430007_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quai
II

M Division bf Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
430007 Facility Status:
Active Permlt: AWS430007
❑ Denied Access
Inppectlon Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Harnett Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 02/06/2017 Entry Time: 11:00 am Exit Time: 12:00 pm
Farm Name: S-6 & Buffalo Ridge Farm
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC
incident 0
Owner Emall:
Phone:
910-296-1800
Melling Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 5922 Marks Rd Cameron NC 28326
Facility Statue: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35° 12' 35" Longitude: 79° 07' 46"
SR 1111 at Moore County boundary, Harnett Co., NC
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone;
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
0
page: 1

C
Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 02/06/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
0 Swine - Farrow to Wean
2,000
Swine - Feeder to Finish
9,202
Total Design Capacity: 11,202
'Total SSLW: 2,108,270
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
BUFFALO RIDGE
19.00
44.00
Lagoon
S-6
19.00
44.00
1
page: 2

S
Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 02/08/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream IMRacts
Yes
No No No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
Elm
❑
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)
❑
❑ 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yee
No Ns Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
■ ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
tjste Application
Yes No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
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 Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS430007
Inspection Date: 02/06/17
Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inpsection Type: - Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Blaney loamy sand, 2 to 8%
slopes
Soil.Type. 2
Gilead loamy sand, 0 to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
Checklists?
Design?
Maps?
Lease Agreements?
Other?
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
Weekly Freeboard?
Waste Analysis?
Soil analysis?
Waste Transfers?
Weather code?
❑ N ❑ ❑
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
Yes No Na Ne
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑ E ❑ ❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 02/06/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes _No
Na No
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
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
❑
M ❑ ❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
M ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑.
❑ ❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26, Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑ ❑
Other lesues
Yea
N,g„Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(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
❑
If Other, please specify
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 on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
430007 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS430007
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Harnett Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
03110/2015 Entry Time: 11:00 am
Exit Time: 12:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
S-6 & Buffalo Ridge Farm
Owner Emall:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 5922 Marks Rd Cameron NC 28326
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35' 12' 35" Longitude: 79° 07' 46"
SR 1111 at Moore County boundary, Harnett Co., NC
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative($):
Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative
Mike Cudd Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
2,400
Swine -Feeder to Finish
7,920
Total Design Capacity: 10,320
Total SSLW: 2,108,400
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
BUFFALO RIDGE
19.00
25.00
Lagoon
S-6
19.00
38.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Imi2acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at:
Structure
Application Field
Other
a. Was conveyance man-made?
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify 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 Waters of the
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
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 permit? (Not applicable
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
Hydraulic Overload?
Frozen Ground?
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
PAN?
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
Total Phosphorus?
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift?
Application outside of application area?
Yes No Na No
❑■❑❑
❑❑■❑
❑ ME] ❑
❑■❑❑
Yes No Na Ns
❑■❑❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
[■7 ■ ■.
❑■❑❑
❑ M ❑ ❑
❑e❑❑
Yes No Na No
❑■❑❑
❑■❑❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS430007 Owner -Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
430007
Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
_Ygs
_No No Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grasa
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Blaney
Soil Type 2
Gilead
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑0
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
■ ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑0
❑
Cl
Records and Documents
Yes MR Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

. '\
Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
430007
Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Xos No NP No
Crop yields?
[]
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
0
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?
❑
w ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous Ioss.assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewed]nspector fall to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
.� ❑
❑
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

r
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
430007 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWS430007
[] Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Data:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Harnett Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
03/18/2014 Entry Time: 09:30 am
Exit Time: 10:30 am Incident #
Farm Name:
S-6 & Buffalo Ridge Farm
Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
5922 Marks Rd
Cameron NC 28326
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 35° 12' 35" Longitude:
79° 07' 46"
SR 1111 at Moore County boundary, Harnett Co., NC
Question Areas:
Dlschrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Cudd Operator Certification Number: 25233
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Rep rosentative(a): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspeclor(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2125/14.
Site visit 3118114.
page: 1
f

Permit: AWS430007 Owner -Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
Swine - Feeder to Finish
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Data Start Data Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon BUFFALO RIDGE 19.00
Lagoon S-B 19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS430007 Owner -Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts
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?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
EIN
❑
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)
[]
❑ M
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes N Na No
4, Is storage capacity less than adequate?
[]
0 []
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural Freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc,)?
B. 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
190 No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PANT
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number, 430007
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yew_ No _Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grakn overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Blaney
Soil Type 2
Gilead
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 ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
yea _Hv,-No Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
N ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
EJ
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
[]
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
[]
0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

I
Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
N ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
E ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
N ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
430007 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS430007
Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine County:
Harnett Region:
Fayetteville
Data of Visit:
02/25/2013 Entry Time: 03:00 pm Exit Time: 4:00 pm Incident#
Farm Name:
S-6 & Buffalo Ridge Farm
-Owner. Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
5922 Marks Rd
Cameron NC 28326
Facility Status:
Compliant 0 Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35' 12' 35" Longitude:
79' 07' 46"
SR 1111 at Moore County boundary, Harnett Co., NC
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Sior, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
James Brian McGugan
Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Cudd
Phone:
On -site representative
Mike Cudd
Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s)
inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 214113
Site visit 2/25113
page: 1

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 02/25/13 Iripsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason For Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
2,400
Swine - Feeder to Finish
7,920
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date start Date Freaboard Freeboard
Lagoon BUFFALO RIDGE 19.00
Lagoon S-6 19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 430007
Inspection Date: 02/25/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No„NNo Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
El M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
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)
❑
E] 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection. Storage & Treatment
Yes
Nv Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
N ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
YRis No NP Me
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
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 Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS430007 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
430007
inspection Date: 02/25/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Blaney
Soil Type 2
Gilead
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?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
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?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page:
4

