790006_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Type of Visit: A Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: t& Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: \\ Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:NLLI KA Reglon:W f O
Farm Name: / V I • \NriV Owner Email:
Owner Name: T f/V� - W �q�ty S�yi� y/ y/� Phone: �t�l
Mailing Address: 4A 1 UAL) Siyej VA , PAS V i 0e) NQ �,t /,620
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: kenniy, Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
V
Phone:
Integrator:
� hys rwede
Certification Number: ,PM 0 F Qt7 15 K
Certification Number:
Latitude: &6 1-7 t 142 t. ^n Longitude: I V10 V 15 11
USIA wy 1695 & , t &,To WColen sTDr& Z , 3 ,5,eS ®two wvggv i- 53i" tZ01.
/ V-JO- o F �larlre f�vn �
Discharees and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
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 DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
EXNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
7�
Page I of.3�\ 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - • Date of Inspection: I ILA
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: U
Spillway?: t t
Designed Freeboard (in):
1
Observed Freeboard (in):�J �— 1 \7t
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
7I�� 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?
7�
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
E4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.))
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10%or 10 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): CQf h
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
D4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
CX 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 appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Waste Application [AWeeklyFreeboard t4 Waste Analysis sis
DAVft-ta--.-�s
OWeatherCode
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑��g 4"WX'.r
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
M No
VX
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued
1

Facili Number: —I - Date of Inspection: I 1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applon 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 PDA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
[^No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
� NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes P�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ 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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector
Reviewer/Inspector
Phone:'/j�j�-7%/� —L1' 7 nCJ
Date: It Iti l
21412015
Page 3 of 3

Type of Visit: M Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ' Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ( ) Arrival Time: �d U Departure Time: i 0County: POt'.}ItyA Region: W Ste©
Farm Name: )K 6AkGWtr (WD SOMS Owner Email:
Owner Name: ir& WRI&M k SeW 5 Phone:
Mailing Address:
8411
wL*",a smog-6- RD0 RE-Iol$VtLL6 MG
Q-7 �t7
Physical Address:
rs� J
Wk(6Hri 0/11RY IWi RE(0St/tt4 )JG
Facility Contact:
i< 64 617f
WCI GH T Title:
Phone: 136 ' G 1 3 - 3951
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number: g(dG'( t
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cattle
Dai Cow
Uesign Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
I INon-Layer
IDair
Calf
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
D , P,oultr,
La ers
Design
C•.a acit
Current
P,o P.
Dr Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
JBeef Feeder
BoarsI
jBeefBroodCow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Pouets
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c,..W} at is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
A d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 66 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ 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: UPPdR UDWCW
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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
54 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
EgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
7rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes D6 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): w ('O-aZ W'O{AT
13. Soil Type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
V�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
`d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
$�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
U(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? Ifyes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes b4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
_01nVrMTtTat ee c y e �s nsfers Q4Leail _Code
,
. nu e s ❑ Monthly od 1" Rainfall Inspection ey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: . Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appication equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ONO
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes JXNo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any addii
acility to better exDlain situations (use additional oaees as
M-) 50tt_ SA"Les ov6 a019j,
NCi10>' f&00 cni vtfso n
d�-
Ck5 I t 8
(06(0%NZC01_. ' \5
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
KNA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
�NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IL4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 't�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CE�No
❑ Yes EfNo
❑ Yes 7No
necessary).
h2E66o Ap
UMOK k4.0 tt
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
or any other comments.
'_0 t
Phone: p3C-40G-Lk-' 5
Date: \ '�
21412015

rype of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �Arrival
Time: ��/OF& Departure Time: l f� County:
Farm Named AIY`F d`�%$ A /4 U / /,kK/ntltsi✓I (iti//�4 ��� Owner Email:
Owner Name: _.TM �- ,�ovr5 Phone:
Mailing Address: if
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
to s 4fe �J �o ij;114 At 273ZO
Region: k'l
U.1 t(e,�s 1,;7 3 ZG
e-- 33
Title: Phone: J-l_
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
wy l Sjp L
14✓00/6n S1roY6 / 41 Zrn:/eS
lvr,J
airy
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow 11
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder [o Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dn P,oultr.
Layers
Design
Ca aci
Current
P,a P.
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
OtherI
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: Zo/S
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes SNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: T�
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 30
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 Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes M 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 E�LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes „®.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
f�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reouired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
K No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
4gSlo
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
C2!-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application ErWeekly Freeboard DWaste Analysis oil Analysis
nnsfers
Q'Weather Code
[Rainfall [Stocking []-Crop Yield [l20 Minute Inspections [D-Monthly and V Rainfall
Inspections
�y
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
QNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - 06 710 1 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,g No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes []No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes JR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 5jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes JR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes rNo
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No
33. Did 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 allo
❑ 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. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
��. So;l �tsi due, 2015.
CatArabod It Zol`.
7 /how J-- -,- fi/(.-s ,r-'�Jl.47
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: T-/ / — Z'6/5
Page 3 of 3 121412014

Type of Visit: ' Q Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation ( Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit`: )6 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Arrival Time: L��5�1 Departure Time:l t,/ / VtJ,piytt:ounty:&GU i�'%h 6-60
Email: �'--`-�
Owner Name: TM It k�gh'� �F .SOtnS None:
Mailing Address: q q I �`11Wool can 5-f o re— U• ., 2 e ki5 V/ ll e r /��(tJ a 7 3c;-O
Physical Address: 3IS IJr*14h-F _r)ailru 2d-. ..NCa?3-'.7- 0
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:34 n 1-7 all Longitude: 79 9 7 6t lS ti
05 Hwj i
` L �nk10
54c rem
a M 1 es
W r�j h 1 Y7 .
D
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow Q 010
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
I)a P,oultr.
Ca aci
P,o P.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
I Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
lBecfBroodCovv
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
01 Other
I I
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 19No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[:]Yes
WNo
❑ 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: /'M,.)La
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z
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?
T-
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
2SNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0j 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
�
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
4a "°
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes h 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 Cro Window Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area /J ��,
12. Crop Type(s): �G/� /r�/ZN/ ( l�l/FlA1_) �"� - __ " o
13. Soil Type(s): Ailha-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps..❑ Lease Agreements
21. Does record keeping need i provement? , .
g�tino Applica i n Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
t
all Stocking Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rai
22. Did the facilityYdiNil`nstall and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
l� Yes
[& No
❑ Yes
j(No
❑ Yes
IJU No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes �6 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Other:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Weather Code
nfall Inspections
❑ Yes �] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No �(NA ❑ NE
21412014 Continued

L PAf`� Wd'
Facility Number: • Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes K No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes X 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?
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)
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
to
any zra answers
reQv6red I n 2-01/a
'f Cal i b ra44on d ue. I n 26
3 a. Field 2 revise] ? lff ,
any
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
or any otne
!/w ow t
)0 tq-
comments.
a of S/"
g. 0 100
6 LoUip nLL11 PhN as"dot s
V
VS 40�f
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
N �:,.-,AM
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: 11 o?
2/4/2014

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:,' 1-Q ;Arrival Time: Departure Time: County' -- yy ,pion: vim, s i�o
Farm Name: w^^T''iahT� 6�i WO Roc'l hQ h2161, �AVYt I�µrier Email: ��Vf ``11
Owner Name: wrIg6i w-SOhs Phone:
Mailing Address: Q q I \pj l ° Y1 S +Ore— R A • t (�RP.I�.S �J l K\ L o2 % 3 140
Physical Address: 31 � Vj r � o h+ D cit r u d • Re id SV I ( IP . Aj C a 7 L') a (D
1{pc -&13-TVs]
Facility Contact: .(wTitle:
Onsite Representative: {PA4 /� QTyty
Certified Operator: 4/
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 3to 11 `f of Longitude: _7q q6 /S
U:5 H W4 158 C, t- W001CVI 51bre , a iv-i ley G,wri�hf- boor y Pd.
Swine
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity; Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to FinishI
ILayer I
Cow
Wean to FeederI
INon-Layer—I
Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design
Dr. + P.oultr, + Ca acit
La ers
Current
P,o
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
BoarsI
IPullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Pouets
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ONE
21412011 Continued

