760011_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of !'Water Resourcej
FFacility Number ®- Division of Soil and �!'ater serration rj n1 1
❑ Other Agenev
1'vpc of Visit: Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation ❑ 'Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: YRoutine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up ❑ Referral ❑ E;mergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Bate of Visit: Arrival 'rime: [J Departure 'I'imc: z'3 Q Count►°: Rar1i j a }1 Region: ti
Farm Name: p� -� Qi CL AD FCl4` M Owner Email:
Owner game: s 4-e.�'' _ Phone: 3rG 4, 6 �Q S
lfail ingAdd ress: 1 �4�j Lob
Plivsical Address:
I . " im c:P U 1r &,, f x .3 i to
Facility Coutael: Title: Phone: L3Ajq,9-q-- 3 1 75-
11
Onsile Representative: lntegrator: QU r v lS
Certified Oncrator: / Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number-.
Location of (Farm: Lalitude.. 35116 36 Longitude:
U� �ul �#Zi S �rblm �5C). Oil& - On
arm n r� Q c
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Laver
Non -Lave:
Wcan to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Fceder to finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
('i1lts
Boars
Offier
i7ther
Design Current
Dr►• Pouhry Canneity Pon -
Layers
Non-Lavc-s
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Puults
Other
DischarL,es and Stream Impact%
1. 1s any discharge observed from ally part oI'the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters ofthe State'? (If ycs, notit'y IJWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. hoes the discharge bypass the ►caste management system? (If yes, notiA, DWR)
2. Is there evidence ofa past discharge from any part of the operation'?
:3. Were lhcre any observable adverw impacts or potential adverse impacts to the ►vatcrs
of the Slate either than frorn a discharge'!
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Calf
Da ry IIeifer
Dry Cow
Non -pair
I3eel' Stocker
lacef Feeder
lice]'Brood Co",
❑ Yes EVNo ❑ NA ❑ NI:
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
C] Yes ❑Ito ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2(No
❑ NA
❑ N l:
❑ Yes
MO�N❑
❑ NA
❑ NF
I'age I u1'3 21412015 Conlin ned

Facility Number: - I I I Date of Ins pection: 71-1
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus :storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a, Ifycs, is caste level into the structural Freeboard? 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NI-1
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LJDDOV SJ L6 au- 5+ 00.i Y
Spillway'?:
besigned Freeboard (in):
f 19 r� r
Observed Freeboard (in): 00/ a
5. Are there any immediate threats to (lie integrity ofany ofthe structures observed? ❑ Yes [, No ❑ NA ❑ NEE
(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
EeNo
❑ NA
❑ NlE
waste management or closure plan:'
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yeti, and the situation polies an immediate public health or environntental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any ofthe structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[ONo
❑ NA
[] NlE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit:'
❑ Yes
RrNo
❑ NA
❑ NEE
(not appIicable to rooted pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Docs any part of'thc waste management system other than (he waste structures require
❑ Yes
[ja No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
NVaste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NF
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA
❑ ]Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overloud ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manurc/Sludge into Bare Sol]
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
11 Crop Type(s): f CAA W-)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CA MP?
15. Does the receiving crop anti/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or welt able
acres determination?
17. Does the Iacility lack adequate acreage lbr land application?
18, Is there a hack 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 tactility fail to have all components ofthe CAWiL•iP readily available? if ves, check
the appropriate box.
❑ NEE
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ Nl;
❑ Yes
Ig No
[] NA
❑NEE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Pgo'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
XNo
❑NA
❑NE
[] Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NEE
❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NEE
❑WUP ❑Checkiists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping, need improvement:'.1f ycs, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [] No
[Waste Application v'eekly Freeboard 561aste Analysis Nrsoil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfer~
[Rainfall 4stocking [YlCrop Yield [V120 Minute Inspections ION, onthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections.
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes M Noy
23. 11'selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [] No
(loge 2 uj'.3
❑ NA ❑ NE
101W eather Code
[R'�'ludgc Survey ZC
❑NA ❑NE
,WNLA ❑ NE
21412015 Continsted

1Nacili(y Number: jDate (if Ins ectissn:,
24. Did the facility rail to calibrate waste applrcation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes R'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out orcornpliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? If yes, check ❑ Yes RrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge Ievcls
❑ Nan -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility rail provide documentation oran actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27, ❑id the tacility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issue%
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 [X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
I yes, contact it regional Air Quality representative inunediately.
30. Did the the ility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes [A 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 ;X No 0 NA 0 NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems rioted which cause non-comp]iance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative''
❑ Yes _', o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the tacility require a t'oIlow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes So No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 4): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to F`-etter explain situations (use additional pagesas necessary),
aia �Di l ��jT� �d 1��L'C� `Pr 2-0(6 e Y&S
.+.
1. o C�-1► brc o►rl torn p1e. !-ell e 4b� 7 6 1
S. 51 ud J z 5 U r \1 r-e. ►� l r-eAy\ ern t- a5 \0 eRA,-%
-P x-+e ndeC1 4-6
'. All clo-pplie, .iit,nS t,)a_v,-e- u_)astP_ 01-"atis15
u-Dj to -5 a
?
3 WS P_ ►lre V1:5e.ar-�
cad c i cv) ot_l ;e— e- eLJAe-A . Se,e
a� I l� c ��-7
A As _3 . � o � Pt&c �s7 . C6-�� C � �r �
f V Q
61212017 S= 1-5,5 4d l q 1U2 ?y
Reviewer/[nspector Name: ,A i ` D t.7C'oL [� — Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: .�
Date: _L._�rrr(�G ■
—
Page 3 (if.?
21412015

Division of Water Resource
Facility Number - Division of Soil and Water Conservation AM
D Other Agency
Type of Visit: Cu pliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visi(: Routine Q Complaint Q Fallow -up D Referral 0 Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: P_&"jj0h Region: LDS ZQ
Farm Name: Spr-Z--Luc n Qe_ FQ r fY) Owner Email: r
Owner Name: P) j'Q.�'j-+� �-2.+r Phone: �.3� �• `1 `�
'[ailing Address: i 4- U Cit-1N15 u r [� 7 jp
Physical Address:'
Facility Contact: Sre�� ����-} �� 'Title: Phone: N J 3(19
Onsite Representative: Integrator: f U ry i5
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Hwy 1 S Fo nn 5 4 1\l6 OL— k-)r lc} h+- 040 U n--r y �
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 Pup. NVet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Non-L
Puilets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Daia Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beet' Stocker
Beef Feeder
Bect'Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes bg."No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at; ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other;
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DW R) ❑ Ycs ❑ 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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any pan of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than From a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes &i'No
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[]NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Ntjmiller: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
2j'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. if'yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ Nf:
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
identifier:
Spillway`':
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): t�
5. Are there any irnrnediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[—]Yes
2rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e,, large trees, severe erasion, seepage, etc.)
G. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managcd through a
❑ Yeti
DjrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan'?
if an►° of questions 4-6 were answered ►°es, and the situ at inn poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DN%'R
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
CNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
W. o
❑ NA
❑ NF
(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
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NI
maintenance or improvement?
Waste_ Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
PKNo
❑ NA
❑ NI:
maintenance or improvement?
11, is there evidence of'incorrect land application') If'yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
M"No
[] NA
❑ NF
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ ilydraulic 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. Crap Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'?
El Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NI:
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Ycs
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the Facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
D�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE:
18. is there a lack of'properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of'Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ N'es
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NI's
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available'' Ifyes, check
❑ Yes
UrNo
[] NA
❑ NI:
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design 0 Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
W
oesrecordkeepingnectl ii prrw•ement? ❑ Yes C5No
aste Applica ' n �'eekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Anal sis Soil Analysis 0 '
j�Rainfall tockingrop Yield l20 Minute Inspections Month ly and 1" Rainfall I nspgVions
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? 'es .e No
23. ii'seiected, dill the Ibcility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑NA ❑NI'
Weather Code
fudge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
ZNA ❑ NF
1'age 2 u/'3 21412015 Cuii bmerl

Facilit • Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes -�dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 5rN-o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below,
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Nan -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility f sil to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the f Wility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
❑ Yes
CgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[y/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes O-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If ycs, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other-
3 2. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ]f No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes MNo
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 5i! No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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).
I P t -fie-�- — I
iAJ LJup 2
3a P-.&.d-ae-aP.*.d buQz e&f
�o
a► 6%010 ofp2_1.e� ��-p� oz.�,c�1,o U�v-d�
WCdto�07,� l� G 0 � , --�b�
0
4/1 91z of io
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
LSS 3. $ Al a a
►b-s 'j a �. S3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: j ,� � �v • �o L q?
Date: 5�I ae) ( to -
214/2014

0
r

r
M Division of Water Resources
❑
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
760011
Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS760011
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason For Visit:
Routine
County: Randolph Region;
Winston-Salem
Date of Visit:
10/23/2015 Entry Time: 09:15 am Exit Time: 11:00 am Incident 9
Farm Name:
Jester Ridge Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
Jonathon B Jester
Phone:
336.824.4746
Mailing Address:
1248 Wright Country Rd
Ramseur NC 273168680
Physical Address:
1248 Wright Country Rd
Ramseur NC 27316
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator: N G Purvis Farms Inc
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35° 46' 30" Longitude;
79' 3547"
4 miles N. of ramseur
of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd, and go 4110 mile to Tan House Red roof on left see sign I Brent
Jester and Purvis Farms.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, &or, & Treat
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
on -Situ Repfesentative(s)
24 hour Contact name
On -site representative
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s);
Jonathon B Jester
Name
Brent Jester
Brent Jester
Waste Application
Operator Cerlifcation Number, 18874
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Phone:
Date: v2 aZ Q r 5
Inspection Summary:
7. Thick vegetation was established between upperllower stage lagoons but it died out. Thick mat is there, but is brown. Ammonia
killing it?
18. Please replace leaking pump hose.
21. Calibration completed in 2015, due again in 2017.
21. Soil tests due in 2016.
25. Sludge survey completed in 2014. OIC to submit request for extension.
32. Need to add T-3869 F-2 to newest WUP (2013). Per Mr. Jester, some other fields need to have acreages corrected. See tech
specialist for assistance.
page: 1

5
Permit: AWS760011
Owner - Facility :
Jonathon 8 Jester Facility Number;
760011
Inspection Dates 10/23/15
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Regulated Operations
design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine -Feeder ID Finish
2,200
2,121
Total Design Capacity:
2,200
Tote SSLW:
297,000
Waste Structures Observed
❑is ig nated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
LOWER STAGE
22.00
Lagoon
MAIN (LARGE)
46.00
Lagoon
UPPER STAGE
12.00
page: 2

0 0
Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility : Jonathon B Jester Facility Number: 760011
Inspection Date: 10/23/15 inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yea
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. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify ❑V11O)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 Waters of the
Cl
E ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yea
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I-e-1 large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed andlor managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks andlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
[]
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN a 10%/1 D lbs.?
[]
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility : Jonathon B Jester Facility Number:
Inspection Date: 10123/15 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason For Visit;
760011
Routine
Waste Application
Yel
No No, Ne
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay,
Pasture)
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
0
❑ ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA'WMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
NNP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0013
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

0
Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility : Jonathan B Jester Facility Number;
Inspection Date; 10/23/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
760011
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes Na Na He
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
[]
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
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
000
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
r]
m ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yga
No Na Me
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
M ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑M
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
[]
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resource.
Facilit., Dumber ®- 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation '•d
0 Other Agency
type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O 'Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint a Follow-up Q Referral D Emergenev, D Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arri►•al 'Time: j- Departure Time: County: � ��,�] � Region: WS
Harm Name: -� t° Stew- � ar►'vL_ Owner Email:
Owner !Name: _TUA&i �,o .j`} P� Phone: � 07 �' -f N o &
Mailing Address: �� (� }%r On on tr LNIA 5e.0 r a- 7.3 ! 4�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��� Title: Phone: may 1757
OnsiteRepresentative: 1 Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Lonuitude:
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Nan -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry C'anaeity Pan.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Frurkey Poults
Other
Dischart`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?
h. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
e. What is the estimated volurne that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify MR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge frorn 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
Da Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑Yes %No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes �No
❑NA []NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NL
Page I of 3 !� 21412014 Continued

Facility Number. - [?ate of inspection: D ,s� 0 af5—
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a, if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? C�
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structur�46
Identifier: Main D �� I.aW-f�
Spillway?:
[designed Freeboard (in):
�r
Observed Freeboard (in);
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?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NI:
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered ves, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify UWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes IX No ❑ NA ❑ N1;
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
J. Does any part ❑f'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. Es there evidence of incorrect land application`? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE:
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of'Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s);
13, Soil Type(s):
14. ❑o the receiving crofts differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. hoes 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, Dues the facility lack adccluate acreage for land application`?
18. 1s there a lack of'properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
13. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW,MP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box,
❑YesNo ❑NA ❑NEI
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
Ycs ❑ No
❑ Yes r❑
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [] Maps ❑ I ease Agreements ❑Other:
2 . Does record keeping need rmprovenient`. ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
Waste Applica 'onVcrop
eckly Freebo, d :6Waste Analysis oil Analysis Weather Code
Rainfall 5locking Yield [] 12t1 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yeti ❑ No D;TIA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Dumber: - is Date of Inspection: Q
I low
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(cs) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List strueture(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 X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes j (No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 nortnal?
29. At the time of'the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
Il'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
pemzit? (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/]nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes (J No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 4): 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).
15 "Is
32 /jrt❑��1 rho ,
Reviewerllnspector Name;
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3of3
IM
Phone:
Date: L-23a e)
21412014

Division of Water Resi s
Facilit-N• Number - O Division of Soil and Water'Conservation O f❑ �A
p Other Agency 1 A M
I,Vpe of Visit: IVCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 1� Routine ❑ Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency Q Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ! l ' arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ft p 1� Region:
Farm Name: - c Owner Email:
Owner Name: +JL,4eir Phone:
;Flailing Address: S e_u rNC o 7
Ph►'sical Address
C- Qla`i-Yo5S
Facility Contact: t,1 Title: Phone: - s
Onsite Representative: Integrator: C U f- V L S
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
gwj p5 S, C g 9 5 (ID�fJ r ht county
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Fccdcr to finish
n
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Fecder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Othcr
Design Current
Drv, Poultry Capacityy Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Dischar ues 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)?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy 1166er
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
E3cef Brood Cow
[:]Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Ycs ❑ 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 pan of the operation? ❑ Yes % No ❑ NA ❑ NE,
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the wasters ❑ Yes ;Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge? ice``
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - I I Date of Inspection: Q a
%Waste Collection & 1'reatment �{
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Ibl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Il'yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: )"QvjeV
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): v2� .20
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes tRfNo ❑ 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? TT
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? 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes q-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 5No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or itnprovernent?
Waste Application
10. Arc there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives that need ❑ Yes D�No ❑ NA ❑ N1:
maintenance or improvement?
11. 1% there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ ]:xcessive Ponding 0 Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN 7 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorius ❑ 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): i �sG UL� Q $ t"e �'� 4►j
13. Sail Type(s)-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'? El Yes p No ❑ NA ❑ Nls
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or Operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes �a ❑ NA ❑ NE?
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ Nis
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 �No ❑ NA [] NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? I yes, check ❑ Yes FdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box,
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other;
2 . Does record keeping need i provernem? ❑ Yeti PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Application lh'eekly Frech9120Minute
d Waste Analysis Soil Analysis reather Code
Rainfall Ev Stocking Crop Yield Inspections Ntonthly and V Rainfall Inspections C9eSludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakcrs on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA [] NE
I'age 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: AQ
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NL'
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ Nl's
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 I'iil to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ Nl:
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification'? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NF
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes O�rNo ❑ 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NEi
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
19
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ Nl's
33. Did the Reviewcr/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-sitc representative?
❑ Yes Na ❑ NA ❑ NL
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NI"s
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).
&I-LQ odd � Ir
3,;? A11 n LLA4 L 2 aC'O
- ..
�5 1�5 . N'l000 i
q , 1-55'�
t o
a--" nQ-u-.) �e-ld,5 -Hq
a I n t a 11000 S h ci Los 6V t D earl c e_ o� e_`o s t o n on
W al - Ql ea5(-�Cl tO 2- Cffl
U p Qom - � o ti e - 1 111 00 r�s Yj �P��S -m � V� � � � NL l l
Reviewer/[nspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: !
Date: D
21412014