Permit: AWS430007 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brawn LLC Facility Number:
430007
Inspection Date: 02/25/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yea__No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[]
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑0
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yos No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[]
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 Cl
❑
(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
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by some agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

III
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 Arrival Time: :1W Departure Time: Q��L�i County: f ' AfW Ems -Region: fW
Farm Name: I� 0 �-3 Owner Email:
Owner Name: ,,
,I 1 _ �'�� uitz Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 14_e_644� Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator• Operator Certification Number: 17 63( J
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = I = 11 Longitude: = ° 0 ` =
61
Design
Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capaci
.opuluation.
Wet Poultry Capayity Population
Cattle
Cape ity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
f)j
❑ Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
❑ La ers
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers ers
❑ Beef Feeder
PulletsTurke
❑Beef Brood Cow
s
tJQIB1toars
oultshe
Number of Structures:
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(M NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
E? No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12/28/04
Continued

- 4
'
Date of Inspection
Facility Number:
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 [PNA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: 60 b Q3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 q 37 `I
5. Arc there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ yes
[LI No El NA El NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
1
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required butters, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No [INA ❑ NE
P
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
KN No ❑ NA El NE
El Excessive Ponding [I Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
f
❑ 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) L,& j5)M( ffir-rPK444V
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EpNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
J.ct: yr 5 (�vi 1 q11 r,
f tit - e� `'00 / .
Reviewer/Inspector Name F Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Am dAfya Date: 31q11 i
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. 1
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes F
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yicld ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Cade
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'?
❑ Yes
91No
❑ 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
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P 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
[4}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
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
QlNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of visit: W c:ompiiance inspection U uperation tcevtew U structure r;vamarion U i ecnmcai Assistance
Reason for Visit: 40 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: m r a Departure Time: County: IdRegion.. PRO
Farm Name: 6706- 6 D D 3 C$ 6 b g )Owner Email:
Owner Name: /V1, ,,-IIII r-"Mu,iii . 14 L Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: imr /a � (� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:li7
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current 11
eslgn Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
r
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
EEINon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
PI 20
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
2-CO
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkez Poults
ELj2ther
Other
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)?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
No
NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? E] Yes CgpNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [] Yes (!A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

a ypv UL V 131k; W l.VllIP11411L:C 1113'/GL.LIVIL %_J Wpr!-LLMM K%VVICW %_,; .7LCUCLUUU r VU1UUL1V1l V I1=11111CUR %&315LHUCr
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint Follow-up O Referral O Emerphcy Q Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 Arrival Time: m Departure Time: County: ?Region: i
Farm Name: 6 r 06— b00 Q-.3 C ip a )Owner Email•
Owner Name: — (pj Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: M `Gp ajc Title: Phone: A
Onsite Representative: l Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
SPINDesigu
Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity
Pop,
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
DairyCalf;~*w.
Feeder to Finish
11,720
Dairy,Heif6r
Farrow to Wean
qto
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, P,flultr
Ca aei
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
jl3eef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
s Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
' a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [] No [!� NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does 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
[�PNo
❑ NA
❑ N.E
❑ Yes
�g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1`
21412011 Continued
,Page 1 of 3.
1 �l . «...LR ., a '. . , '�'.. , � .,. .. bi, .... 'I,, - •-;, F.' Y.,' ,......1 1 r,. e ,,� t . � ^ ,' ,n. .f. ,. ti"f: ,. 1•. .. . �

Facili 'Number: Date of Inspection: �L
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No gg NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: WO--3 tp 706�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 a2' .95-11
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 9) 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 [3NA ❑ 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 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) T
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 E�?No ❑ 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): 60 S t p�1 I
13. Soil Type(s): Q lay tL, , c, \t-eapP
❑ NE
t 1
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?
T
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
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 P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard []Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes M No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 10 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili .Number: q27Date of Inspection: j5— j3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 structurc(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 M No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes T� 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.
PApplication 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
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ca No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Phone: 11I0-t(33^ ?CD
Date:
21412011

: -..'1-};f+"'„,...Y,,.�,.r•�;�.�•.: 5.��'F ^. ziy ,r. .. �r°"r %'ff y �P, •. f.� ,3 �m :�, ^d', :Y'+tii^, - . .a.
7'
", .r...
�'
acjU'.;Number: Date of Inspection: - -1 l3
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 to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA' ❑ NE
Other Issues
r
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?
\4
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.
TT
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.
Es-1 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
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page
3 of
Phone: 9 f 0 A?- 33Cx7
Date:
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number DE] - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of visit: QP Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 40 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time. ,ram Departure Time: County: AWtrrY t ! Region:
Farm Name: r1 s �s� ��'
7Y-rtiID !L caner Email:
Owner Name: Jri , - Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I k:e
Cw Title:
Onsite Representative: u
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone: 1
Integrator: M i n
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
ur 1 y outtry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
Design Current
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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dai Calf
Dairy Heifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No �0 NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
T
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[M No
T❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

� ;. v •�'r*.. d'f:,�,' 1-- a .-_ _�-..� 1 1.
~a ,� 0 Division of Water Quality
Fd' ility Number M � Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other'Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review' 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time. Departure Time: County: /�4A W Region"
Farm Name: �7�p��1 ���~ cStptatig�p ��wner Email:
Owner Name: [ n , LL Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1 � 614C41 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: �� Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
I non*inn of Parm• i.afitnrio• I.nnoifnrla•
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean;to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
% W
Farrow to Wean
oD
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
NLayer `
on -Layer
Design Current
Pullets
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: 0 Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a. Was the conveyance rhan-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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DaiEy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�s No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes'
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
m
Page 1 of 3 21412011 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
No
NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: �p7ob-1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[P 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
lu{ 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 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)
T
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
T
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [] Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or i 0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus [] Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop
Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop TYPe(s):�- ( (_ _ -r1 I Sri, �l^ W"1�
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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes q
No
❑ Yes No
❑ WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes t No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" 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 0 N
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
o
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Ds ection:
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 • ❑ 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?
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 E No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes EP
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or, any other comments `qq-
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
R_eca.j5 reJ t e,—.d 4z 4v�
S-4, 4 ©n 315112 ,
ReviewerlInspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q10-t133"5C0
Date: i Z
21412011