Facilit Number: - • Date of Inspection: 16
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[:]Yes
" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
jL9 Identifier: l�ppPj^ LO\NJ[�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 11
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
--//
JRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
777777������
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
D? No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
n Outside of Acceptable Crop Window n Evidence of Wind Drift n Application Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
N'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,/No
IYI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Other:
211 Does record keeping need' provement?�Ir-- ,,(((ggqWWW- ❑Yes 0 No CIA ❑ NE
,L-{J. ste Application geekly Freeboar Waste Analysis it Analysis FOR - �u(Weather Code
Rainfall StDoclkki= Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes' 6dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes []No YNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - o Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applitn equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Ye i No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No [;KNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 5JNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
t No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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
NfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
jjQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
7�, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments , x ) Xt
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use',(a additional paces as necessary). „'
t
/n ozz le d_i o_ 1P_4 t tr c ke_e_ eel ? Ga l l b r-"o rl ciue, i r>- a-o
Field t-wo revised 2 welu'ra- ble. q-ar e- listed i n Wu P 7
►von yeA .
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -j 1 — San
Date:
21412011

of Visit: TLCpmpliance Inspection V Operation Review Q) Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
in for Visit: l Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
) .Arrival Time: QZ Departure Time: County: l\ gion:
Farm Name
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
P 1<4Mhe`� "
OnsiteRe Representative:
Certified Operator: u ) r 4 ��
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: 3/,2 (% q ;)-Longitude: % 9 q !p %_S
U5 14w4 IS$ E I L Woolen 5+011re- fi-(01 a net ley vdh
Design
Swine Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
I ILayer I
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I jNon-Layer I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
Dr. P,pult . Ce eci P,o P.
La ers
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
ll Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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?
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑Yes [ANo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ONE
Pagel of 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: —1 cl - • Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I )PP p P ti �
/a Spillway?: �-
Designed Freeboard (in): l
i'
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 ��(I 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 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ;� o ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NE
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
�dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
�Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,,,[
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21 Does record keeping need i rovement?� Yes o ILIA ❑ NE
Waste A lication eekl Freeboar Waste Anal sis7onthlly
nal sis Waste Transfers �LLLLNNNN Weather Code
P� }t Y YY
Rainfall StouuckTTing Lr-J/Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspectionsand 1" Rainfall Inspections E°'••a^^ Sur
22. Did the facilluAro install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9�NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: • Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No PNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. 77``
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X, No ❑ NA [3 NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [3I � Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes'KNo
❑ 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 �1tlo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
7k
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
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other commentsA==; ,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use'additional pages as necessary).
W a5k2.
tal a�J u
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
0 • q3 L•'wie/
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
$/ RLtI IX upp fr 0-q6 (OUA4- 0.
Phone: 7 _? I — .7 a /
Date: p7-
2/4/2011

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: I, Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: /D / t t t I Arrival Time:
(�0(9� o Q�l Departure Time: n 0 � tv- County: "ion: W 520
Farm Name: W 'rT1 Q� jh r b.{1� t f'OT R0011IIA'k CO .Owner Email: I ^
Owner Name:G 1
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: K'o—n eH-)�pv )V'41ff_1Title:
Onsite Representative: 1 / �,L�aj\` w\ -
Certified Operator: y"r\ , U'rICYV1Jl
Back-up Operator:
e, to 13 —3 8 5 /
Phone: H [e 110 —1 !a qZ
Integrator -
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 31, 1-1 4 02 Longitude: % 9 46 % S
lJ5 15�s E. I ©woolen S%� I�-� Z � MI 125®W�i�hfi i�a�rt� �.
Discharees 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?
Yes '&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [—]No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes , No
❑ Yes 1){ No
jgNA ❑ NE
❑\NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
\�
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: Pe-r _L6'
Spillway?: y
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the ntegrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
r
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. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? T
11. Is 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 Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 0A AJN 4 P�AA,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
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?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 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 appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
�2l, oes record keeping need i provement? I Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Application [Weekly Freeboard [Waste Analysis Sod Analysis Waste Tra sferseather Code
Z"Rainfall Stocking Rcrop Yield ❑'120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections 11"KigeSuawy—
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No [51�NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Date of inspection:
Facili Number:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app tion equipment as required by the permit?
�{
❑ Yes I ►vl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes 7❑ No
NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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)
❑ Yes 1P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1XNo
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: "```7YYYYY"''""
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No
33. Did 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 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (reler to question 9): Lxplatn any YES answers and/or any, additional recommendations or any other,comment9,,ls +{¢I"
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). x aaa'•
aoio of aotl soils e aotoce-rw,a �J.
�e-P;�rie��er� Cps ao1o? �e;s,aloe 010-In ao►a.
3�� ►� it #I = 6�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
# ';k' = 6.q0
Phone: -771-52ga/
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: hT� tf /
214/2011

(Type of Visit gCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit XRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time:
Id
Departure Time: %2. County: ��
Region:'^t
b5, O
Farm Name: Wrt4,+Da:rN 0/M1p��ahaM
1�
4Dkn'ty. _T�Acl
Owner Email:
om
Trho
Owner Name: M WI f,
Phone: F - �'. 711
/
Mailing Address: 715 1,41141A
d
Ke�bvi I % N
i..II
G
Z %3 Z0
�I
Physical Address: (� lj°olen S4fe
I
Ret.
�'V 1I e N C
2-73 Z 0
I
�I rtyh�
613- 3Fj�
Facility Contact: tnA o
Title:
Phone No:
1 - 1
OnsiteRepresentative:
KeA0%
Integrator: �-
'/
Certified Operator: I tAAe- 44, r L,�
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 36 0 0' Q« Longitude: ®0 ®'
US 151 E,�
L 5K t00/ Woo e. 5i,r,kd,
1 v Z- rb,1 es R Wrtj4} Ntfy U,,
CZ A
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish I
Layer
Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑Dai Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Non-Dai
❑ Farrow to Finish
La
❑ Layers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
EE❑
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes l( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 12QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection [7 LS ( •
Waste Collection & Treatment
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: t ffar )_yw8f
Spillway?: e S�tES
Designed Freeboard (in): p�
Observed Freeboard (in):
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes p(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes /,KN
❑ NA
❑ NE
8.
Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9.
Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or im rovement?
P
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes )<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? �,J
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Excessive Pending El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) �l
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
>No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
[3NA
ElNE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
JR(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #)c Explain any YES answers and/or any, recommendations or any other crimmentst } ``
sir �;t<tt�s t.
Use drawings of facilityao better explain situations. (use additional pages` as necessary) ?r" ) r
/ I -
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 d �a , �'^r (t 3 J ` `7= Phone: — 2Tj
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: QI /dA_VJ&I I k,& Date: OS ZS�FO
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Nam ate of Inspection Of 2S /g •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [3 Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? 1 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application U Weekly Freeboard L7 Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
D'IG'infall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections 91 onthly and I" Rain Inspections B eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (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
)No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
)R(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
,XNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 124No ElNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �J o
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 1ANo
❑ Yes f2Q No
El NA El NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments, and/or Drawings:. t 4t
21, zOo9 Boll -Isl- fyuwl3-s ? cZ0/0?
4pXIICJ '7� flan ,
{Irrk f��1 r d /o - A yy
Dyro — 6, yZy2
2009>-Vd. Ned 2,010.
cc_ e a0l6, .y,„
w'U
Page 3 of 3 12128104

.Division of Water Quality -
Facility Number O 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation Q n
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 9Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:WUNT Arrival Time: YjE� Departure Time: County: paeyd Region: t�� (��6
Farm Name: I (f1UD�LrC Owner Email:
Owner Name: -� Y @ 1a (� Phone: F' .3 µ4-3 6%
Mailing Address: -h�M WVOO tw 54Ore. 1c� • �2eids vi l I e f0L 27 3 9-0
Physical Address: d L R43aO
t1l3- 3s—
Facility Contact: — ) ri)o�n � Title: Phone;V : —
Onsite Representative: / (/� �p�/1 ' , \ Integrator: ,
Certified Operator: 16" n e� W t6a Operator Certification Number: W hOL31-5 rwoA-d
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number: )N 1 a' -bi'" t
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®° ©, Pa" Longitude: °
US IsS G +2SR.Iool 1vJ601tnStore)-++ur11 lef4. Flo a.M1(e5 d-+urh `
ri h} o n b W r h+ 0 Q'1 r �dl • C a n d i r-E Irma) .
Swine
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedei
Farrow to Finish
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifej
E]Dry Cow,
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes 9
No ElNA ElNE
ElYes IEI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number. '19 — Q • Date of Inspection aZ d- •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: �JA�Y _ Lo wer
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 02 }
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 oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes (NNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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? ElYes ElNA ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) /
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes LA No ❑ NA El NE
maintenance or improvement? r
Waste Application //
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El yes Zo
❑ NA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes o [INA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:]Yes0
o ❑ NA El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA [I NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? r ❑ Yes !No
El NA ❑ NE
s5 /fit r�i~b
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):
IUD a,.1 W wk C6-�-�1 �.� �t �.[' m •
IReviewer/Inspector Name — roc Phone: -M-$2$9 I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. 21 , jl ./�-f .'4/� Date: xh"2_169
•rt �
12/28/04 Continued

C
Facility NumDaf Inspection •
ber: — O
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes NN ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes L!i No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Dos record keeping need imp vement?-Ifyesrekr leyr. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste App��lic��ation need
Freeboard Waste Analysis So�il A�nalysis aste Transfers ien
Ltd Rainfall LLjStocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections [3�fC4onthly and I" Rain Inspections,_, Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 03 No n NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ N ' XNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No X 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 IVNo
El NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes gNo ❑ 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 IaI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately !�
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes �N ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require afollow-up visit by same agency? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
al • aoo8 50'1 res L) 7
�. C'c+llbro�ion eoukflei-ed �or aoo8?®ice-da+e� 1�64s��d 156 por,2oo
T- 13S(C F- 1 Ae.rp C�e t�v m i 11eC�
�1
1.�ISM
l 1 J/vr V1 05 f e cwja- Ll s/ s.
Page 3 of 3
12128%04