Facility Number -
9Q Division of Water Quality"
❑ Division of Soil and Water GT_
Q Other Agency
❑A14
I'ype of Visit: %Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation ❑ 'Technical Assistance
Beason for Visit: �( Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up ❑ Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: jd t�3 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: I n Region: W!S P—O
Farm Name: , - - M Owner Email: A tia'r '_ ao , Cto rn
Owner Name: �' ,fl j1 �-��-r _ Phone: r q
L n {
Mailin;; Address: 1 1[ L' 1 [b ��" " 4 Un` tJ i . ,_ Q _m i,e-U v C16.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: BaAl t Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Sack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
14 w4.2$,� rj�, • ;
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
C (O to I r 't tJZi
Phone: 8_ 5 a 9- 3 l 75:
Integrator: u ry 1,j
Certification Number:
Certification Number-
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pap.
Layers
Non -Layers
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 DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume chat reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management systean? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge'?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes NNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NL
11age 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

f
[Facility Number: -10 jDa(e of Inspection: -37 ( Q
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If ycs, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: >! Spp P-,r 6 we aajr)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered Yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures 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 X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or cornpliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes J�fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. 1s there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manurc/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): V
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 10 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?
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 it) have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes 5n No
❑ Yes 56 No
❑ Yes d o
[:]Yes YNO
❑Other;
21. ocs record keeping need i provement? If yes, check he appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Applic ion need
Freeb�dl
Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ' Weather Code
2Rainfall .S"tocking9crop)ield 20 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes L_J N ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility rail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes � 1p/,A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE

lhacilit Number: 71 L - Date of Inspection: 1Q
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app I ifton equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes. check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(%) 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. 1)id 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 No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes 0No ❑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
1%No
❑ NA
❑ NH
34. Does the facility require a follow -tip visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NI"s
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better cxpl:tin situations (use additional pages as necessary').
s 5 l ud � s� 1� ve�► d u� �o � y a
C cil i row o vz
tit1 a x 15- G4 I S o-,ej
G�
SMW- PAAJ 4W.,;.,bt),o
`- AN w U P.
Reviewer/]nspector ;Name:
Reviewer/]nspector Signature
Page 3 t#'3
Inc_ 71 r - 5-CO6
Phone: � I I — '5- 2's q
Date: td'q 1 got 3
21412011

0
Division of WVer Quality
Facility Number - a Division of Soil and Water CARrvation I^ tk�
D Other Agency f V
Type of Visit: Cv pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit; Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
[]ate of Visit: rri►al Time; Departure Time:® County' ,(A�dof•] Region:
Farm Name:
_ !r (��G� Q (� Owner EmaTT Q ] �5 Qn co
- Fd
Owner Name: .� ��� �� � - — Phone: g � ' q 7 q 00 MO K
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to finish
Wean to Feeder
ceder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
tic,
J�
Integrator:
7 3/6
Phone: 0— [ a
nH g� 3tIS
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
L
ayer
Design Current
Dr • Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c• What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge'?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Daia heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑'NE
❑ NA ❑ NI:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA [] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
21412011 Continued

FaOW • Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
+ Structure I Structure 2 Structure Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
� 7 [dentifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ------ y
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 DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. D❑ 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 strictures 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? w
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Cround ❑ 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): �UP" "4 �p 1 o L e
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes J�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes _YNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NI?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes N o 0 NA ❑ NE:
_Reuuired 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the uppropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
2 . Does record keeping need im ovement?-�Ir� i� Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1jGaste Application eckly Freebill
,�I�J Waste Analysis oil Analysis Waste Tra sfers ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall ,�]— locking Crop Yield20 Minute Inspections onthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes ..�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility thil to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �[o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2,1412011 Continued

Facility Number: -1 Date of Inspection:
24. bid 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' ❑ NA ❑ NE
theappropriate boxes) below.�ZNo
C} Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
Cl Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structures) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 'VNo
�No [DNA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification`? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes gNo
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 conccm? ❑ Yes o
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, bid the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes [io
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 77��
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2fN0
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storagc Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No
33. bid the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA [] NE
[]NA []NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Comments (refer to (Iuestion #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations a any other comments. I
Use dra►yinp-s of facility to better exulain situations [use additional paces as necessary].
a5 ..�CPi.tQdO AUA�PAU �P awl'{
0 0
(S (L�P"'I .P -f is fm-kp
zo 13 .
b_t,"
e� 1
i�U 4 SfQ 4y, ! Ll se s
00a= 3.1ob3, 1a3 y �26it oor- �f s
f -
4 9—o I � -
DG i= Y. G 1 h s. N coo q --O.
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Revicwerllnspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
003 ; /- 1 /l s ,N//000
Phone:
[late: 4?Q
2I.t/2D11

11, . A Division of Water Quality
il
Facility Number ®-Ek ❑ Division of Soil and ►rater C.unservation
❑ Other Agency
I.ype of Visit: 'ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up a Referral 0 Emergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q 2 Arrival Time: ; (x a Departure 'Time: � � Cnunh : ;.. /p i� Region: 1r[S R
Farm Name: �� �•� - i J14,_ Fti (/n Owner Email: O 1)_e.5 el 2` (0 e10� - COA-)
Owner Name: JOACA �1A� (f{�e. t 5 � - Phone: C''"°YZ
Mailing Address: _�fq�ti-' �o L{,�y, _ ��l�fCii f _ 2-7 3/ 6
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:—(��nt—ts t C.rr [ itle: Phone: 60
I --�
Onsite Representative: - — _ Integrator: 70 j 61Is - -
Certified Operator: V Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Certification Number:
I
Latitude: 35-o �I 3o Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet E'ouitry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
22(X7
Z
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow -to -Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv 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 roan -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 frorn 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'?
'7 9 y 35-' � �•
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pup.
Dairy Cow
Dai Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dal
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef' Brood Cow
❑ Yeti WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE;
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE;
❑ Yes [3 No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes x
No
E] NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit Yunther: V C,-I I I Date of Ins ection: Q
a
Waste Collection & Treatmcnt —6
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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: { L6We1' i,
Spillway?: �b
Designed Freeboard (in):
rr
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'! ❑ Yes A�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? ))i"[[i""
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate puhlic health a 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 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?N'lNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvcment? '6�kNo
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application`? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Excessive Ponding ❑ l iydraulic Overload ❑ Fro7en Ground ❑ I Leavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.}}
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus D 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): £}u­
l3. Soil Type(s):
14. ❑o 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's
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage fir land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE"s
Required_ Records & Documents
19. Did the f rcility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o❑ NA ❑ NE
20. ❑oes the facility fail to have al] components of the CAWMP readily available? Ifyes, check ❑YcstN
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Dcsign ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements Other:
o 97M keeping need improvcment'! ,Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Wi
aste Applicato Meekly Freeboard Waste Analysis [ oil Analysis Waste 'Transfers [�cather Code
Rarn a .locking Crop Yield 12f7 Minute inspections ❑tialy and i"Rain fat l Inspections 'r Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. 11'selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ONO XNA ❑ NE
Puge 2 of 3 P1111 21412011 Continued

Faciiity Number: Date of Inspection.- Q J
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste ap . ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structurc(s) and date of First survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation ol*an actively ccrtificd operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT') certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other lssues
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? �j
29. At the tithe of the inspection did the Facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes �'j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. �T
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the [] Yes t� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit'? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) L
31. D❑ subsurface tilt drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes y] No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage fond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes JK No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/]nspector 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
Coniments (refer to question #): Explain any NTS answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
7, /,tack do I�e� P�����" I ,j *Z
f pp
s�Ia�lG ►A 11Q `#��,n�'ns ��t�t✓ 7°l� E��c•
f
12-0 1.
7
2,61
r! J4 4 '
p
Rev iewer/]nspeetor Name: �q+U( n� I'►Z1►G� i
Reviewer/lnspeclor Signature:
Phone: X
Date: 7— ;z. + I
2/4,,2011

0 Division of Water Quality
Facility NumberEMD�l 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation q . 30 A
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
❑ Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation
❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Routine Q Complaint
Q Follow up ❑ Referral ❑ Emergency
❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �j i �� Arri►'al 'f irr�e: � Departure 'Time: QQ County; B IReKion: �44
Farm Name: Owner Email: _AC7, ao l 4
Owner Name: D Phone: s D_g - q7g6 (mom _ _ cok
Mailing Address: r
Physical Address: Sm e-
Facilih, Contact: -4- ^'ritic: Phone No:
Onsite. Representative: rvP '�-��i�e l: _ Integrator: EliCertified Operator: l" �]C)-e1TI _ TOperator Certification ;number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location ottf�� Farm: Latitude: ET® I � Longitude:IN `)
V n (6 o u4ii) . Le- + o R4 o
Goun
-r�
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish I ARE
Wean to Feeder er
Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry
❑ Farrow to I eeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
n Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layers
❑ Non-1-aycrs
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
1EITurkey Poalts
❑ Other
Dischartes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance roan -made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dai 1-icifci
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non-Dai
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef' Brood Coµ
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: a]
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence ol'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'?
❑ Ycs b(Ni o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
El NA
El NE.
❑ Yes D�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ Nis
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 0 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
:l, if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
S p i I I w a
Designed Freeboard (in): i 91
+9
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'!
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
G. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes *No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NI
Stntcture 6
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ N1;
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered ves, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify ❑WQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the pennit? ❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
{Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet slacks}
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ,�] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
N'aste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks. or compliance alternatives that need
mai mcnance/improvement'!
❑ Yes !T No ❑ NA ❑ N1:
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application`' if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ E;xcessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Mctals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ I'AN ❑ PAN > I011/. or I0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failureto 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 (lie 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 hail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ Nl3
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage For land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
19. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
CNo
❑ NA
❑ Nl-
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings (if facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
0,5n rove, e.VCor+s
+e) T-"i r e o +ncrde- +m e-* C l oA c rat n w a' e.r +
Reviewer/inspector NameVA.PXk_C'5al Li . Phone:
Re►'ie►►crllnspector Signature: hate: Fi
12128104 Continned

Facility iVumber: (� — i]!Rc of Inspection
0
Required Records & Documents
19. 1)icl the facility rail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW,MP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ,
El1�1 LIP ❑ Checklists El Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Rc es record keeping need improv, ° • it? -dppropr-iate+o. elov e K Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NEi
Waste Application Weekly Frcebr rd Waste Analysis xSoil Analysis Waste Transfers l Gerftfcatinn-
Rainfall ❑ Stocking Crop ieidX
120 Minute InspectionsX
Monthly and 1" Rain Ins pcctions�uher Code
b 1 p Y }
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, diet the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Dici 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?
2& Did the facility fail to have gilt actively certified operator ill charge?
27. Did the facility sail to secure a phosphorus loss asscssmew (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 ► -thin 24 hours anchor 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 inimediatcIy
31. Did the facility I"dI to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/hispector litil to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
I Comments and/or Drawings:
o rl C oe >) 01 .
El Yes El No *NA El NE
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
PiNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CNo
❑ NA
❑ NI'
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes t,No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NI:
❑,NA ONE,
❑NA ❑NE?
El NA ❑NE;
❑ NA ❑ NI -
El NA El NE
�J r\, 'For a .3 7 Hof Q-A- . F1l l `= \ cV"CI 1dl'Gi?
SeVc-)- jooq? 3 �tLtds > loco C6pph Lhc,
i T No v �eC;
3 � Pe- �� .. ,
.
Page 3 (of 3 12128104

❑
Wean to Feeder
Fcedcr to Finish
.3
Farrow to Wean
❑
I arrow to Fceder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
U Boars --- - — — _ I
Other
❑ Other
Facility Number
1
Division ofNVaterQuality' .�
Uivisiun of Sriil and'Watct G mser►•.itlon'� i
Other Agency.
Type of Visit Cgmpliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason far Visit Q Routine O Complaint O Follow up ❑ Referral ()Emergency O ❑ther ❑ denied Access
Date of Visit: l [ 1 Vri►al'1 ime: Dep.irture Time: County: d region:
farm Name: r Owner Email: l
Owner Name: one on j- �1 etST i .— -- Phone: e ' r ` [f� a _r4
—�
Mailing Address: �Qc'
Physical Address:
facility Contact:- r ��r Citle: Phone No: S�
Onsite Representative: i.l� l� _ Integrator: pro PuriLs raxKS fXt\C `
Cerdlied Operator: Operator Certilication Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Locallon or Farm: Latitude: �o ®' ®" Longitude, ®o 12T lull
a�
Design Current Design Current'
Strine Capacity Population N1'et PoultrN- Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish � ❑ Laver ❑ Uai Cow
❑ Non -Laver I ❑ Uairy Calf
�.•,: ❑ Dairy heifer
Dry Poultry
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ 'I. irkevs
❑ Turkey Pottits
El Other
DischarLcs & 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 "raters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Desiln;l:' Current; .
Cattle. Capacity, Population
❑ 1hv Cow
❑ Rion-Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cox►
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ofthe State (gallons)?
Number,of Structures: J
s
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2, Is there evidence of it past discharge troin any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than Irom a discharger
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑NA
ONE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;q/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

0
I'acilit►' tiumhcr: 0
bate 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
❑ N't
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: L C)Lo
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): '
Observes! Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any oI'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
�, f
El Yes k�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
Ifa ny (if questions 4-6 were answered yes, anti the situation poses an immediate puhlie healIli or en►ironmenIal threat, notify ❑WQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ElNA 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 El Yes No El NA ❑ NJ's
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �j No ElNA ElNl�
maintenancclimprovemcnt'? '�';+
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Ilydmulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu. Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 1 Q°/. or 10 lbs ❑'Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manurc/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside ol'Acceptablc Crop Window ❑ Evidence o'.' Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops di f er from those designated in the CA W M P?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
10. Did the f tciIity fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. [does the lbeility lack adequate acreage 6or land application? ❑ Yes
IS. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
No El NA El NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question N): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations, (use add itinna[ pages as necessary]:
1
Reviewer/Inspector Name P0
Itcvicrrerllnspector Si gn at u re
A Phone:
A, hd 1114 Al Date:

Facility Number: — I Pate of Inspection
�9
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 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does r cord keeping need in rovcment? if yes, chec he appropriate box he ow. Cl Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a Applic an Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis ail nalysis C Waste Transfers11 •• �—
Rainfall Stocking 19Crop Yield 0 12d Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22,
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
ElNE
23.
1J'sclected, did the facility flail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
ElYes
[I No
t5�NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
9No
El NA
El NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours anchor 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?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
]f yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
`
3 I.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit'? [icl discharge, freeboard problems, over application]
32.
Did Reviewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
to
El NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
.Additional Comments and/or Drawings: -T
■ �'i / 1 E:, '
' 1
III�/�� � � � . , � �►� ' � - ;' /,�r. �a
L +
4
}
r
_
1 IQ
f
0
12128104

Division of Water Qualiprier
=Facilityumber -7 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ tither Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit y Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
(late of Visit:
Arrival Time:
Departure Time:
QQ County: 6 Region: 5U
Farm Name:
�
Owner Email:
Owner Name: _Tonle
,�y_
In 01, C � 1''Q.iR����� �-�,'^
r�
Phone: � a T - � ? �f �
C h�ar��
J'—
Mailing Address: �
0 r l h1 du r
�
e r iJ(-
a� r:7
Physical Address:
-Q
me
Facilliv Contact: Y't��
�e ���^ Title:
Phune No:
Onsite Representative:
1 ] Y' e y-\+ _ - _
Integrator: (D P V fi ' Y
G
Certified Operator:.
Ty.&aJ
Operator Certification ;dumber:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification ;dumber:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
l� s j bwe 491 5001< V\+ o ntd L�- ,) . Le.
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
' ❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
derto Finish
V
0row
to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ TUrkeX Puuets
❑ Other
1)ischarjes & Stream lm�cts
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'' (li'yes. notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy IIcifer
❑ DU Cow
❑ Non -Dal
❑ l3ecf'Stocker
❑ Beef' Feeder
❑ Beef'Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:E31
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (Ifyes. 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 t'rom a discharge?
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NI;
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NI;
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NI;
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ N E
❑ Yes [ f�io ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page ! nf'3
12128104 Cuntittued

Facility Number: — I I 1 40 pate of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 2 Structat)
Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .4.1►O tZL6 alr7F9r I V)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures obsmed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes bjNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ; No ❑ NA [:1 NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
;�N`o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. hoes any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
[] Yes
X(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
NN'aste Aeplication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? Ifycs, check the appropriate box below,
❑ Yes
!o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Froxen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ 1'AN a 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ 'Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge iiito Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Winslow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ App►�cation Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
9,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre detenrination ?
❑ 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
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use draw!ngs of Facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
1G . ►1}e.�Son tso �m
1 aS ` A 71,ZI6
Reviewer/Inspector;Name
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:qM
Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 'Continued

ILI
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & i'ermit readily available? ❑ Yes o ElNA ❑ NI:
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available'? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NI;
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Doe record keeping need i rovement`? If yes, cite . the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NF
Waste Application We -ly Freeboard Waste Analysis ❑ Soil r nalysis V►'aste 'Transfers
Rainfall stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility rail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes ❑ No IXNA ❑ NE
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphonas loss assessment (PLAT) certification:' ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance ofthe permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30,
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
IF
F'No
❑ NA
El NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative inutiediatcly
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of entergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE,
General Permit? (ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[(Nil
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional
MM, ir,
' ■ ' r UN 1
•F(00 f
U0 cak_�
r ! trl��r F r , ,
Page 3 of 3
1212-8104