STIk5 *//Z/ ZOO 'Vole_ COn.PIi•'.� wor. L10'.'.r0- ►4d'& f
Facility Nutlitber Wj. 04-7
UDivision of Water Quality
O Division of So and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit
Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
,�C,,ompliance
tTKmp�outine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: _ZLf'/D Arrival Time: 7: OOA►'K Departure Time: -y aD ►u County:
Farm Name: -# 6 %06/ A'-%OB03 Owner Email:
Owner Name! M ` gi^O cJN t~ t— C Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ' Ke C"Ou Title: LNG MAWa4 e-s' Phone No: .
Onsite Representative: Integrator: M` 6y'.j/'J
Certified Operator: L�YIG 1<_rYGll
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
1763 y
Latitude: 0 0 = i Longitude: = ° 0 ` 0 "
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
1,7q2o
Farrow to Wean
Z 0D
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
ults
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other --- _�
Dry Poultry
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
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Daiix Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ 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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No [44 ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L o ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

V3 -00 7
Facility Number: -007 Date of Inspection 13 -Z4 -/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
ldentifier: 67061 6, 0803
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z. 9 3 4
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 L!_'f No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5
[I NA ❑NE
El NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes UTNo ❑ 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? El"' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
(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 Ll No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? ,_,,�
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes B< ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) �,yyKti a%— c� J
13. Soil type(s) ?(QN5::!:% G'- 14t
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement`?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
C�N
❑NA
[I NE
N
El NA
❑NI?
;I
['7NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
El NE
VL"1"N
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
:Comm his (refer to'4tiestion #). explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any otlier'cnniments, ?, '�
Use -drawings of facility to better explain situations: (use additional pages as necessary):
nlo+e ; Cow► } evrA/ (� y wlr, ToL�iv LAa4 ,vd c.ct !
P
•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone: 9/0 f33 —.334p
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 3-z'�- ZOO
12IZ8104 Continued

Facility Number-.#_4 —007 Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 ❑ Other
❑ Yes L'I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ 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
Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
LR<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
B o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
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
EYNo
❑ 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 Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

�NS GNk
�•� r i in1E w i ur�w�
�1D310 9
Type of Visit 0016ompliance inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /—Q Arrival Time: �QD !Departure Time: 3%3'f County: �A"NeRegion:
Farm Name -
Owner
Owner Email:
Owner Name: + rG a"'� ` �/N— t3 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /�a..edy $sir+-s ►Yw/e� Title: _ ro`v� 1M�Y • Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Integrator: AA L4 a ✓0-t--f ,j
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = I = 11 Longitude: = o = 6 =
it
DesignFPAIP.M�
rent' Design Currents Design Current
gum
Capacitiun
�!'et Poultry[
@ap�acity Pop latron.
Cattle Capacity 'Population
:: Y�AI....'S�la4�4-SY5
ls'��c. �:.R�F .i:"' -;'...JAR ftR ffMf�..JnNI 1°% # _WIWYk61L h'i.
❑ Layer ❑ DairyCow
❑ Non -La et ❑ Dai Calf
. El Dairy Heifer
Poultry I. f ❑ D Cow
a� ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish'`
Farrow to Wean
2 AD
❑ Farrow to FeederH`L
❑ Farrow to Finish
3 ❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
•'
k El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Brood Cow
3. �_ ....
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
ElI No
�,/
L'NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
B AA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
11 No
��
E NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
iffNoo
ElNA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
El<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facil ity%N umber: ,3 —db
Date of Inspection 3 7T-471
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[RNA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: A/y e,"eltdr:2
Spillway?:
'W
Designed Freeboard (in): ZO� 3
Observed Freeboard (in): 2— ._
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE,
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) �,/
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed El Yes LT 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 2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
2tvo
❑ 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
No
El NA El NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
2<
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop WindowEvidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
{ r❑
12. Crop type(s) _ t-Irt,....� c� J _ � rec. n t C. O /5
l3. Soil type(s) G a R
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
215oo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'?[] Yes
[3 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
S*N�o
[I NA ❑ NE
Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? [IRN
a
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question it): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ,
Reviewer/inspector Name ti G P_s� e,1S Phone: 91 o . '�33 .3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:Ar_4__Z_Date: 3 _ / — Z0"O
1LZL61U4 Co►Urnuea

Facility Number: 3 --OD7 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes v ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [I Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P3 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
p1qo—
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
I2O
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
01qo-
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
C5No
❑ 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
CJINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 I.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
Do
❑ 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
E/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawines:
12128104

