Chris.caach................................................................................. Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Chrj,&Wphrr..M...................Couch................................................ Operator Certification Numhcr:19.1.35.............................
Location of Farm:
kinits,Clxapel,Rd.and Ward.itaad_................................................................................................................................................................................................��
4
Latitude ®•®� ®�� Longitude ®• ®�
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
p Farrow to can
® Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finis
❑ Gilts
p Boars
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds
General
Design k-urreint Design C urren
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer airy
❑ Non -Layer I 1p Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 24
Total SSLW 125,2
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
urtace crams rresent i1
iquid Waste Managemen
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. It'dischar,e is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c, ifdischar2e is observed. what is the estimated flow in galhilin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
rea I❑ spray meta area
❑ Yes
eg No
p Yes
® No
Yes
® No
[]Yes
® No
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?
13 Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
[]Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ® No

act t y Number: 41 _ 12
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site w ich need to be properly closed?
Structures (Laeoons,EIoldine Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 1 2 3
Freeboard(ft):................3.................................4................................ 5...........................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
J
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
....................3................................3.................
15. Crop type ................. SudPx..(Hay-)................ ....Timothy..D.rchard.,.&.Rye........................ SQrghum....................
Grass
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
................... .S.Ctyheans....................
Q . .o.viartios.or aboiur>> etn�1e1tSes:wSi e:re.nrte uring. this visit:. -You i ..r.er.e.iv.e.nor.further.-...r.:..:..:.:or�es0600ene� Y
.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to•question•##): Lxplain�any-.Y,ES, flnswers.a.ncl/or any-recoinmendations or any other.conunents ..
Use draw ngs of facility to better exlilatn situattoris (use addititiiial pages as necessary} :
.. _ h- _.. ..E . d _ �.
Discussed record keeping improvements with ORC. Loss of leaking.irrigation waters at pump should be controlled. Recommend AL
agitation of # 1 lagoon to avoid solids build up. Dairy manure storage tank instlled but still needs same pipe connections (notify
WSRO in writing when complete.
7/2 5197
Reviewer/Inspector Name IRon liinvitle-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

3 y
%�DSW$$C An�l Feedlot Operatfon Review `• � �
(�bWQ',Animal Feedlot Operatlon Site Inspection
1W Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Z
Farm Status: Registered ❑ Applied for Permit
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 1129 /,s—J24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
(ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and orocessinol
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: ............ _......... ....... _..... .............. __....... ............... ........ ..... _............... _..... _...............
FarmName: ........ A.1..... C............}�J.7�............. ................. .... _........ ....... county: ..p..(: F!.!_rl ........ _/... , __..... .............
Land Owner Name:.._ l'd ...... .Z ............. ...... _............... ....... . Phone No:.YZ.2�3;3pC/...`.._.%....&/' V Z.r..'......
Facility Conctact:7.))�:t..... / / / .G._ _%.t. n.... .. Title: ... D..; ✓.,.Q: c ,Q ....... Phone No:...7_1�
Mailing Address: /10.1.......... ...C.,........ W...Kv. ..... L7`. ^t'....... t��C.✓...�b..eaJ:...Y..':!T.'.:.!''....`...._l.v..G........................., a.,%, 511,1
Onsite Representative: .�...Y...!.. f............. ................. ....... _........ Integrator:.............................................................................
Certified Operator: ....✓„a.._J...................... �I�O,,,.w.c_/v........................... Operator Certification Number: ... L...1..�. 3s �........
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®• EM, ®«
Type of Operation and Design Caoacit•
Feeder
Feeder
Longitude -'T• 0- E-7-19?.
ace Drains Present
Area „,,.� ❑Sera
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. 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 Surface Water? (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)
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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
Id Area
%,7M
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
®.No
❑ Yes
M-No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
Ca No
❑ Yes
E No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
W
Continued
on back

Facility Number: .A�[..... — ..... ....Z
6. Is facility not in compliance with any apple setback criteria in effect at the time of des*
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
$tructures (Laa,00ns and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
...... - ......f� �................. ..
10, Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes ;2'No
❑ Yes JRNo
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes [!]No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP,, or runoff entering waters of the
/Sttate/nify D /Q�)15. Crop type 5 G1c#'.a'r4r...L?.. Yl rl. -.... :Y .?- . -y
J T /
16, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17, Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
r Certified Eacilitigs Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes ATo
❑ Yes P�Ro
❑ Yes PNo
AS Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 'rBrNo
—
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes P�No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes .MNo
❑ Yes fWNo
❑ Yes RTo
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No
ja Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #f) Explain any YES answers and/or' any recommendatuons'or any, other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explatn situations (use ad'drtional pages as necessary)�{
{ %'/t'• I
tj- .5 rkn A- e-J'r I / l0 -5,
N � ., -- s R IOL6, �....i 04 c. e., U-) p-, C.O P (JeL C; �' to W ; � .
Reviewer/Inspector Name su ?„ - „ram "'
OUR '77
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: T Date: 2 7 0
cc: Division of Water Oualiti% ter Oualitv Section. Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