�: Division of Water Quali-
Facility Number I� t� �p Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit 9f Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:
Farm Name: _bialr4
Owner Name: �l l
[ling
QpA^dd'ress:
✓ yUPA1ddr f�.
Facility Contact: _
Onsite Representative:
0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ] ❑ Denied Access
n�n DepartureTime: County: n {tQlfi Region:
2C(JL1114 i1Qk-('O 1tth,., o. Em m•l.
Soo
Certified Operator: le �w 4p\ W r;
Back-up Operator:
.
le: F 3H-304
fle,NC a�.�3a6
gsL
Operator Certification Number: 1 009
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: o © R;W Longitude: o ® I �`
e 4 vn le b m l FeS
of ern rip aria l�Jri ! 'ba-tq) &
Swine
to Feeder
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Population
29 Dairy Cow
Lj Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ®.�
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes *1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes IpA-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: I I — �� • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? $ ❑ Yes ElNo [INA ElNE
t \� Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 pS�tplore 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Lobj er 1 `II
D 0Spillway?: i C
ed Freeboard (in): of
Observed Freeboard (in): O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No [INA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan? 666666 ��'��'
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t reat, notify DWQ
1.
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 1PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? �k '*�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ 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
12.
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
e
Crop type(s) Smail Prixin
❑ Application Outside of Area
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes V40
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name �^t . KV 1 Phone: )-5
Y 2$
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A" ) P h Af7 Date: O

Facility Number. — b Date of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
i
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes:No
o NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Doves, keeping need im ovement? €yea,-e ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
pQ aste Applica 'on We j/kly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A/9�lysis Waste Transfers im
(� Rainfall Stocking Ey Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections L�d'Monthly and I" Rain Inspections Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA [INE
!c{ . aoog
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required byte permit? ❑YesNo ❑ NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No X NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes /10 No El NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No yp NA El NE
Other Issues /�
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 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 t)p No El NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately / ,
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes fIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes - o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Add'tional Comments and/or Drawings:
a
-
V° Cj. d..008/ None, ivx on-t
i rria4700
a.o0-1 Q? p ,, 0-7
a
F low rcife
�o v11 5
(,us ed c Iam. --_
9 I' 'O-7 5.1V 0,2_ 0.6b
Cad DV e ot4 � �tX.0.�1 ;�/ I 46W. M_ 12128104 L._ a

Facility Number
Q Division of Water Quality!
o Division of Soil and Water
0 Other Agency
I Pal!
Type of Visit I Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access �''� '/�I
Date of Visit: hhO�J Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �tegion: 16.E
Farm
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
1� � Ot L111 L Y1CIli. Owner Email:
o Phone: _rYn q9 - 369fe
31S ly �4� hit airu ��� i •1 NL a� ao
Physical Address: ;:yj rn,, �JJ q C ^ 3�51
Facility Contact: wtun L
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
4- +Urn ri
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Latitude:
cU % 10 0 f C jJpp (Oil 5*
e n ah� di v-f rtxL4 (
0
Phone No: kV ) (0 10 —
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
• � Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
CapacityPopulationWet Poultry Capacity Population
I I ❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
DA W SPAo
a K,
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
d
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
It. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes LIE No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes 15(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes l No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection S a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ElNE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: UP i LnWPx-
Spillway?: el,5
Designed Freeboard (in): I ' `
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
TTTTk
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
1 No
ElNA
ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
ElYes
jNo
❑ 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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application j
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes b(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? '
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those desigfrated 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 determination?❑ Yes
No
t)(INA
ElNE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
El(
L 0
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ 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):
1 ' Y 1.1 r�d1V8 Prg5h
ASP®
Pond 1%i-00.Vo-ve-S Loh(
l PtrUA, up parde-
W AA
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone: — s
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Date: 5a167
%I t 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 4pate of Inspection—i 7 •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes NNc ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes I]!'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Doe record keeping need iim%ovement? pttia ew ❑ Yes �(J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
V ste Applic on LyVcrlop
y Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil A lysis Waste Transfers cation
Rainfall Stocking Yield H i2e+%ra `ms c tons Monthly and V Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [`'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,❑_, NN Of NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El Yes Lld'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ Nq t,NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes �®'jV/o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Otherlssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, Freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Al No
❑ Yes JKNo
El Yes ��'WNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes VNo
El NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Cl NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a o o 7 5a-1-e re5u Hs
Cali la rah i or, ? ' � 07
11 fin° uA.14- ® Ob-cut
a► l
12128104

• 0
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790006 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC790006 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine
_ County: Rockingham Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 09/12/2006 Entry Time:10,00 AM
Exit Time: 12:00 PM Incident M
Fang Name: Wrght Dairy of Rockinaham County. Inc
Owner Email:
Owner:.i M Wdaht & Sons
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 315 Wright Dairy Rd _
Reidsville NC 27320
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 36°17'42" Longitude: 79°46'15"
From WSRO take US 158 east to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.)
and turn left and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on right (Wright Dairy Rd.)
and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kenneth R Wright
Operator Certification Number: 21009
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Title Phone
On -site representative Kenneth Wright
Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Kenneth Wright
Phone: [phone]
Primary Inspector:
M/]t4gli a Rosgbrock
Phone:
\ D /y
Inspector Signature: iif 1A ,,..� 1 ^ �'
rA�
`"" Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
15. Denuded receiving fields have been re -seeded in orchardgrass.
21. Don't forget to obtain 2006 soil analyses.
21. Records look real good!
24. Contact commercial hauler for honey wagon calibration records.
28. Operator is using two waste plans dated 1/16/04 and 3/16/06. These need to be combined into one CAWMP. Irrigated fields need
all crops in one plan (soybeans, corn, alfalfa, hay, small grain)
Page: 1

0
Penult: AM790006 Owner - Facility: J M Wright & Sons Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
O Cattle - Dry Cow 1 10
Cattle -Milk Cow 1 190 75
Total Design Capacity: 190
Total SSLW: 266,000
Waste Structures
type
Identifier
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard
Observed FreebOard
Mate Pond
LOWER STAGE
44.40
64.00
Waste Pond
UPPER STAGE
132.00
Page:2

•
Permit: AWC790006 Owner- Facility: J M Wright & Sons Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
Discharge originated at: '
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑
❑
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 Slate other than from a
❑
■
❑
❑
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le,/ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
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 peril? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
Cl
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

0
Permit: AWC790006 Owner- Facility: J M Wright & Sons
Facility Number:
790006
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application Outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Small Grain
(Wheat,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 2
Soybeans
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?
❑ ■
❑
❑
1 B. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC790006 Owner - Facility: J M Wright 8 Sons Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 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? ❑ ❑ Cl,
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?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
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?
❑
E ❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑ 0 ❑
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?
❑
❑ ■ ❑
Otherlssues
Yea
No NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
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: AWC790006 Owner - Facility: J M Wright & Sons
Inspection Date: 09/12/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Otherlssues
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ 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: 790006
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yes
No
NA
NE
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number •Division of Soi_I a_ nd Wate r •onservation
—i-- �!i ether Avencv
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visi Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q�n Arrival Time: F-107
� Departure Time: County: &JL Yea �NARegion:
Farm Name: Ar t .ill
G _ wner Email:
Owner Name: So5 "` Phone: _ 3 9- 3 6 `►l�
n.
Mailing Address: i y- R-e Ids U (l l2
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
WrjQ4t, Phone NOW& I% _ � (-W
Onsite Representative:
M,
I Integrator: -------
Certified Operator:
Operator Certification Number: a o q
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Me 0I QL Longitude: ®e F94 FiNtj'
u5 LAY 1Sg C. Le
4- or)+b
Wcole�r) Sfcrr For ai. rn
o?hc)
•
j1r4- ri • art r4-
t00.I T
Design
Current
Design Current Design
Current
Swine Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Laver
DairyCow
Feeder
❑Non -Layer
DairyCalf
Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
o Wean
La erso
❑ Non -La ersPullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy❑
❑Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
0
Pto
o Feeder
Finish
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 4 ❑ 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)?
0
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes Xt�
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes - No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page! of 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — O I Date of Inspection 2w;�06
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 StNcturq 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): I J O
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?
yY ��/
t LJ YXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes HI No ❑ NA El NE
El Yes /115LNo ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10%or 10lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application�utside of Area
• � I
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes IRNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA [3NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes t Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? So u`I k#.sr 5 — 5 t.UZ ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
IComments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
1
i ♦ � i / P
I '
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Page 2 of 3
Phone: I — S
Date: q 1 a-
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 1 — 6 /p I Qate of Inspection (2��
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. ZeWrecord keeping need i ovement?, ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applica 'on Week Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis aste Transfers
L`(Rainfall SDtocg Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections tonthly and 1" Rain Inspection����sBather Code
Kr
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes :1 No NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?�^ ❑ Yes No NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? W ❑ Yes No XA ❑ 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 IXNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ 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? El Yes ld1 No El NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately �9
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, Freeboard problems, over application) /
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
A-dfditional,Comments and/or Drawings:
311 b 1 •G �O'
C sib,
S6
U m
Page 3 of 3 q SL U / f _ N—U 5
r.