11
6
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number : 760011 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS760011 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Randolph Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 05/08/2007 Entry Time: Exit Time: 02A5 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Jesta[ Ridge Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Jonathon B Jester
Phone:
Mailing Address: 1248 Wright CouritEy Rd Ramseur NC 27316 W
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant E Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: 79°35'47"
4 miles N. of ramseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4110 mile to Tan House Red roof on left see sign I Brent
Jester and Purvis Farms.
Question Areas:
W Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
® Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Jonathon B Jester
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
On -site representative Brent Jester
24 hour contact name Brent Jester
Primary Inspector: Melissa Posebrock
Inspector 5ignature: \-AN 0 t � I L� a, I ), . iz
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18874
Title
Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Phone:
Date: 6
Inspection Summary:
18. Need to replace stops on the irrigation reellgun.
21. Once WUP revision is complete, revise PAN number on IRR-2 form to correctly reflect pasture PAN number.
21. 4/10107 waste analyses= .90 lbs. NI1000 gal. in #3 and 5,6 lbs. N11000 gal in #2
24. Calibration completed for 2006.
25. Sludge depth only was measured by operator in upper (#1) and lower (#2) stage lagoons. Need to complete survey for all three
this year, too, NOV for 2006.
28. Tech specialist is working on adding new honey -wagon fields to WUP.
Page. 1

s
•
Permit: AWS760011 Owner • Facility: Jonathon B Jester
Inspection Date: 0510812007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number' 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 2,200 1,809
Total Design Capacity: 2,200
Total SSLW: 297.000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard observed Freeboard
LOWER STAGE
MAIN (LARGE)
UPPER STAGE
Page: 2

s 0
Permit: AWS760011 Owner -Facility: Jonathon B Jester Facility
Number.
760011
Inspection Date: 05/08/2007 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)
❑
■
❑
❑
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.l 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: AWS760011 Owner -Facility: Jonathon B Jester
Inspection hate: 05/08/2007 Inspection Type: Complwioe Inspection
Facility Number: 760011
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
Fescue
(Hay, Pasture)
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
Yes
No
NA
NE
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
0
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below,
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

E
0
Permit: AWS7600f 1 Owner - Facility: Jonathon B Jester Faculty Number: 760011
Inspection Date: 051OW007 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 property 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

0
Permit: AW5760011 Owner - Facility: Jonathon 8 Jester
Inspection Date: 0510812007 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Other Issues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/Inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Facility Number: 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page. 6

Facility Number
❑ivision of Water Qualitil
I)i►•ision of Soil and Water
Q Other Agency
U = 30pN
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation ❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (V Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow up ❑ Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
bate of visit: .� Arrival Time: Departure Time: � County': �iwJ 6 )PhRegion:
�
Farm Name: �7[�� �^���Q� �ar _ Owner Ema'
Owner Name: �C e � 0�lrl �� _l f_ Phone: �a `f -74 6 6
_
,�Q' -I AFL a 73
Mailing Address: 1 � "f O 1� r�.h} ol ]}'� '}-1� u �t� r��Qj_� 2C3 r , 1 �
f F
Physical Address: .�m Q _ --
f acility Contact: Title: Phone,' 6,_-qns—y
Onsite ltenrP,.vntati►w r '1 `] e -�A�P_c Intes+rator: t 1 t u r v i S Farrns i _D-v7
Certified Operator: -, r,?Jn � - - Te �7 _. Operator Certification Number: S
s-74
Back-up Operator:
Hack -up Certification Number:
a < «
Location of Farm: Latitude: � ® Longitude:
US 9wj a) Sow . 2+ onk lip q Sam
lcriq �)+ �0u0+r-W M
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Won -La et
❑
Wean to Finish
El
Wears to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to I' itiish
❑
('iiiis
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkevs
❑ Turkev Puuets
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dair Calf
❑
Dai ry Ilei fei
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocket
❑
Beef Fecder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
64�_w
Dischart=es & Stream Impacts )L)
Pti�F
es
1. Is any discharge observed from any pail of the operation? /thjl�
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made! ❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (I'yes, notify DWQ) [] Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NI?
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1 Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
ollter than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility Nunrher: — � [late of Inspection Q
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus Heavy rainfall) less than adequate'?
a, 1 f yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
► Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: t7
Spillway'?: 1 o
Designed Freeboard (in): 1
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ Nli
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If an►• of tluestions 4-6 ►sere ans►+ered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? !r
S. Do lack
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
ElNI's
any of the stuctures adequate markers as required by (lie 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 bu11crs, 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 ❑ I lydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Ln, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ]f Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Winc ow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop tvpc(s) r �} S'�'Ure—
f 3. Soil type(s) `�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ElNA
4No
ElNE
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 dcsign or wettable acre determination?❑
Yes
*o ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
❑ Yes
ONo ❑ NA
❑ NE
19. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
19Yes
*No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to (luestion #): 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):
} Ih dorm rgai r
Reviewer/inspector Name Y 1` 10r9Lr— Phone: 1 —79
ltcvic er/Inspector Signatorc Date: s D

Facility Number: — Hate of Inspection
Required Records_& documents
19, Did the facility fail to have 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 Di(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WiJP ❑Checklists El Design ❑Maps ❑ Other
21, Due
e cord keeping need inovement'? I ' ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ N1
W to Ap;slocking
a 'on Wec y FreeboardWaste Analysis ❑ Soil A alysis EY '•aste Transfers fff ... ion
tainfall Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections LyMonihly acid i" f�uin Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes '-Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain minbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No VNA ❑ NE
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the lacility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? 'P Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26, Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27, Did the fiscility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ Nl:
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes �Io ❑ 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 sir quality concern? ❑Yes tk4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative imtttcdiate ly
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yrs. XN o ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative`? ❑ Yes �`o
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes C�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
additional Comments and/or ❑rawings-
:5ury V- aWW ? Kr aO06 - r V
,�4- OwlvaAi,,on eb4\e_W 7 lccj, on a
ftJekx:> hdn - U��or) �-e gas ded 7 T _ [1.3o r1Li r
� i
� a[rzaaoi�,o -t- +h 4-a V i ru_,;!�
al • 9 0 -_� .a3 -j s. - �a 6-7 wa�ral,�si5
Nb
12128104

r-f
E
f Visit 4 Compliance Inspection (1rbperation Review Q Structure Evaluation , 0 Technical Assistance
sAN D 4 2007
n for V€sit 0moutine Q Complaint a Follow up O Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access--
�EQm
�y! Req�onal ❑�l:Eco
Wit-. of Visit. n"Lt Olt+ Arri►'al Time: l� Depu'lure'I•iute: q. q _ County: _ Region:
farm Name: T lw1Lri.—�L[A _ ��ILQ li►-'Owner Email:.__---w_..__—_ ____..--•-------..__ -...
Owner Marne: _ { n y�l �ti4�...� L}[�'d :� -.. ..._____. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Faritity Contact: _Y��s �Vti Title: _
Onsite Representative:`�j.Y�t�_'..�49���._.._...... ._._._..._-_
Certified Operator:._
Phone No:
Integrator:.._
Operator Certification Number: •_��g._._,
Back-up Operator: _--�—_.- _ �__--- _,- Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: LaEitude: ©o [� ` mid Longitude: IC o ®' �
��� `d� �b-wr.�•._cl �����-4�n_., �,su� . —C/�• i.�t i,•.� t;���f- (`6:�.Ix� ,� .
Design:Current _ Resign Current I]csign Current
"5wiric`; Ciipiicity; Population WetI'vultry '•,Capucify E'optilatinn Cattle`;' Capacity `Population
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
'Feeder to Finish
i;
El
Farrow to Wean
ElFarrow
to Feeder
ElFarrow
to Finish
❑
Gilts
Li
Boars
:,
:- Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
-Diry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pacts
❑ Turkc s
Turkey
El Dairy Cow
[IDair Calf
ElDai Heifer
❑ D Cow
ElNon-Dairy
El Beef Stocker
El Beef Feeder
El Beef Brood Caw
Poui
❑ ts
'.
❑ Other •fVumbei:of Structures:' '
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge Originated at; ElStructure ❑ Application Field ElOther
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?
m
❑ Yes 3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Poui
❑ ts
'.
❑ Other •fVumbei:of Structures:' '
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge Originated at; ElStructure ❑ Application Field ElOther
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?
m
❑ Yes 3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
ETNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
DINA
❑ NE
D-NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Tacility Number: —itDate of Inspection �r '
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) Iess than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: U
Spillway?: 4" �, r"
Designed Freeboard (in): - u'' Lkw " �.
Observed Freeboard (in): J
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Arc there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ IAA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NI:
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?[Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes MINo ❑ 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 E3-Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Anulication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Ycs 0y<o ❑ NA ❑ N1;
maintenance/improve men t?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive l'onding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare 5oii
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil typc(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
L+`o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ yes
B14o
❑ NA
❑ NI;
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
0 Yes
04o
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[R'Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
11�au p,�, Sn ti Y} ►` i `4a„1. Terti,cl . �rz►aC rti�"k "_t F'x A %AF
�u,Reviewer/Inspector, Namei. k&i , .. ��r. tr. ,. I? fir -`? r . �. s:n:r.. • .-y� 1_1ReviewerfInsr
+ector Signature:
_� ► �. l
� 1 ,

Facility Number: I Ote of Inspection
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 [1 Yes O'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ W[1P ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? i `` El Yes 0Io El NA ON E
D Wastc Application ["Weekly Freeboard PWaste Analysis U oil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
2/Rainfall lystocking 21crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rain Inspections Ef Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes E3 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?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWhtP?
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
3I. 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
UKo
❑ NA
❑ NF
[' Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NH_
2Ycs
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[--]Yes
❑'�o
DNA
❑NE
[, Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NHI
❑ Yes �lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
9,fVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[?io
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
[1 o
❑NA
El NE,
❑ Yes
[moo
❑ NA
❑ NE'
❑ Yes 31' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
it� [ � �S1�U'r.".: Y� � ..L��Y'7 ';�• �. ��wk���ry�S�E�'1 :�?.T.WW� �.. ,�.Y��'� i'ti•�.F�1 � nlr ��,T d ^�i.' . J'i i � �Mi�,.�-..�� '� pp 'Y
a 1. (}R.,�,t.. Sd > w �"1 l` V, L RiJw .hu-� a dry ru a�
YLk"(`lko w�a 6X_ 4�+
I212U04

. Facility Number: - [ Date of Inspection
Technical Assistance Needed
34. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
u
35. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
36. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
37. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
38. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
39. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑
40. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
0
Provide
❑ 5i1�CD us�1 c>. 1i.;n
❑ rf t(& sm
El
EJ
I
41. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
42. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
43. Sludge Evaluation
❑
44. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
45. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
46. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
47. Structure Nec& Improvement
❑
❑
48.Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
49. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
50. Site evaluation
❑
❑
51. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
52. Irrigation system design/installation
❑
❑
53. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
54. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
55. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
56. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
57. Crop cvaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
58. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
59. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc,
❑
❑
60. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
61. Huffer improvements
❑
❑
62. Field measurcments(CPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
63. Mortality HMPs
❑
❑
64. Waste operator education
❑
❑
65. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
66. Record keeping education
❑
❑
67. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
68. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
69. PLAT
❑
❑
70. Other
Cl
Cl
List Improvements Made byOperation:
4.
2. 5.
-
- -
3. ,_ _ 6. 12178104

E Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 760011 ___ Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS760011 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Randolph Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 05/1612006 _ Entry Time:10715 AM Exit Time: 11:30 AM Incident #:
Farm Name: Jester Ridge Farm Owner Emall:
• • 1 . �ITi]i in
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 1248 Wriaht Country Rd Ramseur NC 27316 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35046'30" _ Longitude: 79°35'47"
4 miles N. of ramseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4110 mile to Tan House Red roof on left see sign I Brent
Jester and Purvis Farms.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts W Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents © Other Issues
Certified Operator: Jonathon B Jester
Secondary OICtsj:
Operator Certification Number: 18874
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Brent Jester Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Brent Jester Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector[s]:
Date:
Inspection Summary:
7. Continue efforts. New fence looks good.
21. Records look great+
21. Don't forget to obtain 2006 soil tests.
28. Honey wagon was used to apply waste to land in March of 2006 that is not yet in WUP. Must have tech specialist add ASAP. Soil
test results were received March 24, 2006 for these fields.
Page: 1

Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility: Jonathon B Jester
Inspection Date: 05/16/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Regulated Operations
Facility Number: 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 2,200 2,214
Total Design Capacity: 2,200
Total SSLW: 297,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Deslaned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
agoon
LOWER STAGE
34,00
agoon
MAIN (LARGE)
36.00
agoon
UPPER STAGE
18.00
Page: 2

0 0
Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility: Jonathon B Jester Facility Number: 760011
Inspection Date: 05/16/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vlnit: 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 DWO)
❑
■
❑
❑
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 (Led 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?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility: Jonathon B Jester
Inspection Date: 05116/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crap window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Crap 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 neec 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?
❑
■
Cl
❑
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 CAWhIP readily avaliable?
■
❑
❑
It yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWS760011 owner - Facility: Jonathon B Jester Facility Number: 760011
Inspection Hate: 0511612006 Inspection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? Cl
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?
Cl
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-comptiance of the Permit or CAWMP?
■
❑
❑
❑
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.
Page: 5

0
•
Permit: AVVS760011 Owner • Facility: Jonathon B Jester Facility Number: 760011
Inspection Date: 05/1612006 Inspection Typo: 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? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
32. Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss rev iewli n s pecti a n with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up Visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality � 1
Lac
ity1Vumber Q Division of Suit and Water Conservation1
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 411outine Q Complaint Q Follow up O Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Da(e of Visit:
I)eparture Timc: ® County: QOXN&I Oil Region: w-6f�6
Farm Namc:Farno
Owner Email:
Owner Name:,6�1—,1
tk
''
Phone: °� 1 —
Mom
Mailing Address: , a` q (4 LOr l q'
[...0.on*r -j
V r CL
a 7 3 I�o
Physical Address: �Y1Q
Facility Contact: �}itle:
Onsite Representative: l�—lr'
Certified Operator:"=:�Z�1�.�
Bark -up Operator: , ��'�,1(�;e 531 r __ _
Phonc No: zoo — g6ge
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification ,Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: �° Ili
®� ®� I.nngitude: " ® �
v� DD eDoo-�k rC) Co 5 • -� ASSL16 eas+ o u.5 qa I D�;`
MC." q q S p H�, R- ] pro rn US g a I. Lem 00+0 W r eou
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity 1'jtpufation
❑ Layer
�i ❑ Non -Laver
Other
❑ Other
_ I
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ •l•urkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Daity Cow
❑
Dairy Crab'
❑
Dai Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef'Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
I
Number of Structures:
Discha rues & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of (lie operation'? ❑ Yes ``������ �o El NA ElNis
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field El 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 ❑ NI-1
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (I f yes, notify D WQ) ❑ Yes El o ElNA ❑ 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 ❑ Ycs �No ❑ NA ElNE
other than froma discharge'?
Page 1 (!f 3 12128104 Continued

1 acilit} ,lumber: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. I f yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard'?
Structure 1 Structure 2 MStruStructure
cture,3 Stcture 4
Identifier; UPD4,r�1kw LoLae � Main
Spillway?: 0 e
I7esigned Freeboard (in): �+
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any (if the structures observed?
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan'?
❑ Yes ( No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered ves, and the situation puses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D► Q
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NL
S. 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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 4, ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l 1. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive f onding ❑ l lydrau tic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, 'ln, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN ? 100K 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) re's eu e,r
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAW M P? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NH'
15. Does the receiving crop anchor land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`? ❑ Yes
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`?
❑ Yes
No ❑NA ❑NI:
r �
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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):
' J-° FU4 , A,
U �
Reviewer/Inspector Name iD 1(� ❑Q r�' - Phone: — �a {
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 2 of 3
Date: .-
12128104` Continued

