310792_Compliance Evaluation Inspection_20160318

., Division of Water Resources
FacilityNumber j I Oj Z O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: t�tnpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 04 routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: / / Arrival Time: Departure Time: QSO County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: 5-C O f_�/ -1 A r e Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Wider to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feede
Farrow to Finish
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number: / t07 r
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity POD.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Stricture ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0-90 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes E5'No
[—]Yes El"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Z Date of inspection:
Wasfe Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [i]'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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
C;[-IQo ❑ 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
P4o"�❑ 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
ENo ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
b 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
F7�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste AaolIcation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ Nb
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Ls+" o
❑ 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
[,2�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
.E[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
0 o -❑
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
['-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
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
L�o
❑ 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 E�r_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes LJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: / - Q Z I jDate of inspection: 1 / (6 /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No EDINA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
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
V J No ❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
�to� ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
x I
��-w
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatm
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412015

F71J] N Division of Water Resources A
Facility Number - W O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: kcompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:
-�lQoou]tine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access II,
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ( Departure Time: County: h I (� Region:
Farm Name: aao Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: ,/\� Title:
�J Onsite Representative: ub.
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Q
Q
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pallets
,Furke s
Turkey 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 DW R)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [—]No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number:niz Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes YE] No
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure I Structure 2
1
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment
al threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ YesNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADplication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives 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 �ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
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?
Reauired 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�f'R14I
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
K,GG No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [KNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 9No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes [(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes );�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a 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 KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ❑ No
)NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes 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 Wo
❑ 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 YNo
❑ 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.
❑ 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?
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
�A
[—]Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
�Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
*o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: 90 1- Ct— (JCf /
Date: U ( j�
21412015

Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - C/1 ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review WStracture Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access (�
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ,l.. 1 Region: f NO
Farm Name: ' _ S (�� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: �" U y lei L Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feede
Feeder to Fansl
Farrow to Weai
Farrow to Feed
Farrow to Finis
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Pullets
Design Current
1. Is any discharge
and Stream Impacts n TI �1k"/
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? U
Discharge originated at: ❑ structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
A#
❑ Yes
"C No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility 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 v❑� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: 1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
�NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
I
maintenance or improvement?
XIN
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA *E
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) vV
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [:)6E
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E ]E
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 'aNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA r�rNE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA E
NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
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 E
ElWaste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ElWaste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather y(WCode
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA JJE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection: Q
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
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 ❑ NA j YNE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes lo ❑ 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 60E
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E
'❑
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes [Jo ❑ NA NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ,�-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional Daees as necessarv).
d Imo k 'Tj'CQ('Otll rd G(d t/. 6060 1 h u r-rj Gch1N' , (
t V'/K
CawQ 'ildl�rl c� (f
\& IAkAy4ew
tb rt u�c�$ o wou6w w
VN i I wtmr I is w {1
ot�r��al�le .
- wv�i haS I U rtuom ark
A 6' S, i oah shirr It r,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ►� <,, A
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
�00b� / WCN6.9
n((d 2 rnh�c accordance >� PtOKI
Phone: 1��—I"I�Q 13d7
_ Date: I D 2
�21412 'S

PLAN OF ACTION(Poa) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
Facility Number. 31-792
County. Duplin
Facility Name: Michael Hunter #1 (Hallsville)
Certified Operator Name: Scott Hunter Operator Number:
18075
1. Current liquid level(s) in inches as measured from the current liquid level in the lagoon to the
lowest point on the top of the dam for lagoons without spillways: and from the current liquid level
in the lagoon to the bottom of the spillway for lagoons with spillways.
Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4 Lagoon 5
Lagoon Name/ID:
Spillway(Y or N):
Level(inches):
2. Check all applicable items
Liquid level is within the designed structural freeboard elevations of one or more structures.
Five and 30 day Plans of Action are attached. Hydraulic and agronomic balances are
within acceptable ranges.
X Liquid level is within the 25 year 24 hour storm elevations for one or more structures. A
30 day Plan of Action is attached. Agronomic balance is within acceptable range.
Waste is to be pumped and hauled to off site locations. Volume and PAN content of waste
to be pumped and hauled is reflected in section III tables. Included within this plan is a list
of the proposed sites with related facility numbers, number of acres and receiving crop
information. Contact and secure approval from the DWQ prior to transfer of waste to a site
not covered in the facility's CAWMP.
Operation will be partially or fully depopulated.
'Attach a complete schedule with corresponding animal units and dates fro depopulation
'if animals are to be moved to another permitted facility, provide facility number, lagoon
freeboard levels and herd population for the receiving facility
3. Earliest possible date to begin land application of waste:
912412018
I hereby certify that I have reviewed the information listed above and included within the
attached Plan of Action, and to the best of my knowledge and ability, the information is
accurate and correct.
Michael Hunter Phone:
Facility Owner/Manager (print)
910 298-8364
Date: 10/15/2018
Facility Owner/Manager (signature)

II. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 25 YR./24
HR. STORM
STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1
Structure ID 1
line m =
52A lb PAN
2.
Structure ID
line m =
lb PAN
3
Structure ID.
line m =
lb PAN
4
Structure ID
line m =
lb PAN
5,
Structure ID
line m =
lb PAN
6
Structure ID.
line m =
lb PAN
In. lines 1+2+3+4+5+6= 524lbPAN
III. TOTAL PAN BALANCE REMAINING FOR AVAILABLE CROPS DURING 30 DAY DRAW DOWN
PERIOD. DO NOT LIST FIELDS TO WHICH PAN CANNOT BE APPLIED DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD.
o. tract #
p. field #
q crop
r. acres
s remaining IRR
2 PAN balance
(lb/acre)
L TOTAL PAN
BALANCE FOR
FIELD (Ibs.)
column r x s
u application window'
5369
1
small gram
1.40
50.00
700
Oct -Mar
5369
1A
small grain
0.50
50.00
25.0
Oct -Mar
5369
2
small grain
2.40
50.00
120-0
Oct -Mar
5369
3
small grain
2.50
50.00
125.0
Oct -Mar
5369
4
small grain
2.40
50.00
120.0
Oct -Mar
5369
5
small grain
2.40
50.00
120.0
Oct -Mar
5369
6
small grain
1.50
50.00
75.0
Oct -Mar
5369
7
small grain
0.80
50.00
40.0
Oct -Mar
5369
8
small grain
4.00
50.00
2000
Oct -Mar
5369
9
small grain
0.90
50.00
45.0
Oct -Mar
'State current crop ending application date or next crop application beginning date for available
receiving crops during 30 day draw down period.
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = 940 0 lb. PAN
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
w. Total PAN to be land applied (line In from section II) = 52 4 lb. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00

PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
30 DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
I. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1. Structure Name/Identifier (ID): 11
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr 124 hr storm storage & structural freeboard
a current liquid level according to marker
b designed 25 yr./24 hr. storm & structural freeboard
c, line b - line a (inches in red zone) _
d top of dike surface area according to design
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
e. line c/12 x line d x 7.48 gallons/ft3
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design
1.0 inches
1-9-51 inches
18 5 inches
47936 ftz
552782 gallons
180 days
g volume of waste produced according to structural design 52800 ft3
h. current herd # 1600 certified herd # 1600
actual waste produced = current herd # x line g =
certified herd #
i. volume of wash water according to structural design
j. excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k (lines h + i +j) x 7.48 x 30 days/line f=
4 Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
I current waste analysis dated 1 9/26/2018
m. ((lines e + k)/1000) x line I =
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE.
(Click on the next Structure tab shown below)
52800 ft'
0 ft3
29517 ft3
102622 gallons
0.08 Ibs/1000 gal.
52.4lbs PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2/21/00

k Division of Water Resources
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation lI r t S v
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: NCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: TTT,,, Routine O Complaint O Follow -tip O Referral O Emergency O Other
O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: DepartureTime:�County: N- to Region: WiQ'-U
Farm Name: (—bl,, m -qGI l,5'1/ l �) Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: C AA3(,{ mck
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
11-ayer
Non--
Layer
Poults
Design Current
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 DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Yes 14 No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [—]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
Yes No
Yes No
NA Ej NE
NA Ej NE
NA D NE
NA ONE
NA NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Faeili Number: - Date of -Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
YJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes to No j
❑ Yes IXI No
❑ 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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 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 Q Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): V
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
"O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes nNo ❑ 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: �� D(fY1 I (a 6,52 Ell /' 9
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes CKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the Facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑Yes ❑ No �NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes �!No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
77""
VNo
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 9No ❑ 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 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes W] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Ll I ql
oG k e wa Ij
Phone: GID-7411=73�i
Date: s `
21412015