Facility Number
*0 Division of Water (duality ��x�
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency 2A ,
Type of Visit f Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit �Ftoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: t Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: S'_ Owner Email:
nwnnr Namr• S kyn ._7 a IFUMS lint` -b m 4 PhnnP-
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: �� ��� 'Title: l N (n Phone NaR l0 OR (OS
OnsiteRepresentative:►Qrn�n Integrator: Mk L
Certified Operator: )V� Operator Certificationme2 lS
Back-up Operator: i Back-up Certification Number:— �ql
Location of Farm:
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feedei
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Latitude: = o = = Longitude: = ° 0 ' =
11
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I' ❑ Non-Layet
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Meife►
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ID
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation`? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
%,NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
'ONA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
ElNE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
ElYes
rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Date of Inspection
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
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): C
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 4 Structure 5
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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
El Yes ipj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �5(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ICJ 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 ADDlieation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ElNA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) w& �_ f OS
13. Soil type(s) C_)OL L1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Tallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Facility Number: —
I ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
not rt?Q� �a61,'sti
cav er n ,
Reviewer/inspector Name his—rE"knDIVPhone: Cf lip
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:(p]
— `% 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes VX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Cade
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes J�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 1ANA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
C&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
C&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
10 No
ElNA
❑ 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
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
El Yes
��qq
tgNo
❑ 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
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
E
12128104

Facility No.
Farm
OwnE
Oper,
Back-
COC
Time In _I ()D
Time Out //Date '-a o%
Integrator "U
Site Rep I �Q
No.
No.
PDES
Design
Current
Design
Current
Wean — Feed
Farrow — Feed
Wean — Finish
Farrow — Finish
Feed — Ein ish
Gilts 1 Boars
arrow —Wean-205D
Others
FR RD: Design
ObserV d 35
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge
Soil Test -Z-� ettable Acres
Weekly Freeboard Daily Rainfall
Spray/Freeboard Drop ,co \,_ �U
Weather Codes 120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
LED I �
Sludge Sun e 67
Calibration/GP
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker —'
PLAT
1-in Inspections
in►—
Date Nitrogen (N)
Pull/Field
Soil
Crop
Pan
Window

Division of Water Quality
FaldLty Number 0 4 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Ageney 'J` y0^i ^ 2
Type of Visit 111 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 ❑ Denied Access"
Date of Visit: i I r Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: r Region:
ik
Farm Name: 40 Owner Email:
Owner Name:Pf gm T y ca 0 cuo L4L Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact ,k Yd C. " Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: f-i1P_ `„
<11
Certified Operator: Qn n Operator Certification Number: O'�>—) I
Back-up Operator: + Back-up Certification Number: cml� L
Location of Farm: Latitude: =1 e it Longitude: = ° = 6 ❑
Si
Swine
y=
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
r ❑ Feeder to Finish
�Wiarrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
r"-
Design Current
Capacity .Population
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey 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?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity.Poi; la1.tion
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes E)jo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA
❑ NE
ElYes ElNo NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 4NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes J&o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [�'-Aio ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —00-7
Date of Inspection O
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes i No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes fQ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes & No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health ore iron ntal threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? �-'*)sr❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ff
Waste_ Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) M LIf 1 Q J 111 .--
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes --bNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes 'R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ,DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes E§�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
:�. _. ..
Reviewer/Inspector Name A�o Phone:
fro
Signature Date O�q�
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —+30'] Date of inspection a U
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes PdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El 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 ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
',BNo
❑ 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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PtNo
ElNA
[3NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
ElYes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
El NA
El NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
I
1
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
(�No
I&fo
El NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Ak
`C
U.Ud 1- a {
aqoax. T0.�jC(,,Q �r,�,Q erb d % n CUPA a-n hct c% �" X"` Se.Q G[ � M &dc k
DD
b1fe a.JA5 , r~ ah WIA U ldd k-l� 0,0
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility No. Time In Time Out Date 5 /0 -7
farrn Name Integrator
Owner 71 ew,' J) TkIN-S mo C0.r l nSite Rep I at-
Operator n iy No.
Back-up No,
COC Circle: General or CNPDES
Design
Current
Design
Current
Wean — Feed
Farrow - Feed
Wean — Finish
Farrow -- Finish
Feed — Finis
Gilts I Boars
Pftr—row — We
Ob
Others
FREEBOARD: Design 7 = 19
Sludge Survey n7�
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge
Soil Test
Weekly Freeboard +�
Spray/Freeboard Drop
Weather Codes
Observed
Calibration/GPM Lf 1
C
Waste Transfers
Raiff Breaker
LAT Wettable Acres
Daily Rainfall 1-in Inspections
120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
•3
113i
Date Nitrogen (N) ~� IQV � , 3
10 1 U (P( Do
I fS�
N ttC�
Wmlrjamr-m�.�� . i . .
1
j11

Type of Visit (!rCompliance 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 ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 'D Departure Time: 1 07:3)County: f ^r Region: LL1 ().
Farm Name: k..L
Owner Email:
Owner Name: rrrLi kyrt� s ,o �� /i/ e� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Facility Contact: 7 w 0 Z3
r7 �je_1x.JWa— Title: Phone No•
Onsite Representative: .sGr4-re— Integrator:
Certified Operator: �3i%1 ee° Operator Certification Dumber: 42
Back-up Operator:
Hack -up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [= e 0 6 0tA Longitude: = ° =1 = F1
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
��� ❑ Layer
I, ❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
i
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharaes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
ElBeef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: 71
b. Did the discharge reach waters ofthe 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 X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
,� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[R] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —Q Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 161 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): dZ
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any ofthe structures observed? ❑ Yes Rk.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 9 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 INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes D,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 f R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
main tenance/i mprovement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s) 6rfM;ct_
13.
i v
Soil type(s) ► Z "-at.
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Kyes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination',[]
Yes
94No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
�^ i ?.i.lur•°",�.�'�ri�j� ". c
t►ommentst(reier, to question #,) ' ExpEain,any YI;S answers;snd/or any recom�rEteitdatlons or any other comments.
x,''A E�
I1sr d w ng of facility to"better explain€situations. (use addrtionAl;pages{as'necu5sary)�
/ur eLol '�>e
v.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �+� rj- " w Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /� C7Dry
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — rj7 Date of Inspection�6
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes JQ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and i" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ 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
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 1 .
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
M.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Add[tionitl Coniments`arid/arDraWiil l3
12128104