❑ Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790006 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC790006 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Rockingham Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 02/17/2005 Entry Time: 12,50 PM Exit Time: 03:15 PM
Farm Name: Wdaht Dairy of Rockinaham County- Inc. Owner Em M-1
•wner: J M Wriaht & SonsiDk' I kEI I Is7:L•L!
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Latitude: 36.3 Longitude: -79.77
From WSRO take US 158 east to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn left and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on right (Wright Dairy
Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Kenneth R Wright
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Kenneth Wright
Primary Inspector: MaryM Rosebrock
Secondary Inspector(s):
Operator Certification Number: 21009
Title Phone
Phone: [phone]
Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
9. Some run-off from the stocktrail was noted. Was not a water quality problem today. Buffer looks good.
15. Field #2 needs to be re -seeded. Vegetation is sparse in some areas.
21. Need to maintain additional records per the new permit.
21. Operator has 2004 soil samples but they are dated 1/12/05. Results look ak. A couple of fields calling for lime.
22. Per permit, must install rain gauge.
31. Must call DWQ if waste level goes above maximum liquid level.
11/02/04 waste analyses: ALD#1=2.4 lbs. N/1000 gal. and ALD#2=0.95 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

r]
Permit: AWC790006 Owner- Facility: J M Wright & Sons Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 02/17/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Page: 2

.•
Permit: AWC790006 Owner - Facility: J M Wright & Sons
Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 02/17/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Num Desc
Close Dt Start Dt Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
LOWER STA Waste Pond 35.00
UPPER STA Waste Pond 42.00
Page: 3

•• •
Permit: AWC790006 Owner -Facility: JM Wright B Sons Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 02/17/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Ves
❑
No NA
0 ❑
NF
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse Impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Ves
M ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Waste. Collection. Storage & Treatment
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./ large trees, severe erosion,
❑
0 ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
. ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
M ❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
0 ❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No NA
NF
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or Improvement?
❑
s ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN> 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total 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
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 3
Soybeans
Crop Type 4
Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 5
Page: 4

Permit: AWC790006 Owner- Facility: J M Wright & Sons
Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 02/1712005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Wastp lip cation Yes No NA NF
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
U. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated In the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? 0000
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑.
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
m ❑
❑
Recnrds and DOCLments
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
Yes
❑
No
0
NA
❑
NF
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
00011
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
0
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
0
Weather code?
0
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall 8 monthly?
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
0
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
0
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a ralnbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
0
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
N
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator In charge?
❑
0
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
0
❑
Page: 5

Permit: AWC790006 Owner - Facility: J M Wright & Sons
Facility Number: 790006
Inspection Date: 02/17/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Vac
❑
No NA
0 ❑
_ME
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality
❑
❑
❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
0000
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Page: 6

(Type of Visit R Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit (' /Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: � p(,f f f f E Arrival Time: � Departure Time: County: F++L r Region: y�1 O
Farm Name: —� r G l rl n tOwner Email: \ 1
Owner Name: 'r 5on5 ( Phonef 34q' 36gi6 6r 3gg ' fy»
Mailing Address: 3 � S UDir- U r 1k)yIII e � NL a /3a0
Physical Address:
Facility Contact :K Jne� % I _Title: Phone No: &1 CIO
Onsite Representative: [.0 ' • l Integrator: ^—
Certified Operator: 1�1(I Vl Wrl4 h Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ® 0 ©, ©.. Longitude: IAe ®,
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Number of Structures: ®'
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes _XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ o
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection(] 0 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: l.%
Spillway?: Yr/5
t es
Designed Freeboard (in):d
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 XNo
❑ Yes JVNo
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or enviroamentaeat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 1 o ❑ NA ❑ N
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes (No El NA ❑ N
(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 �A No ❑ NA ❑ N
maintenance or improvement? 77��
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o El NA ❑ N
maintenance/improvement? ////// ��`��`
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ N
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
E
E
E
E
E
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
721111■ ■
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 'KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
..a rty v '` ' W , r .w I Riaal "a' 'LuF '�kks°�4 . .
,00mm t (refer to question #) :Explain any Y;ES answers'and1or, a �y rrecomme ndir s or any, other comments.
Use drawingsfiof facility to"better explain situations (use,addttt$ 1 pages7iis necessary,)
try
16�4
Reviewer/InspectorName �, (b(� �. ;ri j Phone:. . ) 0b Y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: I /ImA,q AkAkWh A n7 M4% Date: / Q
I2128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Dlef Inspection •
Reuuired Records & Documents
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design b El Maps El Other
21. Do s record keeping need i provement? If yes, c jk the appropriate be below. / XYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Applic [ion Weekly Freeboard LJ`( Waste Analysis soil Analysis fir_ /Waste Transfers
1;9(Rainfall ❑Mocking Wrop Yield. X120 Minute Inspections Xmonthly and 1" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? )<Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �(No ,❑I/NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? El Yes El No L 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 phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
$'No
/VNo
[-INAEl
NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ 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
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
XYes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NF
General Permit'? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[ 6o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
1�,(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Drawings:Adqaorml Comments and/or
I
1
/�/o A t-b g=7 2,,41ffi l,��/0 3 r r s. N/' G r p

I i echnical Assistance Site Visit Repo
on of Soil and Water Conservatio
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 79 - © Date: 6/3/04 Time: 9:15 Time On Farm: = WSRO
Farm Name Wright Dairy of Rockingham County, Inc. County Rockingham Phone: [phone] or
Mailing Address 315 Wright Dairy Rd. Reidsville NC 27320
Onsite
Representative Kenneth Wright Integrator
Type Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Caoacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Purpose Of Visit
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
IR Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Purpose Of Visit
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
IR Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
IR Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
iso
so
❑ 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 Ono
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes Ono
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes Ono
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 Ono
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches) 30 30
CROP TYPES lCom, Silage JISoybeans Wheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CdB2
HwB SeB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

• . 1
Facility Number 79 - 6 Date:
6/3104
PARAMETER
pp No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
Cl
10. Level in structural freeboard
Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
El
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 2Hre-certification reertification
[116. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
[118. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Reuulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
❑
El
El Other...
43. Irrigation system designlinstallation
Date:
44. Secure irrigation Information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1 • The waste plan was revised to add fields and
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
crop rotations.
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
El
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - © Date: F 6/3/04
Facility and records look good.
No waste application this year to date.
Talked to Mr. Wright about some options for the stock -trail coming from the milk barn. Mr. Wright is
terested in a concrete trail if possible.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 6/4/04
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
(Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 79 6 Date of Visit: 1/20/2004 'rime: 11I5
O Not Operational O Ilelow'I'hreshold
M Permitted M Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold : .............
Farm Name: Ylrit ht.Hairy.uf.Ratkittgdatn.County.lnc............................ County:&Q.gkingliam ........................... WS1i.Q......
Owner Name: d R1�-------------------- �Xt igbt-&SQus .-------.-.-•---.-• Phone No:399:344b.or_99Z2--_--.-•-----------•-
MailingAddress: 315..W.dg tt.D..allry....Rd........................................................................Rcid5AMAC ......................................................... Z73.2.0 ..............
Facility Contact. ACenoe M..rAR)11................................Title:............................................... Phone No: 33b.Ghb.1698.(Ha...........
Onsite Representative: Keunt:thlYCAp,ILC................................... Integrator:.-•-•---•-•-•-•-•-•-•---•-•-•---•---._._._..
Certified Operator: KcauthA ...........................W.JrjgbI.............................................. Operator Certification Number:21.Q09.............................
Location of Farm:
7rom WSRO take US 158 east to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn left and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on right (Wright
)airy Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
[]Swine []Poultry ® Cattle []Horse Latitude 36 • 17I F-42-T Longitude 79 •F 46 1 15
Design Current
Swine Canseity Ponulation
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
tin¢ Ponds / Solid Trans 2
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca city Po ulation
❑ Layer rig Dairy 190 95
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 190
Total SSLW 266,000
Diseharees & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & 'treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .........Upper ......... ......... Lnwy-t-------- ------------------------------------------------ ....--•--------------- ---
Freeboard (inches): 48 48
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
0 No
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 79-6 • Date of Inspection 1/20/2004 •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Fescue
Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
r
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes [I No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to u lion # : Explain any Y an a and/or any recommendations or an other comme tsif .
drawings of faci to better explain situations. u additional pages as neces ary : ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
3. Crossing in the dry cow pasture looks ok for now. Check next spring or summer during next visit.
8. Stock trail needs repair and maintenance. Getting some run-off of waste into the vegetated buffer. Not a water quality concern today,
however.
17. Operator needs copy of the newest permit and COC. DWQ to send to operator at: 841 Woolen Store Rd., Reidsville, NC, 27320
18. DWQ to send copy of the checklists since these were not in his records this time.
19. Records look good.
5. Operator requested a copy of the available renewal courses taught in Raleigh this year. DWQ to send.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMel�ssp Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. U � , L% Date: d 0
12112103 t ✓ Continued