Facility Number: —I — Ote of Inspection
Required Records & Documents �, j
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes Ljp No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have ail components of the CAWMP readily available? Ifyes, check ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Doe 'record keeping need im rovement`?❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
paste Applicat. n IS Wee (y freeboard �Zs'tc"Analysis Soil A alysis � Waste Transfers
j� R:ainfail Stocking Vrop Yield B3 220 Minute [nspections Ltij Monthly and I " Rain Inspections BKC'ather Code
22. Did the facility rail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
23. If selected, did the facility Fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
1��
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'? �'4'• 0.N(3n— Yes
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? O(-+, 1b jp ❑ Yes
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 Issuer
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-conipliancc of the pemiit or CAWMP?
29. Did (lie facility Fail to properly dispose oFdead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than nonnal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
Ifyes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did (lie facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit'? 6e/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32, [lid Reviewer/[nspectnr fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative'!
33. Does Facility require a follow-up visit by same agency"
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
Ayes
❑Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No
X NA
❑ NE
X.No
ElNA
El NE
tNo
ElNA
ElNE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
. No XNA ❑ NE
El No
El NA
❑NE
No
El NA
❑NE;
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
NiNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
� � 1
M � � rho % �:✓ �r �a
DL 1 a I y
I
q.3
PaA■e 3 of 3
l2/28/09

li
•
Ell
® Division of Water Duality
�] Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency w
Facility Number: 760011 _ • Facility Status: Active Permit: 6WS760011 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Randolph Region: Winston-5aIgM
Dato of Visit: 0013012005 Entry Time: 09:35 Ab Exit Time: 11:00 AM _ Incident #:
Farm Name: Jester Ridge_ Farms__ _ - _ Owner Email:
Prone: 33682447463175
Mailing Address: 1248 Wright Country Rd
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: iy Purvis Farms Inc^,
Location of Farm: Latitude. Longitude. 79 3547
4 miles N. of ramseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4110 mile to Tan House Red roof on left see sign I Brent
Jester and Purvis Farms.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts 0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Jonathon B Jester
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 18874
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Brent Jester Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Brent Jester Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector: Melissa M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Hate:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
7. Need to keep cattle off the upper and lower stage lagoon embankments.
9. Continue efforts to repair leaks at house U.
15. Operator to spray for broadleaves this week. Still need to lime application fields per soil report.
18. Need to replace worn and leaking irrigation suction hose.
21. Operator did not obtain waste analysis within the 60-day application window for waste applications made in December 2005.
5/10105 waste analyses:
Largelmain=1.1 lbs. N11000 gal and Lower stage=3.8 lbs. Nr1000 gal,
Page: 1

0
•
Permit: AWS760011 Owner - Facility: Jonathcn 8 Jester
Inspection Date: 0613012005 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Feeder to Finish 2,200 1,968
Total Design Capacity: 2,200
Total SSLW: 297,000
Tvpe Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Lagoon
LOWER STAGE
21.00
Lagoon
MAIN (LARGE)
36.00
Lagoon
UPPER STAGE
fi.00
Page: 2

0 0
Permit: AWS760011 Owner • Facility: Jonathon B Jester Facility Humber : 760011
Inspection Date: 06/30/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
discha ns & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NF
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ M ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWO) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
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?
❑
0
❑
❑
3, Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
■
No
❑
NA
❑
NE
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
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 (I.e1 large trees, severe erosion,
❑
M
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management or
❑
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
M
❑
andlor wot stacks)
9. Dees any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
❑
❑
improvement?
Yea
No
MA
NF
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives that need maintenance or Improvement?
❑
0
❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
0
❑
❑
If yes, chock the appropriate box below.
Excessive Pending?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to Incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Typo 2
Crop Typo 3
Crap Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

DI
•
Permit: AWS760011 Owner • Facility: Jonathon B Jester
Inspection Date: 06130/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Appliration
Crop Type 6
Yes
No
NA
NIF
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?
❑
■
❑
Cl
1a. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
■
Yes
❑
No
❑
NA
❑
NE
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 components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
W LIP?
❑
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 7 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
Waste Analysis?
■
Annual soil anatysis?
❑
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?
❑
■
❑
O
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AW5760011 Owner • Facility: Jonathon 8 Jester
Inspection Date: 0613012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 760011
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 those mortality
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concem? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Roviower/Inspoctor fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -situ representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NF
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

FAI
ti 9T.);N"itiioit of.Water QualitFa�ilit►; itTnmlier �•! ision of Sot! and !'�'ate'r• l serra- iirn "
Q 6thcr Agency
31 '.;i 7+•�y
ra..^•� '. ;•
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit yRoutine 0 Complaint Q Follow up a Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
ilatc of 1'isit: Arrival Tirnr: Departure Time: County: _Rayy]*h Region: A�� F-o
Farm ,Name: Owner Email:,
Owner Name: �J�Oi (� Phone: �,J 3 • �� � dl'�
Mailing Address: � PLL.d���
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: � 3�5-�- Title: PhonZLti
At/► �
Onsitelieprctientati►e: r� �� �1' Integrator:
Certified Operator: ��� � 0peratorCerti]ica(!on,Numher: _�TS-
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification ,Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: EXM' M' Longitude: ° r 1.MPI
r- t o G664- fm u:�-) ,xao 50L>. �y pas5 ea5 5� ,
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Non -Laver
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
jNPccder
to Finish
Farm►►• to Wean
❑
17arrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
cifts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ PLil1C't5
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke • Points
❑ Other
Discha rues & Stream I pacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
h. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dalry Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifici
❑ Dn, Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockci
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
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 frorn 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
❑ws
El No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ N I;
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes Po ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Conthined

Facility Number: — 11 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. 1s storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes. is Haste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: Vj
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): al 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which arc not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
o ❑NA ❑ NI;through
V
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. ❑o any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
9. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NI-1
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry slacks 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
o ❑ NA ❑ NH
)6,
mai ntenance/i nt 1)roverncnt?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ElNl?
ElExcessive I'onding ❑ I iydraulic Overload ❑ Froxen Ground ❑ heavy Metals (Ctr.Ln, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside ot'Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes No
❑ NA
El NE
16. 1)id the facility fildI to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination;❑
Yes o
El NA
❑ NE
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes o
El 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 anv recommendations or anv other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use.additional pages as necessary):
'
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signatu�

Facility Number: D*f Inspection 6.430, 63 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the theility fail to have Certificate of Covcrage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNc, ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. [Ines the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If'yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ LEI] ❑ IV tps El Other
2 L ;ocrecord keeping neeVweckly
rovcnlent'. [Byes, c ;Inspe
e boAbelo��. ]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Application Freeboard Waste As (]d V►'aste'Transfers�Ieather
Pp�
Rainfall j]/ Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute nd i" Rain Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Yo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ElYes <n ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'? -6 ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'? 04. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge" —too (0 ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification'? ❑ Yes KNO ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose ofdcad 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 satne agency?
Acl�t itional Comments and/or Drawings:
� f r►t �� I I � v � r► i i
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ N E
❑ Yes
4N❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
&U-,) .464 I J ALA L A114 A41,& �
12128104

Assistance Site Visit Re
• C}INVion of Soil and Water Conservatioll'O'
a Natural Resources Conservation Service
Q Soil and Water Conservation District
Q Other...
Facility Number 76 - 11 Date: 12/15/04 Time: 1 1330 1 Time On Farm: 6D WSRO
Farm Name Jester Ridge Farm County Randolph Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1248 Wright Country Road Ramseur NC 27316
Onsite
Representative Brent .fester Integrator N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
N 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 Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
N Feeder to Finish 2200 2180
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Q Routine
Q Response to DWQ/DENR referral
• Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
0 Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
4 Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
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
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
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
❑ Other
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 N no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. 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
Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier I 1 1 2 3
Level (Inches) I NA +12 7 +1 D
CROP TYPES Fescue -ha Fescue -graze
SPRAYFIBLD
SOIL TYPES BaB VaB RvA Mc132
GeB2
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

O
a
Facility Number 76 - 11 Date:
12/15/04
PARAMETER
D No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8.
❑ 9.
Waste spill leaving site
Waste spill contained on site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
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
El
❑
El 12.
Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need in
❑
❑
® 13.
Waste structure needs maintenance
(list comment section)
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14.
Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑ 15.
Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑
❑
❑ 16.
Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
[117. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18.
[119.
Late/missing waste analysis
Late/missing lagoon level records
33. Organ izelcom puterization of records
❑
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
[121.
Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22.
Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24.
Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Renulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
El Referred to NCl]A Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
El
El
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3.
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
El
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs5.
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
6.
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil andlor waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 76 - 11 Date: 12/15/04
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST 113etsy K. Gerwig
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 12/17/04
Entered By: lBetsy K. Gerwi
03/ 10/03

Vr ision of Water Quality 0
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency ".,
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review ❑ Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ❑► Routine D Complaint ❑ Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 76 11 DaECOfVisit: 811i1Z0{lt 'Time: 123t} .
6 Not O terational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
FarmName: ...............................................................................
Owner Name: , ..V.Ila1ll.Rlx. XS:f)1..................J.esX4:f....................................................
Mailing Address: 1�F$..W.ICxII.C.Qlatltx3:.R�ld...................................................
l-acilky Contact: lkm.l.,1.t ler:....................................................Title:.................
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County: ljAad'Qlithl......................................... !!'S��Q........
Phone No: [' 3..61.81-473.f1............................. ...........................
........................................................ ZU.11.6 ..............
Phone No:
Onsite ltc{tresentati►c:.rs>zi..,leS.it:lr................................................................................ lntegra[or:lY.. ..P.,uxy'i..]F�lxaas.,.lt�e.....................
Certified Ol�crator:,f.�xtatttsa.n..s �......................... R'51CA...
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:,J.#s.7.1
t miles N. of ramseur of H► v. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4/10 mile to Tan House fled roof on left see sign 1 �
Brent Jester and Purvis Farms. �
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 366 1 30 « Longitude 79 • 35 4744
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to feeder
I
JE1 Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
2200
2095
❑ Non -Layer
JE1 Nan -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,200
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
297,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 3 Spray Field Arcs
{1
Dischar Les & Stream Im�ts
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 ofthe State? (If 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 ol'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: .....Upper-Stage.......Maixt.4laxgek...................... .....................................
Freeboard (inches): 0 26 44
12112103 Cn►rli►u►ed

Facility Numher: 76-11 0 Vate of InsPeet ion 1 8/12/2004 1 0
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 en►•ironmen(al threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any pan 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 Apttlication
10.
Are there any buffers that need main teriance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
1 l ,
Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ l;xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12.
Crop type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
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
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor 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 tirne 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 4): 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). i_❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes J
3. Finish grouting around end pipes at house 3.
15. Continue efforts to control broadleaf weeds in fields. Looks better.
16. Need pressure gauge on gun, and maybe the reel. Can use portable gauge.
23. 2004 soils ok. Several fields calling for lime.
23. May 2004 applications were slightly outside of the 60-day waste analysis window.
4 waste analyses:
(large)=0.64 lbs. NI1000 gal
(lower)=2.9 lbs. N/ 1000 gal.
Reviewer/inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
1211210.1 Continued

Facility Number: 7G—I1 Di • of Inspection 8/12/2004
Required
Records & Documents
21.
Fail to leave 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?
(ic/ 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with ❑n-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 AWMII?
❑ Yes
®No
NPl]FS Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (I I' no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
lf'selected, did the facility flail 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'ves, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
tional Comments and/or Drawing
rM
12112103

91 y:7 `r`. . _��..- ­ rT
_ `, ..f-- '� irision of�Water,,inaliih'• �. ".
[• ^� � 1 - 9 � ij 1. �� i 'J^�:.::�' � � �� L ri 3� Sr•'-�/ ~!
L �� s,. •!•,•� �` n -4 Mon of and W ter• CUikSCI VSttCsl' r 3`i " r' �+ Llws 3`.
lr _ errApeilt+�7 c i• am zti: .1.=`'
3 - Y+ . 'q r x' .. • ryC" nc '
C.
- _r
]Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review D Lagoon Evaluation '
Reason for Visit Q Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification a Other p Denied Access
Facility_ Number Irate of visit: Q Tim,:
Q Not Oerational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified
�[3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above jThre`shhold: ... _.
Farm Name: .......
.eS...1..........!!... L'-...Q r _............... County. ..,1.1� .L. P.�..3.............. _......
Owner Name: ..jjr..-!`..Ll..........��.. _..........�..................... Phone No: �..�.��.
Flailing Address: J r ( h�- C,6 u n 1�-E!� �� V r , �C� � -7 �J r
__. _._......._ .'.._ w. - - _.._....... _ _ j._.. _ _ _ ._ ..___._ ...
Facility Contact: ..� -i. Sl......... ......_.. Title:.. ......_....... Phone No:
_..�...... �._ . r _._........._.. - ......
Oosite Representative:. r+T ��rr. ............... _.. Integrator:
Certified Dperatvr:.._�..�?`5 Operator Certification Number:_ ..�.__ ..
Location of Farm:
flw4 4 (v es 0 5evf__- E0t5t onto r_JK aOn"
Swine ❑ Poultry
❑ Cattle
0 Horse Latitude ®•
®°�'°
Longitude �• ®° �"
w::
t ::i x t ..
:i Desi Current ::: �. , � - � �'a Desi . r.l1 Current
� '�e:,ls•:et �'
. :r.:� gP:.., urlt't]Q t
Swine
_�
Ca• ez
r_• ..
:Po'niation=,.:'Poultry,: _ %
W ' : Cattle' "
ari Population: Ca aci Po eilation':'
Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
a
❑ Non -Layer
; ❑Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
ElFarrow to Feeder
Other
Farrow to Finish441
:c F:
:Total Deli Ca a�i
Gilts
❑ Boars
: oW SSLW : 1 7 �Q�
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
1.7 " c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flaw in gal/min?
� �d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes q0
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 i Structure b
Identifier: -
Freeboard (inches): �tIJ
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: -- Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the in9ty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree3Revere erosion,
❑ Yes
XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
El 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 maintenancetimprovement?
[]Yes
)(No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
Ayes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
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
o
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type j`49—
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified A imal 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
gNo
Odor 1_tisues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes K
o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N0
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes XNo
Air Quality representative immediately.
Corn - ents (refer. to question t#): Explain any YFS answers andlar. any. recammcndations or. ' y athcr comments.
.Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Reviewer/Inspector Name I...
Reviewer/Inspector
Date:
12/12/03 Continued
r

FacilAy Number: fp Date of Inspection
9
Required Records & Documents �f
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? i
(ie! WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes 6No
23. D s record keeping need improvement? Yyes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No
Waste Application ❑ Feboard Waste Analysis ❑ it Sampling
Y
24. Is facility not in compliance with any a plicable 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 1
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes o
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)
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 fortes 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.
dd�ttonal'Cammeats andlar Dravvrngs:-. _ _ _ .-_ _ — ��•- _ _ . -.—
.•.• c� :v � .tea-+ � -.za .¢ �:�. T _e...:. � . _ i•._- . .r_`. .. f..
a
,D3 - ! . k5.
AL5 (�-)
)-55 ( 1OWT) 1 0 ()o
"nA A 1 '4

e sion of Water Qualit❑ j
a lion of Soil and Water Conservation
Q C}ther Agency '
Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection D Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Cf Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Cf Other ❑ Denied Access
u:,it- ol Vkiu 12itx�zna3 t;r,,,,: ttrnn
Facility Number 76 11
Q Not [1,rralional Q Below 'Threshold
M PermiIted ® Certified E3 Con (IiIionaII y Certified [] Rq,istered I)atc Last [] Ise ratcd or ,Ibn►'c'Threshill d: -.--. ----.-
... Couniv: i4,LdaJD.�............................... I� :, r• m ,ti :r r,rr•: ............... ....... .l t st�x. Ftitlt:c..l•.arn1.........._..
(]++ner N:rme: 1Qva(tiot>_J1.retwlL_____-._ A.Xtm----•---------•-•------------ Ilhone Nrr: Wk W-47A(iAlow'sA _._._._._._._._..
11:rilirrl; Address: .......... 0A111,,Vtjr..tti'.......................................................... Z73 6..............
Facilil►' Contael. j3;•C1A,les.t.er........................................"I'itic:............................................... Phone No: .........
[]nsite Rep re%V111.11i+e:Rr.culAchteC-------.-------------------------------- Intcrr•;,tur:N G_PJlt]-is XarAL4,Inc-
-----------------•
cur'titied[]I,er•:ttr,r:jAn.at.h.R1t.u..........................1.ehmr.................................. _............. t]perator-Cer•tifleaIion Nun,ber•:11,87IA.............
...............
Location of Tarn,:
chiles N. of rarnseur of 111wy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4111) mile to 'f•an House Red roof on left see sign l
Brent .fester and Purvis Farn,s.
®Swine []Poultry []Cattle ❑ Horse l,alitl,de 1 35 " 46 30 Longittlde 79 • 3i 47
Design Current
Swine Canaeit❑ Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Fecdcr to Finish
2200
1790
❑ barrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Cattle
lCapacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,200
Total SSLW 297,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drain,. Present ❑ Lagrnm .vrru ®Spra► F field area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste NJanage rrtent System
Iliseharue► & Slrean, Intt,arls
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated aft []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Othcr
a. If discharge is observed, +►•as the conveyance man-made'? ❑Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is obscr+•ed, did it reach Water uf'the State'' (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. 11'ciischarge is observed. what is the estirnatcd flm+' in gallrnin?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWO) ❑ 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 Stale other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Wasle C:olleclion & 'I•rcalrttrnt
4, is storage capacity (fareeboard plus strum storage) less than ridegUate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
struk�lu c 1 Structure'_ Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 StrurtIII r [i
Identifier:..._Jlppex.stage_.._..._.LQwcr_sta�..._ __..141aittLlarge..............
- r
l�rcchom.kf {inches]: 6 25 34 1 '
05/113101 # G1D %+Cn►rtiirued