1
f ;21a/dS
7e
Type of Visit 49 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4D Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z 0$/Arrival Time: Departure Time: O County: HARN Er Region: E&Q
Farm Name: S _ - ...,....,.,,_. Owner Email:
Owner Name: PQEM10µ STi4N.Rb_ FrffzMS Phone: fl1 o 0 Y
Mailing Address: QQ & K 1147 � N„ e✓ _ _ _ z 8 3L`
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: S�6?Lf4AY tl( L J, Title:
Onsite Representative: JEx_eMi HILL
Certified Operator: __ 1>62 1 Y _ `TY N
Back-up Operator: MM
Phone No: It/ 0 - Z gg_ 3 o� y
Integrator: i S P
Operator Certification Number: Z S_ t_s
Back-up Certification Number: t i
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 = A = Longitude: = ° 0 t 0
dt
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
i
[:]Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean ZY 00 K00
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts !
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other i
❑ La er
❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ 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
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
C4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
(& No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Date of Inspection 0
Facility Number: q3,—
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
Identifier:.
Spillway?: N 0
Designed Freeboard (in): (4 _
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
CKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ 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
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ 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
5,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
RNo
❑ 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 Croppp Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of
Area
12. Crop type(s) &rrvt'jot0. �'g"w e."VKA s tom; K LaJQ-rS�P_----
13. Soil type(s) ViA toktA—
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
W�o
❑ 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
ESNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility Mack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. `T1�.t� are- vj&rW Ko� +o �ra,. Y.
sPr- �leQ *--y
we.+- aA-e-..- vt per- of
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone: 9/0- Y86 - ISYl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ;L o S
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 44 — Date of Inspection K D
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 ElYes XNo ❑ NA ElNE
✓ [-Ithe appropiiate box. ❑ WUChecklisti, - ElDesi *' il❑ Ma g psi❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. KYes ❑ No ❑ NA ElNE
❑ Waste ApplicatioV❑ Weekly Freeboar#*,c ❑ Waste Analysis/ ❑Soil Analysit""❑ Waste Transfent"❑ Annual Certificatiorl---
❑ RainfaV51-Stocking ElCrop Yield-El120 Minute lnspectiork/❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspectiorfs' ❑ Weather CodL'-*�
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
CgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
SNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
RIo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ERNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ®,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Fj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 5KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Be,rmu,& 3/I - toes 340 16 I?A,4/ -C- O. 35' ,Kl�►r � 1.00
Ova se"A 10/ 1 - 3/ 31 5D l6 P" la•e
µ1"{_ Av-, 49e,5 '• (15_1aS
2. 4v
5 4116y
3.2
loK
+� s
s/6/0'i
y.z
S! �(of /DY
1'K
5-/310L(
3.o
8/5-/0N
(.1/1 /01
s.
/Z/oK
Z/Y /ay
Z•8
Z I . �'` 'rJ�i w t ►r���y` t,v..s : � ub wti � f' r¢-� e-t-'-1*a �o PS F o•FFi c � , P 1eas� i KG` U � e-
2N. ?hose WAtw��Iv% &�Vcpot rer.OrJS %�il--_ a,.-si4e reeo45.
12128104

Facility Number Datc c,f Vkit: i) Time: ' i
10 Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ 5 to County. r4J`nfl { , 4�D_
Owner Dame: ._9:�.m_Ar rk EC LnnC t/1QIS �) Phone No: .Z — D
Mailing Address- P. Q, Rnk _-44q
Facility Contact: CkriSPeyyiSSg& Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: VA Z e_,k .Le_ (A-mlle�_ Integrator: _P'[ 'C'
Certified Operator:Operator Certification Number: rt.S i I
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ° D4 Longitude • 1
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Ca acity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE1 Laver
❑ Dairy
ElFeeder to Finish
❑ Non -Laver
I
I
❑ Non -Dairy
® Farrow to wean
a4D6
El Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farro-w to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area' 10 5 rav Field Area
;Holding Ponds / Solld Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges g Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsenped, 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?
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 31
OSIV3101
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
A No
❑ Yes
ZNo
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 21.No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which arc not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes © No
(It' 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 Aunlicatio
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [RNo
12. Crop type e!`Lr� In -- '_ SM , C_02._{4_ 0'S ,
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? (ic/ 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?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �_kl No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes W No
❑Yes No
❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 4 3-, bate of Inspection 3 30
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Type of Visit �A Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine o Complaint 0 Follow up ()Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number I
Date of Visit:
Permitted 10 Certified /0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered
Farm Name: 5 — tc
Owner Name: Pri2mium Sear "'M
Mailing Address:
Time: i CO
t Operational
Date Last Operated or AboveThreshold%
County: He"p— # C
Phone No:
Facility Contact: N' Cft Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: —jerernU Integrator: f' S
Certified Operator: &4ene_ �m17teJ` Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
NSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 16 Du Longitude 0• 6 0"
Design Current
Swine rnnneity Ponnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
QqLso
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 11 1[] Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I Non-Daia II
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons Subsurface Drains Present La ,.on Area Spray Field Area
Hvlding'Pnnds I Solid Traps �N[] 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?
j
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 S
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6
Continued
ti-