- - -
JUL-14-1995 15:34 FROM BE TER QUALITY SECTION TO WSRO P.02i02
Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. -g//�
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: IrIO / L 1995
Time:. //.' 3 J
Farm NamelOwnt
Mailing Address:
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: •-""-f Phone: '/a - 7 CAL
Physical Address/Location: _ S an��
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Catde
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: Sao a _
DEM Certification Number: ACE__ ___ DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 12:j� G Y--" Longitude: '22-2 S%3' Sl Elevation: Feet
C rcle 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) 60s or No Actual Freeboard: Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes oK No&Was any erosion observed? Yes of;
Is adequate land available for spray? ('•'or No Is the cover crop adequate?e r No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum
criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings. Ye or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes OKR:Oj-
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes o NNo ,
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes ocg�1 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 L�Zlu, Gjrl-'#� �'l
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name
Signature
cc. Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.
TP1Tf-H n MID

0 7- t
-Z- C)
•
F
•

JUL-14-1995 15:34 FROM DEM TER QUALITY SECTION TO WSRQ P . 02/02
d 0
Site Requires Immediate Attention: z—
Facility No.
DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: _ O �, 1995
Time: 42 v-y
Farm Name/Owner— -Al— /r 7—
Mailing
County:
Integrator: Ph .
On Site Representative: r ��aone:
Physical Addrtssli.ocation:
Type of Operation: Swin Poultry 6043 Cattle 3 % ga";
Design Capacity: /� ) Number oJf Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: A w
o Latitude,• '� 4 - ' Z" Longitude: 7 9 7 $2—? ' ,'" Elevation: _2_;/4_),Feet
3003 3 7Circle Yes or No '7 5 0 5,4Y' 3
t
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: �.�t. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes Oro ' Vas any erosion observed? Yes or o
Is adequate land available for spray? es Qr-No Is the cover crop adequate? es�or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 2W Feet from Dwellings e� No
100 Feet from Wells . ems r No /V�*
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or o
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or(W
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? (Cep or No If Yes, Please Explain. WG_�
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volume manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Silt Pxqmonuncdiatc At=Pndcn
Faculty Number:
SITZ VISITAT101M RE.COW3
1DA i e: _ 7//7 . 199 5
owner: (V, lsasruName:
COLM :_._.OWLFo12D
Agant Visitng Sir �i6 L! % Phone: `1 /0 -3 3 3- s LOC)
Cjrcr2t3r: r s pone; 33 S/-76 f�Z
On Site Reprnscntativa:Praona:7-i
Niyslcal Address: ���•.t� �- i��� ,¢s7- oI= �T� :� v,a�,e ,zara
Mailin$d1ddi=s:.-%/ 7 �rF/�, I l lzoa r�
Type of 0peralloe` swirw Poultry Cattle nesig±i Capacity. V/t%xl OW A / _� Number of Animals on Site:
01 ' _ � -' Lougitudcc _�_°
Type of ln.+pcciian: Gmund Aerial
Circle Ycs or NC
Dec.- the AnizzA "Nasm Lag=n 1 tave suMcicrtt frebaard of I Faact T 25 y= 24 hoar stor, event
(approximn(ely I Foot , 7 lnc .Cs) Yes or• Nio
For facilities wiLh ruoro a=-cac iagrars, pIcsse address the cC x lagrmos' frt . bwxd under the
cvrnxzicnis sccaoa.
Was any .:emui aV observed from thlncoti(s)l Yes orb w am�r:c.:. czesion of t#-,z d=?-. YM &
Is adcquetc Iand waBabie for land applicalion7 Ycs cr Yo Is the cz,vcr crop adNuau_? Ycs or No
i
°feel ��J�a'N ro d Iree o i -R14
A diliactia Con:melrtLS: Al"N , -t_
;
o f c� C �� 2 Y .�
0_rn r¢rh
Fat o.(9 19) 715-3559
1 �
` l
ff / ig'ssature of Avi1t
'N
#--3