Facility Number: 76-11 Is hale of In-.pwetion ll/1t312i1U3 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes ®No
(If and' of questions 4-6 vs -as answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify i WQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
K. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelirnprovement? ® Yes ❑ No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required nraxirnum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
1Vaste Apolicalioll
10.
Are there any buffers that need rnaaintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11,
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive I'onding ❑ PAN ❑ I Iydraulic Overload t
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crap type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWN1P)?
❑ 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
Retmired Records & Documen1%
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily availuble'?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility ftil to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ 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 faacility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the fiacility 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 AWNlP?
❑ Yes
® No
[f No violations or deficiencies were noted during; this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comriien(refc`r ro que�io�}: Explain any YE S answers and/or an► reccrmrttertdatinns or any other comments.
Usedra►►iit of facility' to hetler ex Erin situations. [use additional a =es as nrcessar.`
,. _. g :. P p ) ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
8. Repairs to cracks in flush pipes look great! lust need to grout the pipes at the wall.
AL
15. Field beside the #3 lagoon has been re -seeded with fescue which is now 1-2 inches tall. Fields were limed this year per soil test
results.
19. Don't forget to add slurry PAN to irrigated PAN for a total PAN used per field. No overapplication noted. December 2003 waste
sample sent in about 2 weeks :ago. Check with records next visit.
19. Overall, records look great?
Reviewer/inspector Name iVleli sa Rosebrock
Rev'iewerllnspector Signature: Date:
05103101 k r r Continued

Facility Number; 76-11 1)atv 441nsprrti4rn 12118120(13
Odor Istiues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon Fail to discharge at/or beIo%v
❑ Yes
[:]No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation''
27.
Are there any dead tinitrials 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 flan belts, missing or
or broken Can blades), inoperable shutters, cte.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
❑o the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe Orit permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additional Coninients and urDrawings:
05103101

0
Di►vision of N'ater Quality
Division of Soil and ►Vater Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit A Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine to Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time:
10 haeilit�• Number
Not O terational Q Belo►s'Chre%huid
Permitted O Certified 0 Conrditionall►• Certifed 0 Registered Date Last Opera19 or Ab(,)►e Threshold:
Farm Name: CA
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: 2` 1
Facility Contact:f
Onsite Representatice:T . t
Certified Operator: l I)irl L��1! 10�i
Location of Farm:
e-S
County:
Pho a No: e� ollA
tonFax334.66
,,.
Integrator: Cn V r- u 1
Operator Certification Number: 111�K)•-714
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®0 12R` - Longitude — -,-* ®• DM -
Design Current
Swine Canacitr Ponulatian
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
01
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Fecdcr
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ iloars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acity Po ulativn Cattle Ca acily Population
❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-INairy
❑ Other
Total Design CapacityQ�
Total SSLW
Num her of lagoons ® -Is ubsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area JEI.Sprzy Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid 'Craps ® 10 No I.ic uid Waste Nlana emcnI S►stem
Diseharzes $c Stream Imnactti
1. Is any discharge obsen•ed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. I1'dischargc is observed, was the conveyance man-made'?
b• lfdischarge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. II'd ischarge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Docti discharge bypass a lagoon system? (I Dyes, notify DWQ)
?. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Wntcrs of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & 'I'reatment �{
4• Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? YJ Spillway
I ' Stnicti l Structure ? C.+ _ Stru u c 3 • Stntcture 4 Structure 5
Idcnlifier;l S�
Freeboard (inches):
05/03/01
10
l�
❑ Yes tgNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
Structure G
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie'trees, severe erosion. ❑Yes No
seepage. etc.)
6, Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed andbr managed through a waste management or
closure plan? y El Yes No
(If an►• of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat. notify D1i'Q)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes o
S. Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovcment? Yes ❑ No
9. Do an}' stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes o
Waste ; nplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancciimprovement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload El Yes �o
12. Crop type
i Do the receiving cr s differ witk those de noted th Cenifie mal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ YesIN,
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application" ❑ Yeso
b) Does the faciiin• need a wettable acre determination? ElYeso
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ElYeso
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ElYesNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ANO
Rettuired Records S Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage &: General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes A No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Cen• ed Ani a] Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe1'<VUP. checklists, design. maps. etc.) Zrnple
Yes No
19. Does record keeping need imwasteprovement? (ie' irrigation. free card, analysts &c 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 faciiin• fail to have a activeiy certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
27. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oe' discharge. freeboard problems. 01,•er application) ❑ Yes4No
No
2's. Did Reviewer:lnspector :ail re discuss review;inspection with on -site representari� e? ❑ Yes
24. Does facility require a folio%' -up Visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o
25. Were any additional problems rioted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AIVCIAP? ❑ Yes 5eNo
No violations or deficiencies µere noted during this visit. You wiII receive no further correspondence about this ❑isit.
.Y" �!•1:.1�"•-. �: _ .. .. �..-_-" ". y�1 [',k`"•.; •L�5'"'�1SFY�..:. �,..+aK.3:.1Y �.:+ aVr "+N.:L-•'4Ya: •.,. ...•,)'.4'.">-1.-:i'J"'�
Comments {refs; to question #j:' Eip]ain siiy'YES ans�+efs andlur nn} r[commendatioas ar":try
er cammenis.kIlse
drawings of facility to better explain situations. (6se additional pages as necessai_v). Copv� ❑Final Notes
Lield
�. �f
Reviewer/Inspector ector Name
+
Date:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
05103101 L J t v Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
QL]or 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 cover?
�q. w.Qe�,� �?o�
Ae - 4Lje" ? /v- 2-
ack03 &LAo no,
7/(P/6-� —
�/=o.sl �rz = a.7
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes
❑ YcsNn
❑ Yes Njr&o
❑ Yes No
0.5103101

Assistance Site Visit
O Di1Wn of Soil and Water Conservationmw
*Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 75 - i 1 Date: 116103 Time: 15:15 1 Time On Farm: WSRO
Farm Name Jester Ridge Farm County Randolph Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 1248 Wright Count Road Ramseur NC 27316
Onsite
Representative Brent Jester
TY22 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
Integrator N G Purvis Farms, Inc.
Purpose Of Visit
Q Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaintllocal referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
El Wean
to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2200
2osa
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL gUESTIONS:
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?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees.
❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
a. 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 Large
Level (Inches) 12 15 12
CROP TYPES Fescue- raze Common Bermuda
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/ 10/03

a
n
Facility Number 76 - 11 Date:
4/16103
PARAMETER
0 Na assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
El
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
011. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
Cl
❑
®13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30. 21-11.0200
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
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. Organixelcomputerixation of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Latelmissing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
Cl
❑
® 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
Cl
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
Cl
Cl
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38, Structure Needs Improvement
®
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
®
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
❑ Other...
43. Irrigation system designlinstallation
El
El
Date'
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
El
El
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
Re-drilled pastures to fescue and wheat.
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
El3
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. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/1 Q103

Facility Number 76 - 11 Date: 4/16/03
(COMMENTS:
Mr. Jester contacted Melissa Rosebrock on 4/09/03 to report lagoon levels. A 30 day PoA was done on 4111/03 for lagoon
2 and #3.
Need to re -seed the dam between lagoon 1 &2 and backside of lagoon # 2.
Seepage noted at #1 house. Recommend repairs be made to cracks.
Need to mow vegetation around all houses. The lower course of cinder blocks and foundation are not visible and if
Lepage were present it could persist unnoticed. Flush pipes need repairs.
Over -seeded Bermuda with fescue. Will either add Bermuda to CAWMP or disk up pasture and re -seed in the Fall.
Has covers for the flush tanks, but they are not in place.
Soil analysis dated 2-24-03. Waste analysis dated 3-20-03.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST 16. Barton Roberson
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 7125103 Entered By: IRocky Durham
'i
03/ 10/03

r;
(vision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency `
(Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason ter Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
),It(, nl' Vkit: t3lZtRUt)Z Time: 1ZDQ -
Facilil►• Number 11
Q Not Operational Q lteluH' 'I'hrr+huld
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered []ate Last Operated or.lho►e'1'hrc•shnld: .........................
Farm Name: J=Ur..badge.Urut............................................................I.......................... Count►•: FAjXdulRlx......................................... !'!'SRQ........
f)µncr Nume:.i�nt�tllbRa.l�stsuti................. jr5jcr ........................................................... Phone No: [3J6a.82.,-g7. ............................... •......................
Mailing Address: C1 11.GRtAntlry.�iQAf� .......................................................... 1jawsrMr-M..........................................
��J.��.....
Facilitv Contact: ArKHl.JCS(er.................................................... 'i'itle:................................................................ Phone No: 3�.&66'I,.�t1S.l�........................
Onsite Representative: ti.regltJlCstex.......... ...................... ...... ..................... .... Integrator: N..S'a..Ptuxis.FArtTaS,.Intc......................
................
Certified Operator:J.t)lq;jttlQ.tx.11i....... .................. Jg,$tern.........--•-••---.....---....--•-••----••-•--• Operator Certification Number:18A7.4 .............................
Location of Farm:
miles N. of ramseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4110 mile to Tan House Red roof on left see sign I
Brent Jester and Purvis Farms.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 46 3[) Longitude 7s 35 • 47 ••
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2200
2050
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 1 ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,2U0
Total SSLW 297,000
Number of Lagoons �' .J ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagimm Area IN Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste ,Management System —71
DiwharLcs - Stream l ) pact
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. It' discharge is ohscrved. was the con�'cy,inrc man-made'.' ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? I If yes. notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, whai is the eslimwed flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il'yes. nuiify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge From any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts to potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Watee Collection & Tr4;itrncrit
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure i Structure 6
ldcatiIier: ...... Upper.stage..... ..... I.rawerst,ap..... ..... .Maita Lar e................. ..........
Frectx)ard (inches)- 12 24 60
051U 3101 Continued

Facility Number., 76-11 Dale cif' 1 w.pectinn 8/21/2002
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 maintenancelimprovement?
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 ntaintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ® PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
I2. Crop type
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)'? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
I:euuir�d_Itecurds_2�_I}r�cuments
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
❑ Yes IN No
[:]Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes [:]No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit,
Comments {refer to question #): Explain any YF.S answers andlor any recommendations o. any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
8. Flush pipes have cracks and some are lose at entrance to houses, causing waste to leak out. Need to repair cracks in walls of houses
by next inspection or will be an NOV.,
_
l,l. Due to the unusplly high nitrogenL11eI in the lower stage lagoon, several fields were over their allowable I'AN of 170:
rJo
H7=220.5 4/27/02;1H8=176.4 4l27/t72=175.04/23/02
15. Fescue field with bermuda is to be tilled up this year and re -seeded with fescue. ?J
18. Need to obtain insect, odor, and mortality checklists for CAWMP since these were missing.
19. Freeboard needs to be recorded weekly per permit. Operator was recording monthly,
19. February 2002 applications were outside of the 60,-daywindow for the waste analysis.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis. nsebrnck�
ReviewerlInspector Signature: Date:
05103101 1 v Continued

l acility Number: 76-11 I } I' I mlx rt inu 812112[102
im r Ititiut•y
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 cover?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Additional Comments and/orDrawings; L'f-
19. Still need to obtain 2002 soil analyses.
25. H-3 is in fescue hay while the CAWMP only lists fescue pasture as the receiving crop. Need to add this to the narrative.
25. Rendering still needs to be added as an option to the CAWMP mortality checklist.
02 waste analyses:
lbs. NI1000 gal. in the main lagoon and 29.4 lbs. NI1000 gal in the lower stage lagoon.
J
0.5103101

Title:
Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil snd Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit �]G mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Cp Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
hate 01 ►visit:
Facilit►• Number
Permitted Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name: I
O►vner Name. _ TD n a.A on _R
. _ . I �. , - I n . I d
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
0
Date Last Operated r Above Threshold:
County:
Phone,' �,_J[D_ ❑O� Y_ ! �� �.
tr
PhoneNo.,3,3& - ,6 + - q6 CSY
Integrator: 1`-' �l r Fa r 1J
Operator Certification lumber: v
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Shine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
I
Layer
DairFeederto
Finish
(}
❑ Non -Laver
F tion-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
Z
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
❑ goats
,tiumber of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ 5 rag Field Area
Bolding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Li uid Waste Management System '
Dkeharges 6: Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated f1mv in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system" (If yes, notify DWQ)
1 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:'
XN'aste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
Struct 1 Structure ? cture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ,
Freeboard (inches):
U51�3/t71
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ ti'es No
Structure 6
Continued

Facilit►• ,Number: — Bate of Inspection a�
5. Arc there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑YesNo
seepage. etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes*10
(lf anyoTquestivns 4-6 was answered yes. and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
i. Do any of the structures need maintenanceiimprovement? ❑ Yes ;KNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? 1A Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovemerit? ❑ Yes KNo
11. is there evidence of Jover pplication? Excessive Ponding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload X 1'es
12. Crop type4NO
13. Do the receiving cro differ with those designat in the citified Animal V4'aste Management Plan (CAWMP}? ❑ Yes No
14a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
b] Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ElYes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
15. Does the recciving crop need improvement? � Yes ❑ No
16, is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes10
Reduired liecords_& Documents `l
17. Fail to It .•e Certificate of Covera & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
18. Does faci ' it to V al mponents of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel L� hecklis de gn, m ps, etc.] Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel 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. Fait to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes IXNo
23. Did Review•erllrispector fail to discuss review inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes *o
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes VNo
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.
Comments (refer to question 4): Explain anv YES answers and/or any recommendations or a v a er comments.
Lice drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)- Field Copp ❑ Final Notes
MAU
r $ 0A t
It". 14�QH
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Revie►yerllnspector Signature:
Date:
05103101
Continuer!

Faciiih Number: 1)ate of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ �,CS
N�No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond -vith no agitation'
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ )'cs
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:'
❑ S'cs
�No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems ,vith the Ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts. missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc.)
❑ I'es
\o
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
El )'es
^ No
32,
Do the Push tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover''
❑ )'es
XN 0
AdditinnaI Comments andfor 1)rassings:
1
� 1 • I /I i
S/a%a
A -ad V 44-z-1 a-,x�-b
41,027J�
1a� oZa �IoP �
y/ a3/oa I 70
a a�_SQ�Qcc�i
I7ln. �
c�wn�
05/03/01

I { ision of Water Quality
L Seision of Soil and Water Conservation
a Other Agency
Type of Visit ❑ Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review ❑ Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ❑ Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
IT,ile oil' 1'itiil: 12J612nn1 'ri,ur; =a3tl
Facility Number 7Ci 11
Q Not Operational ❑ llelwo- Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3Condifionally Cerlifiird [3Registered
Harm Name: Jvs#s;r:.Midi:t~..l:irrlrll......................................................................................
Owner Name: JAIIMIIRAI.Ii>1CCf�L.................. Rtiter. ...... .........................................
............
Mailing Address: ��,4#.1'xis;ktt.[tl�glxy..113�0,�i3...........................................................
Facility Contact:Rxcsl.t.RstCr.................... ...Title:
I)ate bast Operated or AboveThreshold:
Count•: R;Atjd[!lpjX.............................
Phone No: {3 61,.2.4.-,4,74,6........................................................
&kllj,Nw r...,N.0 ........................................................ 2U.1.0 ..............
Phone No:33,0�66,9,40,5,,l3........................
Onsite Representative Integrator: . i�.r,►.►at..[enter�................................................................................ � ... ....ur:k rs...axrt�s,. ►�t:,...................... ...............
Certified0perator:J.tria;Ltbtt)m..0.......................... .leS.tCx.................... ............... .............. Operator Certification Number:.l.$.7..4
Location of Farm:
1 miles N. of ramseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 41141 mile to Tan [louse Red roof on left see sign I �
Brent •fester and Purvis Farms.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 46 ° 3[I .. longitude 79 • 3$ 1 47
Design Current
Swine Canaritv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2200
1100
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑Gilts
❑ Boars
Ilcsign Current I)esign Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ I)airy
❑ Non -Layer I I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,200
Total SSL W 297,00=0
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I.ag... n Area IN.Sprav Fie k= Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management Svstent
Discharges & Strean Impacts
1 • Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originaled at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. [I'discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. ]f discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. 11' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge hypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify I)WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan 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 Colly Ilion & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
[dentiiicr: ......[.IpiPCr.stag,e...... ....JA1Wcr.sWga......................................
......................................................................
Freeboard [inches]: h 21 66
0510.3101 O J-7T13 Continued

Facility Number: 76-11 I};rtk �I' Insprrtiun 12J612U[ll
5.
Are there any iturnediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there Structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
El Yes
®N❑
[If any' of (luestions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures neck] maintenance/improverrtent'?
® Yes
❑ No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvernent?
❑ Yes
® No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Was Ir-APulicotum
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
It.
Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWNIP)?
® 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) 'Phis facility is pended for a wettable acre determination'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
IN Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
c uired Words & Docurnyints
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 Managerent 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
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no Further correspondence about this Visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YFS answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. [use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®FinaE Notes
7. Need to re -seed and establish vegetation on dam of lower lagoon. Need to keep cattle off of the dam, also.
_
8. Suggest putting cap on re -charge pipe at house #1.
13. Need to also include hay as option in CAWMP for'1'-4678 F-3 (Hydrant 3) since operator is using; this area for fescue hay and
pasture.
14. Irrigation design is dated 7/14/98 by Dr. Ronald Sneed. Was based on effective acres.
15. T-4678 F-2 (Hydrants 4-8) are partially in bermuda while CAWMP lists the field as fescue. Need to either control bermuda or or
possibly change CAWMP and not apply during winter months unless overseeded.
19. Need to be sure and adhere to 60 day waste analysis window and also record the year not just day/month) of application events.
Review•erAnspector Name 14'Ieli • Rosebroclr
ReviewerAuspector Signature:' /2Date:
05103101 } ► Conri►rucd