Facility Number: — r} Date of Inspection �3
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?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes LN No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes UNo
❑ Yes [N 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 typeGM,'r, O
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
[XNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
MNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[A No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ❑ No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes [:]No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
?. V 1'�di� e-',� '' - y& - ;; �. rvka
'Comments'(refer to question #): Explain any YES,answersiland/or aRy recnntmen�[[dations or.'any;nther comments '
Y Y.R1iP.F'�i.t"�60t1 Sa �. .✓ ..
Use drawings..of facility to..better explain situations. (u"se additlanai`pagts as°necessary) 1+ ❑Field Copy ❑Final Notes
Vn S% nymat5 Cb(-R� Ix,% J. No \3 1 0 16A Ions
IV o 1 r [�'%j toil w','iLt i � `tom ieiS � Lo,,4 010 P a M p
CI
f (46► S iu ¢ 1k MC« R4c%: n e 1 S41 S Ll7' oV t1 Se Cox.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �� -0.�L� SV e_rmcL
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 xr,Continued

Facility Number: 'j — YJ
Date of Inspection=-y
ima 1=
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 bells, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Yes [,No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes [4 No
El Yes pJ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Add itional:.Comments and/or=U"ra' ho:
05103101
05103101

Information contained in this database is from non agency sources and is considered unconfirmed.
Animal Operation Telephone Lo
DWQ Facility Number 43 — 07
Date
7-14-2003
Farm Name g_6
Time
9:00am
Caller's Name lieremy
Control Number
13641
O Reporting O Complaint
Region
JFRO
Caller's Phone # [phone]
Access to harm
I'ay-oon Questions
Farm Accessible
from main road 10 Yes O No
Breached 10 Yes O No
Inundated 10 Yes O No
Overtopped 10 Yes O No
Animal I'o ulatiun
Water on O Yes O No
Outside Wall
Confined 10 Yes Q No 71
Dike Conditions O Yes O No
Depop 10 Yes O No
Feed Available 10 Yes O No
Freeboard Level
Mortality 10 Yes O No
Freeboard Plan Due Date
Inches (?equals blank)
Date Plan Date Freeboard
Received Level OK
Lagoon1 18" 7116I2003
7-1u-43 -lS=v3
Spray Availability
Lagoon2
Pumping
Equipment 10 Yes O No
Lagoon3
Lagoon4
Available
Fields O Yes O No
Lagoons �
0
0
Lagoon6
to Follow.
...._.rj(....Q.�.`•--•5,...�• T�_..__.i``.'�.._.._I�_L.��....S2.t'1.._._�_:_..S_G�_...QkC�...s: c.--•--._`:�ps,Y--tx.._...i..}.�.....��.!'�.j.? 7. ...--
Bax
Comments2

14-2003 MON 08:24 PM PSF OF NC, ING
,, FAX N0, 9102993016
P. 02
PLAN OF ACTION (PoA) FOR HIGH FREEBOARD AT ANIMAL FACILITIES
THIRTY (30) DAY DRAW DOWN PERIOD
1. TOTAL PAN TO BE LAND APPLIED PER WASTE STRUCTURE
1_ Structure Namelldentrt3er (ID): _�a {�C;l;�a W _yS J O-7
2. Current liquid volume in 25 yr_l24 hr. storm storage & structural freeboard
a. current liquid level according to marker 1 inches
b. designed 25 yr.124 hr. storm & structural freeboard i 9 inches
c. line b - line a (inches in red zone) = inches
d. top of dike surface area according to design /:22� ft2
(area at below structural freeboard elevation)
e. line c x line d x 7.48 alYq Ions - _10 0 gallons
12 fe
3. Projected volume of waste liquid produced during draw down period
f. temporary storage period according to structural design 20 days
g. volume of waste produced according to structural design 5y 10
ft'
h. actual waste produced = L44o current herd # x line g = SBj 63(9 ft,
ruao certified herd #
i_ volume of wash water -according to structural design
j, excess rainfall over evaporation according to design
k. (lines h + I +i) x 7.48 x 30-days =
line f
4. Total PAN to be land applied during draw down period
1. current waste analysis dated /3)03
m. lines e + k x line I =
1000
REPEAT SECTION I FOR EACH WASTE STRUCTURE ON SITE
�i
0607 50 fe
511 gallons
c2. 0 Ib/1000 gal.
r g� lb PAN
PoA (30 Day) =1I00 1

JUL-14-2003 MON 06:25 PM PSF OF NO. INC
_. FAX N0, 9102993016 P. 03
It. TOTAL POUNDS OF PAN STORED WITHIN STRUCTURAL FREEBOARD AND/OR 25 YR.124
HR. STORM STORAGE ELEVATIONS IN ALL WASTE STRUCTURES FOR FACILITY
1. structure ID: ,�, (9 line rn = i 13a - 9 a lb PAN
2. structure ID:
3. structure ID:
4. structure ID:
S. structure ID:
6. structure ID:
n. lines I + 2 + 3 + 4 + 6 + 6 =
line m = lb PAN
line rn = 1b PAN
fine m = lb PAN
line m = lb PAN
line m = lb PAN
1,13a lb PAN
111. TOTAL PAN BALANCE REMAINING FOR AVAILABLE CROPS DURING 30 ❑AYDRAW DOWN
PERIOD. DO NOT LIST FIELDS TO WHICH PAN CAN NOT BE APPLIES DURING THIS 30 DAY PERIOD.
o. tract #
p. field #
q. crop
r. acres
4
S. remaining
IRR-2 PAN
balance
(lb/acre)
t. TOTAL PAN
BALANCE
FOR FIELD
(lbs.)
colum n r x s
u. application
window'
A
�erm
1 -7
-75. 95
d a
—I - /v /s-
'�
eL-
o . 21
c
3.tr
At;?-5 75
5.
a.8ji
7.?. 35
.52
3r)
, 5
,G
2-0
-16 r
C�
. 9
Lao . Yd
.7 3 . & b
1.7
/v i
n
o
L
.8
3. 9
r o-7
a
•a
,IJ
1.5
. '73
, -7
o
•$
a` -ciI
$ .
D
519 -to iv
'State current crop enaing application date or next crop application meginning date for available receiving crops
during 30 day drawn down period
v. Total PAN available for all fields (sum of column t) = q,S �5• �� Ib. PAN
PoA (30 Day) 2121/00 z