Facility Number: 79-6 D; of Inspection 1/20/2004 •
Required
Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
❑ No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
® Yes
❑ No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12/12/03

0 It
i Type of Visit )0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation '
Reason for Visit JpRoutine Q Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted C,retrttiifli-e�dd i[3 Conditionally
-7Certified
� [3 Registered
Farm Name: W Qk- � 4rV 0 1=G (- nq 11Gxh N. , -
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Design Current
II _I Wean to Feeder I I I
IL I Farrow to Feeder I I I
Time:
or Above Threshold:
Phone No:.3-3�
Operator Certification Number: \7 Q
aid lzma �E7
Design Current
Design Current
Poultr
Capacity Population Cottle
Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
I
ILJ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
q Q
I ❑ Boars I I I Total SSLW 1p'Z(o a �d
Number of Lagoons`:'
nu Ponds / Solid Traps
Discharges & Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ��❑,,.{{No
❑ Yes �pl No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? El Yes ` No
Waste Collection && Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes NNo
Strulcctttur`1IelJ.II fD Structure 2 St clure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
1i
Freeboard (inches): }
05103101 T Continued

racility Number: -7CJ— • Date of Inspection I 1 / •
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Aonlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over
12. Crop type
d 0 Excessive Ponding
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes aC1 No
Yes TTTTT❑E3 No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 1� No
PAN ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes o
13. Do the receiving crops differ v„'n those designatell 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? El 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
Reouired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?] Yes ❑ No
`'. 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Wasje Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design. maps, etc.) j �// . . / V� / ] Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑Yes o
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ YesAwNic,
o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑Yes
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? 4,No
(ie! discharge, freeboard problems. over application) ElYes
23. Did Reviewer,9nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ElYeso
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes /p(No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes //�No
ID No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Y i -, w� ^S `A.uL" .q .a .v "'�L.. "4Y]^'#Liss. ,fx-w.Tr' .YF.N.b.VS.. Sq�•r'f1:FY � .t f r„w, crx .
Comments (refer to goes0on � Ezplafn any YFS answersand/oranymommendahtros orany Mhe�r,commmts.�,� 4,'1 ��Jf�'I.4``� �,•da
Use dregswtnof facilityfto better ezplam situations (use addmonsl pages as net:essary) r Field Copy. Fial NotesGT ua 4
ReviewerAnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signai
Date:
05103/01
Continued

Facility Numberr — 7 of Inspection / 1 •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32, Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
O5103101
❑ Yes �•.No
El Yes KJ No
�O��"l D ^� 6' ��(.CXL.•_ /A..�'„/,C. "�'ly,�, c�%�l�J /�� �'/�/,V�'(iZ�' ��i'�GC�/li.it�%�i
ls

Assistance Site Visit Report
DivifflF of Soil and Water Conservation
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 79 © Date: 1019/03 Time: 11:00 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Wright Dairy of Rockingham County, Inc. County Rockingham Phone:
Mailing Address 315 Wright Dairy Rd. Reidsville NC
Onsite
Representative Kenneth Wright Integrator
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
ElNon-Dairy
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy
ElNon-Dairy
® Dairy
ElNon-Dairy
190
95
❑ Other
910-349-3696 or
27320
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ®no
surface waters or wetlands?
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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier Upper WSP j Lower WSP
Level (inches) 72 1 72
CROP TYPES [Com Soybeans Wheatj kheat
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 ApB SeB HwB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - 6 Date:
10/9/03
PARAMETER
O No 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
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
30. 2H.0200
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
[117. Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
[118. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
t • The wup was revised 4-08-03 for additional fields
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
and crop rotations.
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.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 © Date: 10I9I03
MENTS:
Waste analysis: 9-16-03 ALD 6.8 Ibs.N/1000 gals. B, ALD 6.8
6-20-03 ALD 0.86 " " I, LSD 10.7 "
3-28-03 ALD 1.1 " " 1
Provided Mr. Wright with some freeboard and application forms. New waste plan looks good. Records and facility look
)od overall.
Remember to get your 2003 soil samples in.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03
Entered By: IRocky Durham
03/10/03

I Facility Number 79 Date of Visit: 5/16/2002 'time. 1300
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Nave: bright.RaIKY..nf.RA.ckinghattx.t atxntY,.lnc..................................... County: RQ.CkjKtgbAM ................................... IVSRQ........
Owner Name: d.M........................................... WrIght.&S.Q.tis ....................................... Phone No: 1 arDx.33.G.:3.44..3.bQb..tic.S.tsve.3.44,.4.97Z.......
Mailing Address: J.15..W..rfight..D.afir.Y..iid........................................................................ &jdsY.Al.q..N.0 ........................................................ 2.7.12.0 ..............
Facility Contact: Kcau.0lt.Ylrigtlt...........................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:33.6..G1.6.tG98.kLauls..........
Onsite Representative: 1feulaeth........................................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Keatrtcth..&.......................... WClght.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 110.(19.............................
Location of Farm:
roni Reidsville take US 158 West 8 miles to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn Rt. and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on
right (Wright Dairy Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 17 ° 42 R Longitude 79 • 46 { 15 ,l
Design Current
Swine Caoacity Population
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca acit Po ulation
❑ Layer ® Dairy 190 120
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 190
Total SSLW 266,000
I Number of Lagoons 1 0� J❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area �' I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (.If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..... Uppec_W..SP...........Lctwez..kV.SP.......................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 60 72
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [_]No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 7976 Date of Inspection 1 5/16/2002 y.
5. Are there any immediate threats to thelegrity, of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tie severe erosion, ❑ Yes N 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 N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? N Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? N Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type orchardgrass Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? N Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes N No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
■ :im
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
N Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
(refer to question #): Explain'anyYES answers and/or any recommendations or another comments.
Comments to y
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations, (use additional pages as necessary) — "
❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
7. Continue efforts to control groundhogs.
8. Continue efforts to repair stocktrail.
9. Need to put up permanent marker on the upper W SP per permit.
19. Records will be easier to correct once the waste plan is revised.
25. Ask technical specialist (SWCD) to add "landfill" to mortality checklist.
25. As mentioned during last year's inspections, CAWMP needs to be revised to include a range of months for waste applications
(irrigation and broadcast). Also, hydrant 2 of field 2 (per irrigation drawing) is in grass while CAWMP lists small grain and corn.
H drant 1 of field 2 is in small grain or corn. CAWMP lists grass. Suggest revising CAWMP.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa R sebrock -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: S t!0
v
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 7v-6 Dateof nspection 5/16/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
❑ No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additional Comments anor Drawings:
r
O5103101

Type of Visit ? Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit koutine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: mc:
Facility Number
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted Certified O Conditionally ed 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: yy�
Farm Name: TT_ 14 h� 1 fJl rt� . q .. _ ' .�i County: �-��-� �� fTp • • .,may
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
No:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _F&A IIQF-- l /r-I u-N L un 1 Integrator:
Certified Operator: 4 � oy i Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
I Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude I .S (a I' I i 1 I' I `t G4" Longitude
Design Current Design Current
II__I Wean to Feeder I I I
3 LJ w to Feeder
H FarrowFarroto Finish
Poultr _ Ca aci
Pc ulsoon
❑ La er
FEES
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSL"
No Liquid Waste
Design
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? gJ Spillway
Structure
� �I� Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier. -,�-Zpf'�:x.T LnldarO7'
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
r ` q7
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
[I No
El Yes
A No
El Yes
o
El Yes
��.,,(N`
Q(1 No
�i
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection•
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? -Ayes XNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? 'KYes ❑ No
Waste Aonlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending [IPA [I Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type B
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designath in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (C WMP)? Yes b No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?- °2S ❑ Yes �[No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? El Yes t../No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes (2g No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ElYes/(6t�1j No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo
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 VNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & sdil sample reports) 0 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? �..Q.i�IC,J ❑ Yes ANo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes XNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes Wo
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? XYes ❑ No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
wY, ,.. v.1F fr 1. : 2* M1.il .e
Comments (refer to question #) 9Eiplain any YES answers',Candlor any recommendations or ariy'othercomments•�tx�
'`
Use drawings�oflfecilitydto')bette,,Ir���xeaplaintsltuations (use additional pages as necessa'ry�)
I �
Field Copy ❑Final Notes ,
4,0
i /
V'IlJ l�i�
/�CQI.X/V J
Q1'
O
Reviewer/Inspector Name
L� �^'' '
ram'*•""{ ' ,., ���
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Vllh&
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
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?
1Q0
❑ Yes f�No
El Yes No
cA�n��n.e�aGo7�—Gr.�o�1 e�U,
,ca4z* di"
,(ylI(Q.QP c4 6&4u p �hQ2cd���, CHI
F-a dt c°eutPAW. 41
-
05103101