Facility Number: 7fi_11 D* ln"pectiioil 12JC�J2tlg1
Qdow
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
29.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
rends, building Structure, anchor 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
d d ittona ,ominents!an or.'ra►+tn rs•=
27. Operator is now taking mortality to rendering facility. Need to have technical specialist initial and date this addition in �►
CAWMP.
0.5/03/01

M
Division ofWd
d,Water,Cnnscrvation =.Operation Re�i • °: "y' ' s =°.I.'rI.
Ni4
0 Division of . Water Conservation - Compliance Ins on r+ {.. a{t.r ,� +�:'t e:1;'wvasFt
M Division of,Waier Qualit}+ -Compliance Inspection `z ► , , �r. ; '::..;gar' rs :s. �,.5, �•,,
f . {, r
..
�7 i 0 Other Agency - ❑ eration Review;` `+'r' .,' :•. ,i.'.r ,*,°" .•'° • �'� "x": '§ `r, a" '.' f' -r it -�.
jQ Routine Q Complaint 0 follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DS%VC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time or Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted Certified [] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated: .......................... 0.
Farm Name: -....... l.G � �r....... � �....... � m. .... County. �n�.Q..�....................................
[)caner Name:....Ion & 'PJ ................. Phone No... . 3 ...............:...`3!. .1r1.........................
Facility Contact: ... ¢ .� .....1 } ,St `p ................ Title: ............... .._........................................... Phone
Latitude I ) _S • 1 4 In ' E 1 D f11 Longitude L-4 • 13 S7` 1 HI -
Design Current-
Design Current
Design " Current
$wine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JEJ Layer I
❑ Dairy
ceder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wcan
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design: Capacity
2 C)
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I.aeoon Area ❑Spray Field Area Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps r ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System ,
Discharges fir Stream lmaactti
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNO
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 tlic State? (If ycs, nutil'y DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ Na
C. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Dues 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 ANo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes XNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes X No
Structure l ` Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
D
Identifier: V P per^- � w&-r Mo lrrj
I
rceho:ard (incites): 111 .......................................................................
t i edi• th o to y the u sc d? sev s n, e
seeps e[c-
3123199 Continued on back

Facility Number: — . 0 Date of inspection 0
�. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? Oe/ trees, severe erosion, [] Yes > No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes � Na
(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? ❑ Yeso
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes Al�o
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes W
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes X<0
12. Crop type Au_ A
13. Do the receiving kvs differ with those AignatedA the Certified 4imal 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'?
XYes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Required Records &_Documcnts
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
XNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
XYcs
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
Na
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
9No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
9010
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[Yes
No
' Yipl'a�igr>js.o�- 1fllcwnpie-5 -V . be jli0f ft irig th}s:visit; YQ1j) wild •eeeiye Ito fu>�tb
correspondence: a Out, this :visit..: :
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other. comments.
U drawings of Facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): 'S
U4. 7 1 ��
AOA��
Reviewer/Inspector Name IVI • 1
Reviewer/inspector Signature: A 4 0 MA.4_ VAJVJ h A7 Date: 1,2101016L 5100

Facility Number: MTT71 I* liaspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below IQ Xe&—ZjSp�
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Ago
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes J 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
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? 9 Yes ^ No
Add*ional Comments and/or Drawing's: r ' ... _ .i r._ + n• . i .. t K
1
410
��.-2:Rr W�P-Re�cEw /leerLz�)
esutuv�Pre�w.�fe� �J cJu�'v�m.�7�-vJ
ca�ne,.�

Revised April IS, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number _7� - 1
Farm Name:. 21�_`rT. Fonyj
On -Site Representative: f..�
Operation is flagged for a wettable
acre determination due to failure of
Part 11 eligibility item(s) FT F2 F3 F4
lnspectorlReviewe r's Name: r i .n? br.C�_._-� Operation not. required to secure DNA
determination at this time based on
Date of site visit: lb exemption El E2 E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP: f a '- U Operation pended for wettable acre
determination based on PT P2 P3
Annual farm PAN deficit:
s /�,�
Irrigation System(s) - circle : 1. hard -hose traveler; 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
^. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wlportable pipe;
5. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system w/portable pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part 1 exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, inClllUd.inc map depicting %ve('Llable acres, is complete
and stoned by an I or Pm. 4Jy s CN�r L��L I 4fyl �I C��l1 �J l
E2 Adequate D; and ❑,ID, irrigation operating parameter sheets, incibding map
depicting eve table acres, is complete and signed by an l or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
V.IelllEbie acres, is complete ?nd signed by a 1'�'UP.
i5:� ru}e exempti•on as verified in Par< I11. (N0 T E: 75 as exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fait the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eliaibility
checkiis , Par II - F 1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part Ill].
PART II. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of informaiionlmap.
F 3 Obvious field limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
bunerlsetback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 750/0 of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part Ill.

ME
i. �.. livision of Water Quality
Nvision of Soil abd Writer Conservation „
i -Q q(ber` Agency ,
s
r
e of Visit Q C__ompliance Inspection Aeration Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
son for Visit (,Yl=toutine n Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification D Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Nurnhivr halDateof 4 isil•
I/ _ —�/
'Plane•:
'F '_iC5 AI
Printed mi.10/26/2000
Q Nnl Operational Q Belo►► "Hire%hold
[] Perrnitted ❑ Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered
Date Last Operated or Aho►e Threshold : ................. ....
]t:trrtt N::nle ......� �. 5 T -5,R I3 �� �clt'l
..................j...................
(:natal►•• '+ti :'/..................................
f'
Owner Name: .. 1.f�............. -F,l[3ni..........4�.��-/�r+ �� 7C�i
!--.......... ....... �j 46
>r�ti �- =Vie.:...-.: ..................... �'—�.....:..:..... .-..-.....'
Facility Contact: ............. S I t f� .... `f'itle J n, Phone No:..3 6
f
Mailing Address:..�a. q��.........t� l�f!.. Ai..-...-.C;�..�N.-....��...-..��?.�.�Y:....
...�......A. c............ ��� �.��.�.�'.....................-...
❑nsite Hepresealati►'e: ...
............�.....r.....................
Integrator•.....v. .�.',................... ............
Certified [Jcralur:................`...............r ...... .....
Oval- or Certilwation Number:....�,.��.r��..?. .-.......
Location of F-arm:
kce- w.� -4 A2v/ FV 4i le3 J?Rrrt6nL1t, l rif4 J n,�, r� nra
I`
fn d . 4- Itti f o T-A-tj h Cr cR � e- IJ �• / as
U.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry [I Cattle ❑ Horse l.:arila>cic •
��I Longitude 7T] DTI S�1
Design Current
Swine C:anacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to feeder
❑ feeder to Finish—
e
barrow to Wean
�D
❑ barrow to Fceder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po elation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Nun -hairy
❑ Olhcr'
Total Design Capacity '72 0 0
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 3 ❑ Sultsurface Drains Present ❑ 1•agoon Areu JE1 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I JE1 No Liquid %Valle ,Llanagetnc.nt SVstem
Discharges & Stream ltnfracts
I. Is any discharge ohscrved from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes\1 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. It' disch.lrge is ohscl-vcd, was lhr conveyance Inall-Ill'ade? ❑Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is observed, dill it reach Water of (lie State? (If }'es, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. II'discharge is obscrvcd, what is the estimated flow in galhnirl?
d, Does (Iischrarge 1lypasti a lagoon system r (II yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 No
2. Is there evidence of'past discharge from ar,v Dart of the operation? El`
Yes 2 No
:3. Were there any adverse impacts nr i%otenlial adverse impacts to the Wauns of the State ether than from a discharge`? ❑ Yes '�O Nn
Nyamc: Colleclion R `I'rcalwc•1;
4, Is storage capac• [,, O'iccboard plus storm slcrragcl !c=s Than adequate? - ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes n
SIrIICItIrC, i S III nLallrtl 2 Structwe a Structure 4 Structure 5 SIrtIL-IUN 6
ulenlificl: .` .................lf?k:re?r............•... 4t p.....................................-..........-. 1-1— .........-..-............ ...... -.......... -..........
.,......
�.r.
:'rccttcrsrtl (inches):
5/00 (.*nn i► rred on back

Facility Number: 2(- r Date of Ills pectiora �Je Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any imtried ialc threats to the egrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Ycs\] No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Ye'su No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify I]WQ)
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/impromnent?
❑ Yes 'Ile No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes t No
W-mic. Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement'?
El Yes No
11. Is [here evidence of over application? ❑ 1-xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes\10 No
12. Crop type
13, ❑o 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 Iand application?
❑ Yes 'IQ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes 10 No
c) • liis f tciliIy is pendccl for a wettable acre determination'?
❑ Yes No
15. does the receiving crop need improvement?
Cl YesNQ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
Required Records & Documents
17. FaiI to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes\U No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Ccrtified Animal Waslc Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes\ul No
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, reaps, etc.)
19• Does record keeping need improvement'' (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis cot soil sample reports)
❑ yes No
20. Is lac:iIity not in compliance with any applicahle setback criteria in eflcc:t at the [irate of design?
❑ Yes\16 Na
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Ycs\ ] No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, free hoard problems, over appl irrtion) ❑ Yes\] No
23. Did Reviewer/Irispector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Ye� 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? ❑ Ye\SU No
J1U ykvlatita> s'o ft. ticiehi ies r►c�r n�rtetj• itur•'tlii; 3his;visit; • Y;oi>F wilt i-eeeiye fin fu1411t. ;
C rres• oridence: about: this :visit. • .. • .. .
Comments (refer to question #}: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any .other enmments. n
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ; , i•+ s y;.
r.
Reviewer/[nspeclor Name /
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: — 5/00

Facility Number: ate nl' ln--peclion 1— rl U/ Primer! on: 10/26/2000
{blur Issor•x 0
-,26—Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [�`YCs ❑ N❑
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Arc there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Ycs�] No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (ix, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ YcS\11G1 No
roads, building structure, and/or puhlic property)
29, Is the land application Spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes\9 No
30. Were any major• maintenance prohlems with the ventilation Fan(s) rioted'? (i.e. broken fan hells, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes Nc�
3 L Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Ycs%-� No
K Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pemtancri0ernporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Oddlitional Comments an orDrawings:
VIM
1� �
� e,3 �t �.r
� 5
� S L...�
C�► S T �.
� GI Y1 r � v . 5 eA
�SwCD
-�-�
��� �G ,�
Y. w
. to �J-
ROO

r.
vision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review D Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ©Routine ❑ Complaint d Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Ilatc ul' Vkil: 11RIi12{lull I'imc; {}925 Printed ion: 11/28/2000
I't�cility Numl�cr• 76 l I
Q Not Operational Q Iielow-'ThrL%hold
13 Permilled ® Certified [3 Conditional]%, Certified 0 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: ••--•••••--••••- •-• -
FarmName: .............................. ....... .................................... I ..... ........ County: RAtxdWPIX.......... .......................... ..... �Vsg[1.........
Owner Name:J.QR;lXZl.fttA.jjT.4:ltt...................1.f S1[ 1........................................................... Phony: No:
Facility Contact: BiAni.tic.Ntcr.....................................................Ville:................................................................ Phone No: ;i fi�fr sl ..s s ll...............
Mailing Address: 12��.��'.!<its;fat..�.UlxlttlCy:.4�l7�sl................................
Onsite Representative:t�.Cs>a1.1c�.t�X................................................................................. Integrator:N.�e..P,.u.�►.'i�..k.itlC�k5.,.11�1..................... ....... ........
..
Certified [lpersttor:,J.slln tklifn ...............................14st
,jr ............................... ....... ....... ... Operator Certification Number-I.M.74 .............................
Location of Farm:
4 miles N. of rainseur of Hwy. 49 turn right on Wright Country Rd. and go 4110 mile to Tan House Fled roof on left see sign I �
Brent ,Icster and Purvis Farms.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse latitude 3S • 4C� 301. longitude 79 • 3S 4711
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
2100
❑ I -arrow to Wean
1450
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulalian Cattle
Capacity population
ulution
IN I.ayer F❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,450
Total SSLW 627,85Q
Number of lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I.agnon Arcs ®tipra► Field area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps JCI No liquid Waste Management Sytitem
Discharges _&- Strean Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any hart of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is ❑bsenred. was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water ofthe State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in Val/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Il' 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 Stricture fi
Identifier: .... ........ 1.lppa......... ....Lrasi ex.4pri.WAr.}:i.............. N-lain..... ....... .................. .................. ........ ............ ................ ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 6 12 60
5/00 1 o 4) i , _ Continued rirr hark

EFacili,v Number: 76-11 Date n1' Inspeeliun l 112812[1Q[I Printed un: 11/28/2000
. 5. Are there any immediate threats to the 0.6ty of any of the structures observed? lie/ tre0evere erosion, ❑ Yeti ® 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 d-f was answered yes, and the situation polies an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D%VQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management systern other than waste structures require rnaintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ® Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
It. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
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 n wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pcnded for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
lb. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipmem?
Ry(mired-Records,K, 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? lie/ 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 so have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit'y
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss rcviewlinspection with on -site representative'!
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problem,, rioted which cause noncompliance cif the Certified AWMP?
Nei latiiins;oi' &ficieneic5•were'noted durin�;•thi's ►Visit. ;Y(')u'- n receive -no further .
c4resp6ndcnce abi}uf this .visit. • ..
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yeti ® No
❑ Yeti ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yeti ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yeti ® No
1. Lower stage lagoon waste is pumped by underground pipe to third "holding lagoon." Irrigation takes place from third lagoon.
pper and lower lagoons can he pumped and haled if needed.
1. Operator plans not replacing upper stage pipe with 8 inch pipe.
1. Need marker in lower lagoon. Main lagoon needs top of dam added once permitted.
13. 'Tract 3809 fields 2 and 3 are listed as fescue pasture in the WUP. Operator has fescue hay there. Need to revise WUP.
15. Continua effiartti to establish fescue on field # I . May want to apply more iirne as p11 was 5.0.
19. Aug. and Sept, waste applications did not have waste sample taken within 60 days.
r.1
Re►iewer/Inspector Name 11
Reviewer/Inspector
Date: _. 51U11

Facility Number: 76-11 Iw lnspertimi I 11128121111{} Printed on: 11/28/2000
is
llwrlstit
26.
Does the discharge pile 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 (if wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring ►•egetation, 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 fans} 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
AddifitinaPCornments and/or . rawings:
5/00

q1�m
rvision of Water [duality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
IType of Visit 4YCompliance Inspection a Operation Review D Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit ()�Woutine () Complaint Q Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number flute of Visit: Time. � 1'f'iuted an. 7/21/2000
Q Not Operational Q Below• Threshold
0 Permitted XCertified Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
�, r� Y g I):tte Last Operated orAbove Threshold: .........................
Farrn Name: ��6 ..-� V1 ., p- FQf .. C'ounty:.,, rld.Q..l...................................
Owner Name: ........ —,!.��r.�.'..!..........�.... _l.�s�P�f'............. Phone No: ............... (.
1 .� .. ..a . r aS8'
Facility Contact: .....�.rQl'� !..... .....Title Phone No: a� •�
U
Mailing Address: ....�..�.�...t�..... .........a..7,3.��►...
Onsite Representative: �ccpi ... . lntcgrator: + V..(�.....ev rv.1jr..........................................
Certified [lperatur:F�1 .. Operator Certification Number:........... 4.............................
Location of Farm:
EaM- ❑m5eur. or oil Owl 9` Jh B o rIq 06 U�`'� W.
rlr fY) on 1 e-� A . V lV,
W Ina ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle []Horse Latitude ©• L 66 Longitude �• 1 q7 "
:,. Swine
Design Current
r2narity Pnmillatinn
Wean to Feeder
ceder to Finish
g
Q
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
IB
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
oars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity a fl Q
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag--- Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream lmpactti
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes 4No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is ohser■ed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the Stale? (11' yes, notify ]7WQ} ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. II' clischarge is ohserved. what is the estimaled flaw in galftnin?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan 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 C;ollrction & Treatnivril
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'' h Spillway Epp-e4- On It& ❑ Yes No
ytrUCLUrC 1 Structure 2 Struc ure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identifier: l dit 7 r j . l� .......... I.......................
tl If
Freeboard (inches):
SIOU Cemlinued on back