-JUL- 14-2003 MON 06 : 25 PM PSF OF NO, INC _ ...... __. FAX N0. 9102993016 P. 04
IV. FACILITY'S PoA OVERALL PAN BALANCE
W. Total PAN to be land applied (line n from section 11) _ 'l 13.,)- q.:) lb. PAN
x. Crop's remaining PAN balance (line v from- section 111) lb. PAN
y. Overall PAN balance (w - x) = � q1,2; 3 lb. PAN
Line y must show as a deficit. If line y does not show as a deficit, list course of action here
including pump and haul, depopulation, herd reduction, etc. For pump & haul and herd
reduction options, recalculate new PAN based on new information, if new fields are to be
included as an option for lowering lagoon level, add these fields to the PAN balance table and
recalculate the overall PAN balance. If animal waste is to be hauled to another permitted
facility provide Information regarding the herd population and lagoon freeboard levels at the
receiving facility.
NARRATIVE:
PaA (30 oav) 2121/00 3

\V
Facility
Date of Visit: Time:
Time:
Number 10
of O erati na elow Thresh
d
Apermitted ❑ Certified
E3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated r Above Th hold:
Farm Name: f County: �' �l �
Owner Name: !� �' Phone No: •s/ — Z 10
R
/9
Mailing Address: '✓ Ale
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: i ii:74W CP- - Integrator:
Certified Operator: 71,110fet— Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 0a " Longitude ` �• ��
,E
E �,
:Design Current. ° °r Design ".°Cttrrent ;� `' E; 4,;Design` ;� Cnrrei '
Swine Capacity.
Population Poult ' • Ca'iicity Po ulation A Ca acitv,: Po iiEatian
Wean to Feeder
I IE3 Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
E€
<< ❑ Non -Layer I : ❑ Non Dai
Farrow to Wean
E: 71 1
? 1,,
v 1i
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other '
Farrow to Finish
! Total Design Capacity ,
❑ Gilts
,
`_ �� a 'E,1 I„tE', `I� hE E°�`( irf �; E 1,,, 3 EII E ;i 3 i!�18 Its E`¢6
Boars
E, _SSM iE
i. k
Number of Lagoons
i ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ 5 rav Field Area 4!;
4 l
. i
t- 1
1io[ding Fantle /,So[Id T�ps,:`�G
E
S 3 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon El Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ YesTNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yeso
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes qNo
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 C-ollection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 11
0
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Frceboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

!2 . i ' 1
Facility Number: —
Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require 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 ver application? ❑ Excess' a Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic /Overload
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designate 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?
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?
El Yes �No
El Yes ^No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes )2No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 4rNo
❑ Yes RN o
❑ Yes 4PNo
❑ Yes AP 'No
❑ Yes J�INo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes fNo
o
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes
❑ Yes 4'No
❑ YesfNo
`lo
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this.visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
-. E -..e. 1 lute-53 1 3 f..t..� '.� ,`- i i 9.,F: 3
Comments,(refer to question;#) Explain any YES answers,and/ofany rko" &ntendations or anlv'ottter c mmettM1:jj r,,",},,£'i,'
l�,
Use drawis s of facility to better ex lean sttuattons.,(ase tdditional pages4s necessary) ' !
g 1z, �E i,rti f��Et ❑ Field Conv ❑ Final Notess',
�=
Farm �Ob/CS�oZ�C�ct We�/jt1�ti�r Gtr.t-�cl.
W,
.., -v'x -r,. t '1 ,.r• t� i-"41* ...,,,.. ..ryf-y, 3 3i
n
Reviewer/Inspector Name ES I�7 ? !
E. 3.3
:'
t; - e.�,tl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 v Continued

00
Type of Visit IF Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for VlsIt YRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: t' O 'Time: �O : 00
EFacility Numher
=Not 0 grational. el h old
Permitted aCeecrtitiffe_d O Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:y_10 County: ksl1e#- F+�O
Owner Name: �l�1Yt�UrrisoC Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: �tlro++�r rX��I ` Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: Wfu"--5&J rY
Operator Certification Number: 620-A3 ,2-
VSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • i 66 Longitude 0 1 Du
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dai
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ! ❑ Other
Farrow to Finish iin+sal haclan Cinnnrl
Boars
Subsurface Drains Present
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
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?
Area ILJ Spray Field Area I
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
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:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
O No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
Structure 6
Continued