Facility Number 79 6� Date of Visit: 3/12/2002 'rime: 10:00
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
®Permitted M Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: J.M. ..rfight-Earlm........................................................................................ County: iieclx ngbanx................................... WSRQ........
Owner Name: d.M.......................................... YSXigdt.tRc.SvOs........................................ Phone No: 91.0r.3.49.-3.69.6..Qr.+417 .........................................
Mailing Address: 315..WxlghQ.airy..>.id........................ :............................................... ReAllumv.A.0 ........................................................ VIM
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative: l{unciliMright....................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Nghike[h..lL.......................... Wright ............................................. Operator Certification Number: 7,10.09.............................
Location of Farm:
rom Reidsville take US 158 West 8 miles to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn Rt. and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on
•fight (Wright Dairy Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry M Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • =1 F-42 Longitude 79 • 46 15
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Ca Tacit Po ulation Poultry Ca tacit P,o ulation ,Cattle Ca acit Population
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer ®Dairy 190 1 116
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I on -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity 190
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSL'W 266,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M 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 D WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑.Yes M No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes M No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ..... Up{ter. W SP...........Lawrx. W.SP...................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48 60
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 79-6 Date of Inspection r 3/12/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i*ty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre*vere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structure on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(:[f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Orchard Grass (hay) Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ®No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® 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 YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. i.
Use drawings of facility to better explain, situations. (use additional pages as necessary): L❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
1 --
# 15. Mr. Wright has drilled more orchard grass on part of T3423 fld. # 2 to get a better stand of grass.
The waste utilization plan still needs to be updated for the application windows and possibly increase the allowable PAN applied to corn
silage.
Overall facility and records are in good shape.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iRocky Durham,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date:
05103101 Continued

Eac(14ty.Number: 79-6 Dasg of Inspection 3/12/2002
• 0.
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional romments'an orb raw n s N' �;ty���,on l '��,..'..� i' .n.. " zn�rx�,��ufill
Waste analysis: 9-25-01 LSD 12.5 lbs.N/1000 gals. B, ALD 0.85 lbs.N/1000 gals. B
05103101

(Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Vlsit 0• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 79 6 Daty of Visit: 2/1N2001 Time: 0945
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified O Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: d.H..W..rightfornk........................................................................................ County: R,ocdciWluimn.................................... .W.SIiO.......
Owner Name: d.1,l1.......................................... Wright.A.Sutts....................................... Phone No: 3 k-399-.3Se96.o�..4.42.7..........................................
Facility Contact: X9.0ttt:ih.W.6911t....................... ..................... ritle:............................................................... Phone No: 336.bdb.db9S........................
Mailing Address: 3.15....mim bt.Q..aifY..diti........................................................................ Rdd.5.yAc.NC ........................................................ Z73.2.0 ..............
OnsiteRepresentative: i4,CIM9.11bMid9bi....................................................................... Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Ktitateth................................ .w..A'ight.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 2100.9 ............................
Location of Farm:
From Reidsville take US 158 West 8 miles to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn Rt. and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on
*fight (Wright Dairy Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 17 42 Longitude 79 • 46 • 15 '
F V7
c,
Swine' 6
❑ Wean to Feeder
' ❑ Feeder to Finish
c. ir.Mm
Dest n •; Current x:
g
Ca acit iPo ulaiion
a»u .�y—'xwa ew..v 'txY ,i� s, ea..-.-y.. vti„
Desi n sCurrent Dest n Current
I ;,. g
Poultry ' Ca racrt Po tulation Cattle`'I Ca~'ac [.�Po ulation i
❑Layer ®Dairy 190 130 .-'
❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
9
❑ Farrow to Weann�
❑Other
Total Design Capacity 190
Total SS'W 266,000
❑ Farrow to Feeder
.
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
HuNumber of Lagoons �0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Fidd Area
(ding Ponds /Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges X Stream Impact
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes IM No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. 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 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
0//0//0/ � n Coptinued

Facility Number: 79-6 • Date of' Inspection 2/16/2001 • a' -
Waste Collection & frealment
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: .........P.w&Aff ......... ...........Liaid........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ................ kQ................ ................ b6................ ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
® Yes
❑ No
Waste
Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type Fescue (graze and hay) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack ol'adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
17.
Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
® No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records rc Documents
19.
Fail to have Cerdficate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
21,
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
Odor
Issues
28.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
® Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No
01/01/01
Continued

Facility Number: 79_6 1 l*)1'Inspeetion 2/16/20111 0
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application'? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon'?
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable' shutters, etc.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged till pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Printed on: 2/16/2001
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Com ents refer to eestion # : Explain any YES answers an or.Tanvirecommendations or any other commen .
Use drawin of facility to better explain situations. use additionalWageslasmemsarviM ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
7. Continue efforts to control burrow holes. Small hole started on upper waste structure.
9. Need marker with bottom of spillway marked on it now that permit has been issued. Operator to have this completed within 30 days.
13. Irrigation applications from lower (liquid) waste pond onto grass in Feb., Aug. and Sept. of 2000. Irrigation events for 2001 were in
an. (last week) and Feb. WUP only Iists.Sept. and Dec. as application months. Suggest contacting the SWCD to see if the WUP can be
revised.
Slurry applications from upper (push off) waste pond onto small grain fields was in Sept. of 2000. The WUP lists only Nov. as an
application month. May want to revise WUP.
15. Most recent application field was already re -seeded last week with orchardgrass.
21. Need to keep weekly freeboard per permit. Are currently taking readings after rain events.
28. Not a concern or problem on this farm at this time.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
01/01/01

Type of Visit A, Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 4p Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
® Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered
,Farm Name:.r...1u `.....>1..(�.1 is7.....::. C..� lr..m................................
Owner
Facility Contact: B(.
Mailing Address: ... 3.
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: ,,,�,
Location of Farm:
.....................................
...Title:........... ...........t .......
Time:
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
County:... i_n....L.i.%/t p./..................................7
Phone No: 11.3.13 :..3._f
................................... Phone
e.%ds......V... �..I le.....'.. NC........... a.7, a 0
Integrator: ...........................................................
.aroo
Operator Certification Number:.. ,ke r,�. {et bQSe
MIK Ise? t05 V I Ile, 16t" Hwy I I S't $ All r -N J l- rW f C rJ%�61 en s ror t V -.
r r h+ a l Os fo-5e&r d� F rd - on
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry txCattle [I Horse Latitude EM• I-17], F—iM°' Longitude • ' El '
Swine
Design . Current
-Canacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Ca le CapaSjty, Population
❑ Layer jjXDairy
❑ Non -Layer ILI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Ttital SSLW
Numberzof Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds] Solid Tr ;© ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes kNo
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? (II'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, 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 X No
01/01/01 Continued \ ■

Facility Number: _ . of Inspection I(6(/// /[a/ I •
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e..residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Printed on: 1/4/2001
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I
e Yes-8 No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
b.5.�Field
r.Copy
y yFnal Note ,
uee� i r79 (NeP-P� 1,t� -Fv—u )oao4-J read w
oatoItGa-iori?
q, Need marY-� bAw o; 5 dlbWc��/,-
C- rn a (a u i A(4gve- l i d evt`i 4- e-d o v` M x
b '
��iar 4t V{ave `i to 5' Corufk-+ed �/; n 3o d ` S
rcuy+ Pt e ado n e l� �a5 a l re -
bekA reseeded las6rc. kard 8 r-61,5s,
oW. No-[ a cone&m or prob Iern oh q4 s -Qr-►n.
13, 1 t-%-, ¢��oil �,pplI ec4-ior5 on ra'5 i n amb i P=e o l
up a
u
Co�+o�cs , ✓� 5toe--Q +o seel-e LOu'P Wan bo- I e,res�
.Trrnor
P'Vtl`l� t v� 000 1 re � v► Tan .�Fe 6
Slur nj uf l�ca ions Sn1ay9ra,lh �icis,w�5 ih 5604
Reviewer/Inspector Name' �' tt i
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date:
Need 4 ep UJL
01/01/01 PkIluo

Facility.Number: —
0 Date of Inspection (p Q 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes No
3�'�Strutctur Structgre 2 e Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
'; etitier: � b.om........ .. LI U1d.............................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ........... ..W.......... .............. /, _1..........................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any sluctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application?
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
designated in the CErtifkcq Animal Waste
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
17. Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes )(No
❑ Yes �(No
)dYes ❑ No
es �(No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes J[ No
Yes
0
nentt Plan (CAWMP)? El Yes
J�'IOo
Orc [ dgrac ❑ Yes
XNo
V ❑ Yes
*o
❑ Yes
VNo
Xj Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
*0
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary?
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
'r
i /
❑ Yes
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes XNo
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes _kNo
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �!V[o
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Vo
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
[]Yes
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yesl�ro
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes XNo
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes XNo
Odor Issues
.,�/ / a
28.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
)1fI Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
/ `
29.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within,24 hours?
�/
❑ Yes DA No
01/01/01
Continued

�ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 79 6 Date of Visit: 8/22/200U Time: 14:00 Primed an: 2/15/2001
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
S Permitted ■ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ]..lVlArighUBArta........................................................................................ County: K"kiugttatm................................... !\SRQ........
Owner Name: d RA ......................................... YYtigltl.tXc.S¢ms.............. .......................... Phone No: 91Q.:a.49.:ab9k..ax..4.4.7..........................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 315. ft1gh1D.Alry..IZd........................................................................ lieidsrille..NG........................................................ Z73z9 .............
Onsite Representative: lei.C.OtIcttk.W..r1gllt........................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:RgiamRill.%.......................... W..r.1ght.............................................. Operator Certification Nuniber:ZI.Q.99 .............................
Location of Farm:
From Reidsville take US 158 West 8 miles to SR 1001 (Woolen Store Rd.) and turn Rt. and go 2 miles to 2nd dirt road on
right (Wright Dairy Rd.) and go to end of road 0.4 miles.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 36 • 17 42 1, Longitude 79 • 46 15
-111
Design Current
Swine Canacity Pnmdatinn
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca tacit Po ulation
❑ Layer ® Dairy 190 125
❑ Non -Layer I I ILI Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 190
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges X Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No.
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'?
❑ Yes .
® No
%Vaste. Collection K 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: ..... Pnshaff..W..SP..... ..... Liquid..W..SP.....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36 30
5100
Continued
on back

Facilit Number: 79-6 Dateof Inspection] 8/22/2000 Printed o:2/15/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ trees, vere erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) _
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Grace) Fescue (Hay) Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records hS• Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
❑' No violatioIts:or deficiencies were:no e' d' :during this: visit' :You:will receive IIo ft kil'er
.. correSDoiidehce'abbijithis.visa. .
19. Start keeping weekly levels on the holding ponds per the General Permit requirements. Need to have waste analysis within 60
rys of application. Had `99 and 2000 soil samples.
verall operation and records looked good.
ante analysis: 10/4/99 LSD 2.7 lbs./ton, ALD 1.1 lbs./1000 gals. I, 1.1 lbs./1000 gals. B
Reviewer/Inspectorr Name 'Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

' Facility Number: 79-6 of Inspection 8/22/201111 • Printed on: 2/15/2001
4.1
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
[]No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation'?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged till pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
dmnaIMommen an or Dowigs:
5100
5100

19
19 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number 79 06 Date of Inspection 3/10/2000
Time of Inspection 1415 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted M Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: d..M..2i.'1'.ighl.k:,A[m........................................................................................ County: FW.ckjvZbam ................................... WSRO........
Owner Name: d..M........................................... )Yright.A.Suns....................................... . Phone No: 33.6z3.4%3.69.6..9rA4.7.7 .........................................
Facility Contact: Kcaneth-Wrigtlt...........................................Title: AberatQr ........................................... Phone No: 33.6,616,1698 .......................
MailingAddress: 315.11'right.Ralry..Rd........................................................................ RAday.01P.N.0 ........................................................ 2.7.320 .............
OnsiteRepresentative: laacth......................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:$,etllUetlAlt ............................ W.right.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 23009.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 • 17 42 Longitude 79 • 46 15
Swine g
Design
tCa acit
Cn[rent
P,o wlation
Design Current Destgnt 'Cur�en`t
Poulteyauc Ca tacit . P,o ulation Cattle Ca acit _'sPo ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
®Dairy
190
120
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑Other
Total Design @apacity 190
Total SSLW 266,000
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
Holding P„o„os /Solid Traps71�1[1
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Alma
No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes -®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Secondary Primary
Freeboard(inches): .............._4#...............................72...............................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 3/20/2000
-4� aq3 �] th..

Facility Number: 79-06 1) 'Inspection 3/10/2000
6. Are there structures on -site which are nooperly addressed and/or managed through a was management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Orchardgrass
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
Reuuired
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
No yiblatigtis;o� defciencies were;noted;duTing this. visit:...... receive .. ftirth;. .
corresuotideitce: about this.visit.::. .
Reviewer/Inspector Name jMelissa Rose ck Mike Mickey
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Rfl. 1rKPLb_.c_eDate:
on

v
Facility Number: 79-06 1). Inspection 3/10/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
®No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
® No
re
Printed on 3/20/2000

Routine
IFacility Number I
review O Other
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
Permitted [3 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified C] Registered C
,Farm Name: ... J...:..M....rl�Jy li��.....y................................................
Owner Name:........IXi17.tr:.1.11.1.....l.Q.1......................
Facility Contact: ...�t t,..I.r jL .{..........:Tide: Q it
36. Mailing Address:.....(.� njah....V.....tcw F �...:
24 hr. (hh:mm)
I Not Operational 1 Date Last Operated: ..........................
County:...... Q/cKi.n..,Qj-►arn.............................
Phone No:.... ��.�P.:.._�..!..../.. /3� &....I4..d r .q..g77
.r............................. Phone No: 3..k.'.!y..I.F!...'... !k'... t
C........UaO......
OnsiteRepresentative: .....................,..1......_....................................L............................................
Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:•..
esin.... ,1,4,h
f..........................._...__..__.
Operator Certification Number:•••,••„°�.,,J!Pi
Location of Farm:
_
5.. .r..e..:..................Ufa.....
01V.1... . I ..S.VL....................JnI...T"u.r.�...1�.......,t5........Q.... .......o..........
r��a..MI. .�eS......�....�nul.� ...t...r..... j.�an....r....'..: f.
a e
Latitude ®•
©1 =' Longitude ®• ®' �� Qt1 9�
_
0'e o. ni 1 kl
Design
`
" Currenti :' Desrgn •. ,Current, k Design Current
Swme. Ca acit ":Po iilation Poultry Capacity,'Pon lation ' ; Cattle 'r l ..Ca acit .: Po' ulation "
'ji;,
t,�
o '�k'. P •
�
❑ Other I 1
Total MAgn, Capddty,;
.'Total ssLw a 000
Nuniber'of Lagoons
® ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Bolding Pond's 'I Traps'
0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System r
•. _.. ..
Al" ..
❑ Wean [o Feeder
❑ Feeder [o Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑Boars
❑ Layer
Dairy
❑ Non -Layer
�' Non -Dairy
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. 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. II' discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (II' yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ��V[[No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 7[I 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: �y
Freeboard(inches): ....................................................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.) ////// ��'��'
3/23/99 �2 Continued on back

Facility Number: — Q I�X Inspection D 00
6. Are there structures on -site which are n000perly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ YesANo
(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 VNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
)(No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
YNO
12.
Crop type &
13.
Do the receiving crops differ A those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14,
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Renuired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
>No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
1�0
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
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
�o
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ywl
22.
Pail 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
I J (O

Facility Number: , — U 1) 1 Inspection 0 b 60
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes )(No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ` <No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 4 �fN0
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
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 AVNo
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? ❑ Yes �tNo

ek
Facility Number 79 6 Date of Inspection 9/29/99
Time of Inspection 11:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Q Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified t] Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: J..M..11a:ighffA[m........................................................................................ County: Iiackitigham................................... lISItQ........
Owner Name: 1.M........................................... WrI01A.Sixtis ....................................... Phone No: 91.0-3.44.:J69..6..or-44.7..7.................................. :.......
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 315..Wr.jgtrt.I)aAcy..id........................................................................ li.¢ &y..illV...N.C........................................................ 27NO .............
OnsiteRepresentative: lficrlrtctlr.t�..let..W..tight....................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:KcrntcildL.......................... Wright.............................................. Operator Certification Number: 2i009.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 • 17 42 .1 Longitude = • 46 15 fl
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pouulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry _ Capacity Population Cattle Ca racity Po tulation
❑ Layer I I Dairy I50 1 110
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 150
Total SSLW
Number of'Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area JEISpray Field Area
Holding Ponds hSolid Traps =rs. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges && Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) ...... 2.4..:'.(S.Rllll.5)...... ...... 4..$"..(liAeidl.....................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

4
Facilit Number: 79-6 D• of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are nooperly addressed and/or managed through a wWanagement or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application?
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze)
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
9/29/99
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
®No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
® Yes
❑ No
Remtired
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
®No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
Nti•Yiolatiotis:or deficiencies were itoted:dttriitg•this; Visiit: 'You:wili receive no ftir,116e ' •'
corresporideh& about this 'Nisit..:........ .. ... .
16 - Liquid spray equipment on site; need solids pump
Reviewer/Inspector Name bavid C. Russell
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number: 79-6 D Inspection 9/29/99 •
•
Odor Issues
t 26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
❑ No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
❑ No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
• " ona •otrimefits an oi• aw figs:

Of
of
Facility Number
Dale of Inspection
Time of Inspection M= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Permitted P Certified {] Conditionally Certified [3Registered Not O crational /Daate Last
`Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: �L..:l1 ......1/T/.2_! /UL!—........., "f.^,,,,..lYt........................................ County: .. _4�.1"`.l.N...�i./1.. '!
Owner Name: 07i..:./........1�"R �.. M .. �._C.??n%5...................:..................... Phone No:
- ..3 /!. —36 �(O 9... 5...... 3b 3�f9—.....�....r.✓
Facility Contact: Y. .......tN/{,.%.5. ................... Title:................................................................ one No:.......................
Mailing Address: ... 3/S WK.15...(.Y......_121 oe......te - �1.M..Cu„5..:>./../..('�..y./V.`.C. �--�
.............. tel .... ........................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: KQ.f.�i�Qlh...b..eVtZ...R.L....................................... Integrator.............................................
q.
Certified Operator., yJn/Q[ ,�t%tQ.,,(,G„/,!� ,./. !G�./�6.--�6,Rtl Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm: <V1 A,, RV_ b Je tli//_�e c7Yl Ar /i�i r7. �SO 10 95 1'/e.c 1 /17 SiZ jOJ/
Latitude ©' EV2,—: I" Longitude ®•
p ; •Design
Current °' , 'j Desrgn ,Current j
Design: Current `try
L
wine :, 'Capacity
Po ulation poalhY' .'t. Ca'l'actt . P Mahon . ;iCattle
Capacity Population' IS
r ❑ Wean to Feeder.:,
❑ Layer '' ,Dairy
.r
;'
_. ❑ Feeder to Finish
]❑ Non -Layer ,, ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
,. ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ri
JH
❑Farrow to Finish
"_ Total Desfgn;Capacfty,`
❑ Gilts
[,;
' Total
vp
... .. c i� t...
SSL W
....0 ..
❑soars
� •
Number of Lagoons +
r t ;
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
pray Field Area t, F
❑SV.
, L
HolBing Fonds / 6,QIid Traps
;f
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
p
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, 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 j1(J,IV0
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 1 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure �V
Identifier: , I \
ult�I.c /
Freeboard (inches): ..... .µ...L4.l�.�s. tT �� l^) Li.'1�.�..................................................................................................
.................................`................. ....
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes �y(No
seepage, etc.) /
3/23/99 Cf, 119 - 9 I Continued on back

Facility Number. '79— • 1 of Inspection
6.
Are there; structures on which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ve management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
WS10
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
-
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
/�`,r
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
9
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Pending ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
No
12.
Crop type Aq 3/.013'4 64&A j
13.
Do the receiving cr ps 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? [IYes rANo
!
11 c
j 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? [-. i "I �( S� RAI ni U t p� t) N tf � Yes ❑ No
Required Records & Documents N e 'Sy/ J R"4p l� (- p_,,
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? El Yes 9No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W UP, 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 �Io
. n
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
3/23/99

Division of Soilll Water Conservation [3Other
Aivision of Water Quality
Date of Inspection `t7 0L
Facility Number _ jj IL
Time of Inspcction 1® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered Certified jj 3 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted C
Farm Name:.. r......(! .na, 4t
/`
W� 'G sS. Owner Name:........�!.` ...................'........... _....On1S............................................
Facility Contact:.......'. 1111.0.........k
Mailing Address:....
Onsite Representative:. !`..!''�,
Certified Operator;........
Location of Farm:a. "L A a"
0 2
Latitude ME* ®'F7q7.1"
Title:
M
Date Last Operated:
County:.... �.1. ° . r!y ...............
Phone No: ..(-7 3t; 3'y 3`q4
�33 - — Vy77
P one No: ...................................
0a,-ds�;A W C. y73............
..............................y.....I..............................
......................................... Operator Certification Number .........................................
iv 9 W od Woo eu '5�s,ce
i
2i e� GL
Longitude ®• ®' ©11
Design Current
Design Current, , Current =_
� Dpag
Swine
Population
"Poultry
Capacity P pulahon-, Cattle t y" Population '
k ❑ Wean to Feeder
JE01 Layer
❑ Dairy 0
❑ Feeder to Finish
ILI Non -Layer I
I IL]Non-Dairyl
❑ Farrow to Wean`
N ❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Total Design CapacityEl
Gilts
❑ Boars
`,
� �
n
..'
z
"
Number of Lagoons
1 Holding Ponds_ J❑ ains Present ❑ Subsurface DrLagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area `?
N
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
�60
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
*0
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
00
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
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
❑ Yes
(Vo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
// vv
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97

------------
Facili$y Number: jCj— • •
^8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
�Vo
Structures (Lagoons.11oldina Ponds. Flush Pits. etc.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
\ —
❑ Yes*No
Structure l ,Sttructure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: /Oe �fP✓ RtlNo�'`t
l ..... �.............................v.......................................................................................
Structure 6
//......I ...................................
Freeboard (ft):........f..!� /
...................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
o
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
❑ Yes
o
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
(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 markets?
❑ Yes
o
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
NN�
o
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type 4.'.A1.... .[......�A'4..Al........................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
�10
CC
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
t8.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes20.
E00
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
P:�Jo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
P4No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
C
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
V)No
p No.vioNtionsor deficiencies were noted during this:visit..You:will receive 16 flirilter.
correspimdeuce tibout (his:visit.:: :

Facility Number
13 Registered U Certified 13 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Date of Inspection ® Winston -
Time of Inspection �24ILMO &W
erational Date Last Operated:....
County: .1.Q.(' (�uG ( /_
Phone No:
Phone No:
N f;
Office
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................................... ..................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: ... Ly.. _C.... �'f .. . ......... ........ Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ..................................................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number: .........................................
Latitude =• =' =11 Longitude =• =' 0"
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feede
Farrow to Finist
Boars
Other
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste Managen
Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
VNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
�f
�Q No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaVmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
1NNo
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
I_ fNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
�(No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
91 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
.in No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on sr which need to be property closed? • 0 Yes O Structures (Lapoons.11oldina Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0 Yes VNo
­�tincture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: yn,04 ............... sr& ................ .................................... ................................... ................................ . . ...................................
Freeboard(ft): ............. b ..................................... 46 .... ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
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 No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? P'Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? 0 Yes (NO
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? 0 Yes PrNO
(if in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type 14e—L) .... I .... . 5 ... C ............................................................... ...................................................................................................................
.... ................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? El Yes dNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? 0 Yes P No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 0 Yes EdNo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? 0 Yes No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 0 Yes 9No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? El Yes No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? P'Yes ❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? }'Yes 0 No
7-
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? El Yes FINO
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? El Yes 7110
. . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . .. . ..
corresp6fideine about this*. visit."
d- C19" 4'
F�Aar Jf)
cel-
goy Of w L,/P �0, pou p 4- ;2-,
?/-AA,5 tO
lA
5c,)bT-t� 1LrceV_05 V
o-(, hy5 t5 7/25/97H

Facility Number Date of Inspection
ITime of Inspection
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ' ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 in
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or It
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:......_ .........................
Farm Name: ... ..:.....WR t.....h�' �2h1
_........._......__..............._....._........._.......
Land Owner Name: `Y:.. .'.......� !. �7. SoNS...................................
24 hr. (hh:mm)
of hours
mt on Review
County: ... Ro, c �C,i.�S..O .!e'h. ^..._.... ......... ..........
Phone NoCl. ).......U.....�.lo2Jr?..(SiYI
Facility Conctact:...... [,NN t.................1�'R �..`3................. Title:............................... Phone No:
Mailing Address:.....3 S z.1
..........
Onsite Representative:..., N NZ
Certified Operator: ...... Q. iti-!!!`4,.9 R i
Location of Farm: �2v . X , AI ,I f //e r
A4 /
//V ................ /_...._........................_......._.................
t....l ....a............ 11v.�.?.�S. ✓ .... �!�....... . C. L% 3'ZD
r.............................................................
........................... Integrator:............................................
Operator Certification Number:
US l SY3 /.Jes Q1 _ R .1. )/P r rh .t
Latitude 0XV10 f7 , E7VE71" Longitude F7-7-10 ®, ©«
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 40
❑ Yes ?
K'
No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes to
❑ Yes
7LNO
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
o /
Continued on backV//

Facility Number: ......g... .....
6. 0?
Is facility not in compliance with any a$able setback criteria in effect at the time of
❑ Yes XNo
7. r13id the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes No
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes X140
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes Xy o
Freeboard (ft): Strt�turf 1 StruuI,c�ttllure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
.......... ........ J.v.�........ ............................ ............................
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?
❑ YesX 0
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate min um of maximum jr td eve) markers?
Waste Application S� It �Op , j wStT' L DY+.® Je Pa , f Ua eA ll st _Of of[
❑Yes ❑ No
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes [VNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type l�N.�... .....r�FiS.....................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes �61slo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes o
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes 0
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes )!J�No
21.
For
Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Certified Facilities Only
❑ Yes Xo
((((((
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes ❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes ❑ No
ORS f0tia �'OS lee't �tAsr 9t AO'p �V. Oj"
lad w �k,
p�� t'uI✓ ib r( `( t✓ �20CE4 o� C 017 le -NC c�2� Oi✓ .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: q%09 J
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97