Facility Number: '� llatr t,f lusprc lion 9 printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate. threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes j�o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes �o
(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?
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?
Waste Arrnlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
Is there evidence or over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
cane- C4
13. Do the receiving crops differ wiNthose designated inithe Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
h) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
0 17his facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a luck of 'adequate waste application equipment?
Required Rvcords & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? +�A
19. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, frechoard, 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. frechoard problems, over application)
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Dtx:s facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
. ' l'Na yinla> k)0s'oV. ftficj6nde9 -►here gated- dO-eirig 4hls'visit; - Y:ojt :'.ill -t. &6*6 dd futft • . • .
,Torres oricienC . ahOU .this visit. ............ .
)� Yes .�No
❑ Yes NINO
)RKyes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes )No
A
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
,wYcs ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
-El Yes B-No
❑ Yes � No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
ElYes No
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes �NO
❑ Yes 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):
4q. was+e_ 15 purytpeJ • bi u nd�
� 1 p � � �d l Win " i s r n ,
�1 � V
P late 4-tm ' � rd I OJL 00r1 U peg- 11- [a vw o-,r ".-Va e- /Q ccu
�CLVI � p u �J N h O. O (e r� • t � )Ieede d .
rl5 t e.el. ,4 re 5 eff) �--seue -1, Id - 3 & io r �a a at Zw5t—
Reviewer/Inspector Name
b
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:v-�YJ 1 f e AAA_ [1-1 .,1❑ -Ik A7 Y � Date: f [ f ��$� [}� 5�Jp
a�

Facility Number: — I + i)*1' Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor lsswo%
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the st( c pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -�fcs—�Io
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? OM 1 + o?tY]
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 0 No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with t}te 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 XNO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? T [D Xc&-4;Wo
/51ar+ - p ddam max Ve-r Iri5la Iced
�►' e,'rIeA-N Cj Chi o rl P do q- M a1►,1 femr
Plan �Ja�) due `t ,tee Ka,r fea_ by &kl� Mid
a a oo ��..err -�o �+ n 1t5 or Fri rro u) q o b-�-,,Qn .
7- Need �Vlar �- t �'1 (f 6 ��,- a an 3 NO-J5 14 0-
dam o1
7. n5 nn r-q U pP�Lr 5 ; Pe
(o/ 1 l P � .
V 0 •` ,s - e5 i 1 e ue [ �
to p p ►� m + m e Cp H .s.
+j are
to
e hoOe-
i�QSfe 5"1
0
A
SAW

]Visiari-of=Siiil:lllCl 14' iter Cruise"r.v:itifiii:-.[)frer:iti view
Eli:iiiiif Water -,on sei'vatrnn:-:Lornplia . InsjiectiotV.(
�+]illivislwlCof�lVsit�r. ['1u:ility - Coni�'rli:ri]ce Irrspcctioil,r ry
Z. rLwA
[] CltliLA., ,gcric "Ojicrlrtifiri F; cvicw t- -'11
L❑ routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Voflo►►'-tit, of DS1VC review iQfOrtminn_Saledi -
_ Facility tiuliiher T_
Dote of lnstwetior] r3VqUFaiOffice
•F'in,e or lntitiection �'� 24 hr. {lih:fnin}
❑ Permitted 911!'erlified ❑ Conditionally
�Certified ❑ Regislered ❑ Not O eratinn:ll Date Last Operated:
F:irrli 11}:ifrie:S.r.... '!.`........ F:rn"...... .... (:]itnty:.....1+4��j�.l.....................................
......... f
t l weer ,Minic: •,••• xl CI 5' r Phone No: � ,� 7 •„ ••••,_ ,••••_ ••• .
Facility Contact .... �fG ^i"�`..��s.'��...................... .Vitle:..DWN�. �................................... Phone No: `�. ���........
•4
.-MailingAddress: � . •Jr•: �r �okxi�r� � I*? �kF C• �� 4r
J
/.-......... �...... ................. :.................. a�..................Irk................1....7,......................
pp � II• �
Ortsite Repi•csentalive: [3�C•+I�" ...I r ..�'L.......... ....... ..... ............ ..... ... IntcF;i•:itor:.�L:...�r� � l /FfA~`S
Certified Operator :......... % `�i/�.............C�f;�.'L Operator Certification lVurinccr:..l �..J...........
Location ol'I'arm:
La6lutle f J3 f•I � it Longitude ®■=' ,�`� 11
l3esiii =.r;°:`.Guirrerif
D'esigii Current ' Ilesigii Current
Swine
` ' "6 :-l...
Ca irit .'I-o ulatiori
Poultry
y
' Cattle '.
Ca a�ity Population Ca acit :- Po illation
❑ Wean to Feeder
I
JEJ Layer
to Finish
a00 %r7 U
❑Non -Layer
FEeedcr Non-I]airy
EEI
❑ Farrow to Wcan
❑ Other
:; •Y . -:r ..;,'. ,
''•'.i
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity;:.
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW,
'go
Nunilier of La goo
❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
❑Spray Field Area
Ilokling Potidsl,Solid;Traps-,;
❑ No Liquid Waste tNaiiagement System
Disci antes & Stream Inipacts
t•, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[Nf
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance inan-made!
❑ Yes
❑ Nc
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water firths State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ Nc
c. if fliscli:,rge is observed• what is (lie estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon sysicin•? (if yes, notify DWQ}
❑ Yes
❑ Nc
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
RK-C
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than frorn :[ discharge? ❑ Yes
�-
Waste (.'ollection & T)ratment
A. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus stofrn storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes
i
51ructure I Slruclure Structure 3 Structure, 4 Struc[tire 5
Structure 6
Idenlificr: WP e7,-,Iles- /4 a r ��in urc' ^F Fr►� .
1.................................................--............ 7...-...--................................-...... ..........................................
...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of -any of [tic structures ohservcd? (iel trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
seepage. etc.}
:3/2:3/91)
Currrie]ued an berth

,A Irucitity NtrtrtLer: r — f)aI a of I nspectinn
6. Are there structures oft -site whicOnot hroherly addressed andlor managed through a waste tnanagernent or
closure flan?
(If :+riy of rluesIions 4-6 was ans►vered yes, and the situation poses an
immedialc public It eaIIlt or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need rrztiintenance/irril)rovernent?
8. Does any part of the waste management sysicrtt other than waste structures require mairitenartcclirnprovctrterit'?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required max imttrn and rninitnutn liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste rkpfrlicalitm
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
I
M,,
❑ Yes
q4<
❑ Yes
Q_k
cs
❑ N
❑ Yes
Q'Pf
I]. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes UK
12, Crop type—
I3. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management ]'Ian (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes @-W
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑Yes tie
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre dcterm inalion? ❑ Yes M-I(
c)'I'his facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes uj.,- "K
15- Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. FaiI 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?
(icl 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. I3id 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?
{ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewedlnspector 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: a yiaTafie�riy:or iit?feie;l3ci. .. . . . . iIi>Fririg�i�is;visit: Yoir wits rec iye iio t`urt r
corxcs ondence- abaut ti><is .visit . ' ..... . . - ..... I .: .. .
, Ni'e:d5 �yaP j7f+%l�1I�C>✓fj �]
❑ Yes
[a-itfq'
Cl Yes
LO K
cs
❑ No
❑ Yes
Orso
❑ Yes
[;3 NU
❑ Yes
allo'_
❑ Yes
allo
❑ Yes
[-No
❑ Yes
GI -NO
❑ Yes
&Nd"
❑ Yes
ewo
A,
Revie,, ver/Inspector Name .
Re►'ieetiwer/lospector Signature-.
Elate:
'� r�

Facility Nurralier: — �1 � !]:ur nt' I�ashretian �';:,'��
Odor Issiws
26. Does the discharge pipe From (lie con finen=enI building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below 0. cs ❑ N
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond wills no agititlion?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'? ❑ Yes Q-N'
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during ]and ,application? (i.e, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes
roads, building structure, andlor public property)
29. 1s the land application spray system intake not located near ttae liquid surface of tltc lagoon? ❑ Yes
30. Were any major irutintcnance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or- broken fan blade(s), inoperable shulters, etc.) ❑ Yes [aM,
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fait to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes LWC
32. Do the flush tanks tack a submerged 1111 pipe or a perrnanentltemporary cover? Pes ❑ Nc
312 31

p Division of Soil Water Conservation - Operation Review
[ p 1)iyisio11 of Soil Voter Conservation - Compliance lnspectl,..
Division of Water (duality - Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
otoillc p Conk11 In1n1 p 1,o ors' -lip n1 1) WQ nlspertion 0 1•o omy-up n I)SNXI, revrr�v '0 l Yt 1rr-
P:lrilit} tinnlhrl, 11,IIc trf Inslirrlltln
I Ime'lf lusprrllon ® 2.4 hr. (himnin)
p Permitted p Certified M Conditionally Certified p Registered p Not 0Ilrrallnlla D;lte Lnsl Op[•raled:
F;11'111 iN:1111r:.1(Csker.Hi(igC.karlu........................................................ [ milt}: Randolph WSRO
0%N n c r INnInc.,fonat.htzln..13r;ent................. jc5ter•................. ...... ... ............. .............. -... Phone ,No:(336).824:4.7.46 .......................................................
F.16HIN' Contact: 11ren >,fester .....................................................Title: Owner ..... .......................................... 1'Iltrrre Nit: 33&.814n47.46— ..........
11:Iilin�Adrlrcss:.I.Z48..'1'.rigl>_t.Co.uuiry..Etnad ........................................................... Rains,ctlr..NC......................................................... MAW ............
011siI[' Ure.ItJ...1.Csty:r................................................................................. lil]LLI!i,;it(pt,:N,G,.J'tir.yis..I:,IrjaLi,.Lilc .....................................
cerIificd i)1Pt. r:rllir:dalt.uth,un.f3,............... ..... Jestcr..................... ............................ Illlrr':lt[II' [;[1'1i1i[';Itirlil Nombt-3-:1118.7.4 .............................
Location nl Far'rm
.ut1l I:s....0 .ralnscur„u ..:.w�:... .tlurlu.rag k.trn.. .rig z.. ourtir.►....'..... au ..g�..... - tot c.:t�t.- an.. u.usl;... c .ruu ..t2u. c ..s,cc.slf;ll:.. ♦.
Frrtti..l.eskc r..nr>d..f.'.itzxits..�arnta_...................................................
Design Curren(
Swine Capacity Population
❑ can to •cc er
❑ 'ee cr to ' II11S
❑ •arrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Furls
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer ❑ Dairy
❑ on- .ayer ❑ on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,450
Total SSLW 627,850
Number of lagoons
❑ - u isur ace
Drams
Present ❑
,ag(jon , rea ® ,lira► re t rea
(folding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
10 No Liquid Waste
I
auagerneut
.yslem
1)ischart!e, & SIr'eain Iniliacr,
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
l )ischar e oI•ijnalcd ;lt: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. I1'dischar,.e is ohserye 1. t[�as the Cmyevance loan -made•,
h. 11'disch;Ir c is tr W 1-v ed. did it reach WIler oI'the state:' ( II'ves. IitPtiVv I)WQI
c. II'riisehar�"e is rrhserved, whaI is the eslirllaIcd 11ow in uallmi11?
d. Does discharge bypass a lnL'ooll symcill'' (II'ves, moil"• i kVQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part ol'the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the .Waters of the State other than from a (Iischarge? ❑ Yes M No
11 ame Collection ,l' Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
struclurc I 511-11Cltlrc 2 SIruclurc 3 Siruclure 4 tilructurc
Ir enliti[•r: ............Upper............ ........... 1.,oty:er........... ............. Main .............
Freeboard 611ches): ..
....................................... I ............ 3........... I.....
sh ticulrC h
5. Are there any immediate threats to (lie integrity ol'any ofthe structures observed? (icl trees, severe erosion,
3123199 seepage, etc,)
p Yes ® No
Con limed (pit hack

Facility Number: 76-11 � I):,� lIsNIwi I I I P T 1
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
iinill ediate puhlie health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require in aintenail celitttprovement? p Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers ►with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ®No
W;i"lr Applicalioii
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenaricelitnprovernent? ❑ Yes ® No
I I. Is there evidence ol'over application? ❑ Excessive Portding ❑ PAN p Yes p No
12. Crop type Fescue (I lay)
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA W141P)•?
14. a) Does (lie facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) Does this facility lack adequate documentation to make a determination of adequate acreage?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
RV4111irr[k Itrrrrr(kti .\ I)IPC11111L-11IN
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Genera Permit readily available?
18, Dues the facility fa i I to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management flan readily available?
(ic/ 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 cri(eria in effect at the time ol'design?
2I. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional I)WQ of emergency situations as required by General Perm it?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems. over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Ducs facility require a foIIow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N .► ial�tiorts:nr. tlefirienc'res.►.t're'noted:duritag. this .►•isit.: luau: i►ill.rerei► a na further.:.:
ikii-6}►irgdcke. aKilut tJiis;►'isit: . :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® Nil
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes M No
p Yes ® Nil
p Yes ® Nn
p Yes ® No
Conrments (refer to question #): 'Explain auy YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comill ents.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
-acility in excellen shape. New field sites have been cleared and ready to be seeded. Additional acreage agreement for 66 required AL
"' DI', -SIGN CAPACITY HAS SEEN Cl IANGED TO 2200. T] I I S IS REFL EC E.D I CERTIFIED PLAN COMPLETED BY
ARRY GRAHAM, P.E.
Reviewer/Inspector Name W. Corey Basinger -
Revie►verllnspector Signature: Date:

1p,A � n : ❑ Division of Sail anWater Conservation ❑ 0ther Agen
,� Division of Water Quality
Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up of DWQ ins ection ❑ Follow-up of DSNVC review ❑ Other
Date of Inspection15 0
Facility Number l t
Tu121
ne of Inspection �40 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered pCertified 13 Applied for Permit ❑ Permitted j] Not O eration;il Date Last Operated:
Farm Nante:. ........F....
County ......................... .......................
OwnerName:....... .......................................................... Phone 4'- Q.................................
Facility Contact: ... B - .... ACT ...... Title:....f .�,lE ... �}...... Pltnne I\o:. ���'. 4-- 49-Al-
,Mailing Address:...... f 2 48 GLAZC. i Cou,j7-) y � ! S �"^ �` ............................................ Z� 3[.4.........
OnsiteRepresentative ........ ftg7 T ........ ......... ........... .......... rotegrater:... NkP 2v„!s.._i.4�c:............ ...............
Certified Operator:..... ... ...........':t:5T.......................................... Oltei-ator Certifiratiun Ntrmber:. 89-7-4 ...................
Location of Farm:
,...r^...!!f.� cr....:...� .......... �!�!f.Sr., d............:r7.�........�1.:?..l.q,�_-...P..•1...�.-.W.fn�;�..!�.... ..lr{f.'T.............�.�:�...�,[ll.......�1.. ............... �
...!rh..�`.r......Y'.... �.:...... 4............. ...r`t...!'!� Sr .......................................................
Latitude • ®6 i`f °' Longitude ®• 3S ` 5144
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
al"arrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gifts
❑ 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 z, Z as
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1. Holding Ponds- ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagtxtn Area IV Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
;enend
I. Are there any buffers that need maintcnancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
9No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�TNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
allo
b, if discharge is observed, dill it reach Surface Witter? (If yes. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
®-No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUn in?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? {I(yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
0 No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
2NO
4. Were there any adverse i ntpacts to (lie waters of the State other than froth a discharge?
❑ Yes
®'No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
)SXNo
ivai ntenan eclintprovc menu?
h. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design`?
❑ Yes
.5 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge!
❑ Yes
)�rNo
7/25/97

Facility Number: S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site wRch need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes e�l No
Structures (Lagoons.Holdin�; 'rnutti. Flush 1'tt.s. etc.1
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Stnicture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: LIP ...... .r
Freeboard (ft): M.4....[7..wed ...+eS�r...... �evr [ 3 .......................................
10. 1s 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 maintenancelimproventent?
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation posts
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level ntarkers?
Waste APPlicalion
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 ............ I ... f 2_,,5,,,, � e,
Structure 5
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 saune agency?
21, Did Reviewerllnspcctor fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities nit
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 noncomplicutce of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problents noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No.viol kions or deficiencies were notied-du' rin' i this'.visiL Yov;►vi11 i &6ve'no"f irthier
:�.•ct}rrespi>'ndei�cea�oittthis:visit:•:-:•. :::: :•:•.-:�.�:: .. :� •. :�:�:�... .�:-:: :�:•:�:.: -•
❑ Yes ONo
Structure; G
❑ Yes EX-S'o
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes GNo
❑ Yes 19No
❑ Yes ,f No
❑ Yes M'No
❑ Yes R"rqo
❑ Yes fi�No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes 'gNo
❑ Yes VRNO
❑ Yes IR No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #): =; Explain any'YES answers andloir ari recotnniendalions or.un other nmei ts:'. :" ...... ;
y�,. y
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (irse additiisru►i pages as necessary):
ra k.�Ge.L�►- A-�is t . �W e1 A +-jt.� �"¢-�-e ''icR+ti c 4tn.+.a_d
1-147
al"A
7/25/97
_
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

p Division nf' Soil'In titer Conservation p Other Agene
s, r
® Division of Water [duality
outine Q Complaint G o o►►'-up ot DWQ inspection p o ow -up o review 0 Miter
l7ate of Inspection j7—
I j }'acility Number �
Time of Inspection 24 hr. {hh:nun}
® Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit 11 Permitted 113 No( 1)eratinn.r Date Last Operated:
Farin Name: ,leste.lt.irlgt:.F ixtn......................................................................................... County: Randolph WSRO
Owner Name: Joiia.than ............................... Jcslcx,
Facility Contact: Rre aUcslr:r......................................................title: Owner,
Mailing Address: ................
Phone No: 9,10-814-3741a .............................
lt, izn.e u.r...NC..........
Phone No: 9..1ll:kiZ#- .1.7.5.......................
273.1 fa ..............
❑nsite Representative: lament..1cstcr................................................................................. lntcgrator:NV,.P..urxis........................ ................... ................... ...,
Certified ❑perator:.butt.ath.au.B.................. ..... - luster.................................................. Operator Certification Number: 188.7.4....... ......................
Location of Farm:
,ut cs. .. [t ,r.:�ruscutr..ia ..:.txy .. ..itat•u.xt tt.oa... .r:if; t.t.. p.uutrs'... ...ara .ga......tn.t i:..t:u.. �.tnr. nusi:.. r� .a:[ira ..ttiu. G .t.set:.s[l;rr... �
Eircui..l.[ stt r..;ancl..f.'.usi is..E:rratr.......................................................................................................................................................................................................�
Latitude �� ©c ©'° Longitude
esign ulirrellt
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feedertn Fi nist
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Barrow to Finish
p Gills
❑ Boars
Design (Arruill 1pusign urren
11oulti-y' Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
lj Layer ❑ Dalry
p Noll -Layer p on- airy
❑ other
Total Design Cal)acity 1,4
'rota[ s.LW627,S=
Numl}cr of Litl;oons 1 f lolling fonds
JE3, u Psur are
rams
11 resen
p
La goo n rea 0 S pray ie c rea
❑ N o Liquid. Waste
Managenoent
Sys em
1. Are there any buffers that need muintenancelimprovenicnt?
[]Yes
® No
2. Is any discharge observed front any part of the operation?
p Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray Field p Qtltcr
a. 1f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
[]Yes
®No
b, lf'discfinrgc is observed, slid it reach Surface Water? (If'yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in-allniin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (lf yes, not fy D WQ)
f7 Yes
® No
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Ycs
® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
m a intenanceli ntprovement?
G, is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
® No
7/25/97

act ity i m ]er: 76-_ 1 1
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
[]Yes
® No
'1
Structures La =oon5 11oldin a fonds. Flusl] Fits etc.
9. Is
storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
[]Yes
® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
G
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ............ 1-5,ft_........... ........... ..1A.ft............ ...............i.,#i............... ...................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the stnuctures?
❑ Yes
M No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
M No
12.
Do any of the structures need mainteiiancelitnprovenient?
p Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and (lie situation poses an
immediate public Health or environmental threat, notify 1)WQ)
13,
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
M No
Wwste Application
14,
Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ......... .............. F.esc=...................... ...................... ...................... ................... .................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated iii the Aninial Waste Management Phan (A WMP)?
❑ Yes
p No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
®No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Cl Yes
® No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
M No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
® No
21.
Did Revicwerllnspector tail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
® No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
For Certified or Permitted FaeiliIies Qtti
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
p Na
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 [lie Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
R.. w,vi r •ttions.or i riencies_►vere.nA)tet . uring t its visit:. You. ► i .receive no. urt ter .:.
V)0esfitinj1Me�'ajxjtit Mi�-0si1; . ; . : .:. : .:. : .:. .:. .:.:
Co tit tit citts (refer to gitesIion H): Explain tiny YES ajis►►'ers andlor any reconinien(Iation s or any otlier co tit ill eitIs.
Use dra►►•iitgs of facility to better ex1)laiit situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
16 - NRCSIS WC has all intormation-to prepare plan. Farm is on list for assistance in preparing plan.
23- 25 - Not certified yet.. Flope to have certified plan,by deadline.
** Mr. Jester has submitted all necessary information and data to NRCSISWC. Currently waiting on NRCSISWC
to complete the certified.plan. Operation is in good shape.
7/25/97 1_ .
Reviewer/inspector Name ICilrey° Bassin •r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: hate:

DSWC Animm eedlot Operation Review
BDWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
]routine ocomplaillit Q C?ther
Date of Inspection r
Facility tiunther
1'1111r• of I n5pecIion a 24 hr. (hh-.mm)
E3Registered D Certified © Applied for Permit O Permitted 113 Not Operational I Date Last Operaled:...
Farm ,Name �Q57� �roCQE �M t:ountv:...2,4"7oc Pry..................................................
........................................................................ r r...75 kv
(Ai \:true:D►�Ar1F-off......,.,........���.......... 1'Ittrne tio:....``]ra)....Zi'...............................
........ .............................
Faci[il►' Contact, ........................................................ ........... ........... .l'itle.....................
Mailing Address: { [� (,J2idi r}� '� pt)+-JrP—V ��-a
.....................................................I.......-- ....................
Onsite Rel)i-eserlt:t(i►-c:,74Al4THDM � 7rZ
.........................................................
i:ertilied [liter.;lrar;... .................... j3 v e`s7ER
Location ref Farm:
.................................. Phone No.........................
�t IS
,s[.
R C z�3�
Integrator:, ......... ..................................................................
Operator Certification Number,.... ...�. ¢
i?i. S nrizr �.............. rat s�J►7r O:S....... ..... ...............C. ......., kiG / 1... Nr]pc ....... -....... .......1¢..s� ..�........ ...........
,..... • .'Fr�roz rx r nr s
t
Latitude I 35" • ®' 44 I.ortgilude ®• �S & S`I ••
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
�
2 Z or
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gil,%
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Laver Hiry
,lion -Laver �EH]
h'nn-Dairy
l ---d
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity i� a
Total SSI,%V
Number of Lagoons 1 Iloldittg Ponds ❑ 5uhsurrace 1)rainti Present ❑ lagoon ,ire- ❑ Spray, Field ,ire-
❑ No Liquid Waste .Managetnent System
General
I. Arc [here any buffers that herd mairite nancelimproventent7 ❑ Yes �dNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the opera(ic}n? ❑ Yeti 9— No
Di;char-c origin:rlcrl a1: ❑Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance ratan-niadc" ❑ Yeti KNo
b. if dischar _c is observed. dial it retich Surface W:ttcr" (If t'cs. nu[iiy [ %VQ) ❑ Yes PrNo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estitnated flow in gallntin''
el, Does discharge bypass a lagoon syswni? (If ves. notify €)WQ) ❑Yes &ZNo
3. is there evidence of past discharge front any part of the operation? ❑ Yes JirN❑
4. Were there anv adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yeti 0 No
5. Doesany part of [he waste management system (other than lagoonslholding ponds) rerluirc ❑ Yes Wo
rtr a ill ten anceli i ni)ro vemc rat?
G. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ;EMNo
r
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? Cl Yes W.No
7/25/97 Continued an hack

Facility Number: Ito
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on sits: which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
JRNo
Slructttrtys_11.stL,ortrtti,lltrlditt g Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate:'
❑ Yes
KNo
Stricture I Structure. 2 Structure 3 Structure •1 Structure 5
Structure
6
.0
Identifier: 5ako�5 !�d
........ .......� .. .......-.......-.../T............. ....... .............. ..._.......... ...................................
...................................
yr..
Freeboard(I't): i. ...................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
�ffNo
11. Is erosion• or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
;S-No
12. Do any of the structures need ntnintenance/itnprrn•etttent'?
❑ Yes
RrNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was ans►+•ered yes, and the situation pose's
an iturned iate puttlic health or environmental threa(, notify D%VQ)
13. Do any ofthe Structures lack adequate minimum or maxi ntunt liquid level starkers?
❑ Yes
XNo
Waste ,Il�pliyation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application:'
❑ Yeti
XNo
(If in excess of WM1 . or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
J-
15. Crop type.......1~CSG4.ee—............................................................................................................................................................................................................
lb. Do the receiving craps differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMI')'?
❑ Yeti
❑ No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage For land application?
❑ Yes
;R�No
18.
Does the receiving crop steed improvement?
❑ Yes
PrNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
20.
Dates facility require a follow-up visit by saute agency?
❑ Yes
& No
21.
Did Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
R No
22.
Docs record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
,RNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available:'
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMI'?
❑ Yes
❑tin
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ Net
09 iVo.violatittns or' deticiencies ►'ere'no'tc+;f during; this vi%it.-.Yo'U.►+•ill recei'•e no ftirthier
cyrrc5pitrtdeitcc about tltis.risit.
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 ):
rG, N 5 SWC has a rr ;� P p(r�r .Awwt 8 erx -6r
ASS13°�'i+a'tt !�t PrC�AY►K� P 1 care .
Z�ZS ti[sF a.VOi,-,,LLJ LfCJ-. fb het-* a-
Mr . Je6kw- hard //!
$ wC. %Ja new o>L aih�
7/25/97
Neviewerllnspcctor Name tj . do � Y may,,I 6c� ...__..... ....._.,.......-_.W.. W .... W ..., W.._ W .._ _ . -..�. . .
RevieKer/Inspector Signature: Date: � �

Division of Soil and W Conservation - Operation Review
p Division cif Soil and N Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality -Compliance Inspection
p CHher Agency - Operation Review
16 Roulrne 0 U1111l}I:alnl 0 hullo►►' -tip of 1INV 1 Inspectlrrrl 0 1•1i
IFariIit.' Number'
Registered 0 Certitied p Applied for Permit p Permitted
W-up {al I)., ►t, ITVIe►► 0 1 )IheI* I
Bali tit' Ins1woioll
time oaf 111sprc6oaa © 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Not 0per'aluin:I (late Last Operaled:
Farm NanIe:.lcste.RidgC..Far.tu............... County: Randolph WSRO
0%1 iteI- N:IInc:Jon athwi ............................... Jester• .................... ........ ....... ....................... Phone Nil: 33fa-S2.4-4.7.46...... .................................. ..................
Facilit►• C'oritnc•I: Rre►xt.aJolcr............. ........................................ I,itle: f]Wncr....... .......................................... Phone No: 33h-.i24-47.46........ ...... ...... -
hlailint! Address:.lit#i..N'.righx..Ctzu>atry..l3si................................................................ KaMeux...NC............................................... ............ 27.lift..............
1 .. .. ., ., ... Illtefrlatcrr:.f..]',ux}:is.Fuxnts..11rxc................... [lnsite Iielta•eserlltlti►'e: �3Xf.',IIx...451�C............... ....................,... .................. ..................
Cerlilieal Oper;Itor: jallaikun.lL.........................Rester.................. Operator Cerlilic:atinn INumber:18874.............................
1.1w;I inra of Farm:
.iut cs.....a .iratuxcur..0 ..: ►ry... .. urta.r:t � t.❑n.. .r:t .. sruntr.#'.. :.�tu .gm.: ..iru i~,W.. aa, o�usc, . r .r.❑n ..uu, C .scc,slt;a. �
Iirutl..l.cster.. and..l.'.uxxis..Eorms...................................................I......I................ J
I-Ititude .© ®' Loangiludr ®• ..
Swine Capacity Population
p Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Idints
p •arrow to Wean
❑ 'arrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
p Oilts
p Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Ayer I❑ airy
❑ on- ,ayer I I[] Non -Dairy
p Other
Total Design Capacity 1,450
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds
p . u
stir ace
Drains
Present
❑ .ugoon rear n Spray Ir t rea
p No
Liquid Waste
Management
Sys
Gener.Il
1. Are there any buffers that need Inainteii.ince/improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharpe ori-inated at: p Lagoon ❑ Spray ]Meld ❑ Other
it. II'd ISCllal'L'C is 11bSeIvrd, its the con ►waitcc elan-Inadc? ❑ Yes 0 No
b. 1 f disell ar'c is obwI'Ved. did it reach Strtilce ]Nola? (II'yes. not if►• 1)\VO) ❑ Yes ® No
C. II disch:an—,C IS obsel-vCd, ► hat is the estitit,ned Ilo►►• in ualIII liit'?
d. Does dlsehargc bN pass :t la,-, system:' (Ifves. not 1)",Q] ❑Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
4• Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require p Yes H No
ma i ntentutceli rn provetnent?
6. Is fiacility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes ® No
7/25/97

act rty Number: 76-11 13:11r cat 'rinl+l
._ 8.
W1f
Are there lagoons or storage ponds ort site Ich need to be properly closed?
p Yes
® No
Strtict(II'V's (l,:rytluns.}IIIIdin,Polids. I'lurh I'ilti. elC.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
structure I struclure ? SIRICttlrt ; Structure d Sll'IICILIFO 5
Structure G
Iilellllller: 01 #2 93
Frcchoald{Il):..............1..5.............................. i.5:.............. ................ 6....... ........... ............................ ...............................
................................
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
N No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 ►►•as answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental. threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minirnunt or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
® No
NVILAr
A11t111Ca1i0rl
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(If in excess of WM11. or runoff entering ►eaters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ....................... Fcscur................. ....................................... ....... ........ .............. ............ ...........................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
0 Yes
® No
17,
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18,
Does the receiving; crop need improvement?
p Yes
®No
19.
1s there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
20.
Does facility require a follow -Lip visit by same agency?
p Yes
® No
21.
laid Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/irtspectiott with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
floes record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
N Na
1,or Cerlified fig' I erillllled I acilitics 0n1►•
23.
Does the facility tall to have ar copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance ofthe Certified AWMP?
p Yes
I1 No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
p No
. . o;vioutions.or a rurencies'wereantc . urin is visit: - Vim willreceive no: further.-.
eT'retijein�iGne` ►1]uf t�liS YiSa:. .. . .. .. .
Comments (refer to question #). E xplaiit any YES it itswers and/or any recommendations or any° of
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
AITING ON OK FROM SWCD TO 13EGIN WORK.
AGILITY IN GOOD SHAPE, NO PROBLEMS NOTED+
comments.
Re►•ie►►•er/Inspector Name W. Corey Basinger —
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

_S
❑ Division of Soil aVater Conservation �❑ ()titer Al;ty
plAvision of Water Quality
i I)otinc Q Complaint 0 Follow-up of DW inspection Q Follow-u of DSWC review Q Other
Date of Inspection d7a
FI' acility Number t
lime of Inspection dD 2 hr. (hh:rnm)
*f egistered E3 Certified 13 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated
i
I arrii Hume: tDCty C aunty: ...................... I ....:...........................':......... - ...........
Owner Name: .....�PKli<-TAP4........ TxG tT ..lii .-xv- r.............................. Phone No: -fie ^ $2 ................. I ................................ $
Facility Contact ......... F,)I� r.... ... Title: `t ....................... Phone No�3�. .......�.......... .....
Mailing Address: ...lZ+'b 11JRtrnc�r eC T ��......i i?....................... .. �4!ic�.?th..... C-, Z�-51(0 ..
Integrator .................
Ortsitc Representative :.............................................��z!�.jz.. .....,............,.,................... rInteg......... ..................... ........................................
Certified Operator;-1... 1�5-= t......................... ..L:.S r.R................................ Operator Certification Number,..... I b $1-.4:'.................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 3S 0 1 " Longitude ®• 3r L S1 is
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
EYFarrow to Wean
21 oo
11500
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current I)esign Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Nun -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2, 1 0 0
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
❑ NoLiquid Waste Management Systcm
General
1.
Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimproven►ent?
❑ Yes
N'No
2.
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[ 'No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance mass -made?
❑ Yes
RNo
b. If discharge is observed, dirt it reach Surt'ace Water'' (lf ycs, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
qNo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flaw in gal/inin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? 01'yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
E "No
1
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IR No
4.
Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
8 No
5.
Dues any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
mai nteiranceli mprovernent?
6.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
GrNo
7.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
E�No
7125/97

•� Facility Number: 11
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to he properly closed?
r
Structures (lagoons,lfolding _Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l
Identifier:
r
Freeboard (ft): ........ ..r .................
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
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 rnaintenance/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)
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type Stu?:'................................................................................................................ .................
IC. 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 Facilitit.-, 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?
lYa.vivZatioits'ar deficiencies were noted ittiririg this visit..You:►vill 'receive no ftirfteeir
correspotidence ah�out this: visit:• : -
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes JR"No
❑ Yes eNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes . (WNo
❑ Yes ,M�No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes GrNo
❑ Yes E�No
❑ Yes .[WNo
❑ Yes 15 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
('otrtments"{refer to question #i)::F.xp.Ui.6 any<YE, answers`atndlor,any,recommendations o:r apy'other,corrufients; `"�1:;, .. ," •Fji:
Use drmOn s of fucilit ta:better ex lain situationis, use additional a es as'necc:ssa d .,
g Y; P P_ x3}�
[j
J vim. � L� ►{,� D Lp�''sti S t'LGi�7' .
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 2.;2 d