r• .
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection ! OL
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel 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?
❑ Yes 1XNo
❑ Yes 1XNo
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes V No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
1� No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding AN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
IXYes
No
12. Crop type S
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
[yNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
lb. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�fNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
I No
18. Does facility fail to have all components of the Certified Anima[ Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe W , checklists design, ma te.)
Yes
9Yes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
Lr.V,,FNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0 No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
rVr No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
1 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 anyYES answers andlorny recnmmendatinns nrsuny other comments ,, :, ` . �;'
Use,drewin sof facllit er ex Ia.ln situ
p �..,, p „ges as�riecessary) h
g ations'' its a ❑Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
�. fah: 17
Il~' 0v�rcfp1+'c on on rcu y a.n 16s I r7otl) Ca lid (`n 6
C64trtu*_ 4 toor-on crop d^ Sty .n C}.ra�G �v�� j a_
5 Prr�'��g,
Rev iewerllnspector Name
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: r�}
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number: q,3 — Date of inspection y ��
QAU 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 permanentitemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes IYNo
❑ Yes lyNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Nilditidhail: Comments and/or, Draw
�I
�e- C- LOri4dn 40 t nc�uJf- I�,)a ed cures zone
A...,;..
-�r Qvuv Sol�`� Sewn (Soler ScC piP 2i�-L'^n nc�
{��'�" Wvt'� �. IVC�lr•'- tUQ f1Q�C�s tUA CXk1 e) evr6J, i cP
+Mrv& -rcr O-r L,�S�e- Lu&J,-r Lry-i -k, IA�4 WAze-,
Okt�nJ W r►r41 6e qL+ c3C n-cede Ofu Ge,�ovr.
KC, �J tf 15 Lo"ki'nq W( 6e^c lL,ttirrie y sn �U�S+�nJ At (,,-)Ltp
O510.3101

3AN-09-2002 WED 03;36 PM PSF OF NC, INC
'.-II0n Mii PI
FAX NO. 9102993016
PRENVIIUM STANDARD FARMS
OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
_-- P.O. 80:: 3'.+9 CLINTON. NC :3324-0349
Fax Cover Sheet
Dace:
To:' S
Company:
Time; 3 , 3 S
Fax #: 9 ry ` 070-7
Phone:
From: _ Jcr(rnU Ui1\ _ Phone Ext:
RE:
Number of pages including cover sheep:
P. 01
reR 2 wr.p
MESSAGE
we.a�1�
loy n216
��-' so1•a 4 ana
one ouAL kec1•,3. Berl
§%,c . oe-i a c1XWvi)- ZbrQ.
tic 01 ACC V,4 a:� r���y
art we
`5 �QCi1nQC�� I�� Ct7�. swvxe
V yo�n
n(,ec1
�Pr �ns�tc}�dn
' S1t}
�or a►�
sap'x
'bvx 3qi
IIAPORTANT CONFIDENTAAI
THIS FAX COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR
WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORA
CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVIL.gEGED.' IF YOU ARE NOT Z
EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERIN
INTENDED RECIPIENT), YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED'
DISTRIBUTION. OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICA
HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR,
IMMEDEATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETUR:H IT TO
REIMBURSE YOU FOR ANY REASONABLE E)'ENSE
(Art?) ZRI - 30 i U "Fa)c
[TY NOTICE
W USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO
ATION THAT IS PROPRIETARY,
-M INTENDED RECIPIENT (OV,&
THIS COMMUWICATION TO TSB
HAT ANY DISSEMINATION,
)N IS STRICTLY PROHIB=. IF YOU
.EASE NOTIFY THE SENDER
-M SENDER BY MAIL. SENDER WILL
~URRED. THANK YOU,
III

_ O orm. Or -Each*
FF
0
m
A"
M
[V
ow
0
z
x
cx_,
U
z
z
rL.
0
Lx_ i
r
CD
o ! .
QI
w
cv
0
0
CV
a�
o -
z
d ,
i
P
f_WM t M (1 8MW) _ (A) 1.73 - ='• ; - Fa Na:ne�: isr'ri$6S ' `' r,± ', ,
Farm Oww Premium Standard Fmmq'of HC �"r +Inig bn Operator
Ohs Address P.O. Box 340 - Irilpam Operator's
Ckdon, NC 28328 ` + Address
Ownees Phx* d 10 592.2104 Operators Phone 01
From Waste UtllhMon Plan
Crop Type heat Recommended PAN
Loading fWacre) = (B)50
111 r21 f3l (4) 151 fsl m fal 191 (in) rill
Date
(mrakldtp)
irrigation
PAN Appied
aste Analys (l5facre)
PAN' EA} x (9)
OW11000 g 1000
Ndr+ogen
Balance"
(Ibfacre)
(B) - 00)
Slant
Time
End
Time
i Total
Mi WI s
(3) - (2)
# O!
sprinlders
Operating
Flaw
Rate
(gallmin)
rotal Vokm
(gallons)
6) x (5) x (4
Volume
per Acre
(gaVacre)
(7)1(A)
8= 50
11101101
2b0 PM
4:00 PM 1
120
14 1
14
23 20
13,595
1.7
23.11
26.89
11l19/0 i
2:10 PM
4,10 PM
120
14
14
23,520
J TM5
1.7
23.11
3.78
11120W1
2:00 PM
2:30 PM
30
14
14
5,880
3.399
1.7
5.78
-2.00
=
_
00
-
-
�r 3
�.7
ONO
Crop Cycle Totals Total PAN
Owner's Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator (Pried} Operator CediSratian #
VOt�

' Dtvisian of Wafer QushtyE i 6
i i i1 �i 1' . _ 3EF r i i�
QI)ivisipn of Soil' and Water Conservation° " t� �ss��',';'1,i El k
' - E 0,0ther Agency ^ I(, �' , i `.
lit,,rl _.a I �i� �i:r?,�iEE ¢.�{�. �i i��a�$�....i, >_ <�,t ...!` .u'
IType of Visit (A Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
IReason for Visit Voutine O Complaint O Foilow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access I
Facility Number Date of Visit: - -O r Time: w % "v Printed on: 10/26/2000
o Nat O erational Q Below Threshold
EpPermitted O CCertified 0 Conditionallyy Certified 13Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: .....1,'Q&.... r.��... ;....s,t..`..!Y.................................................. County: ......... pw.-n.c ................................. . 1T0.......
Owner Name:...... 1e.—wcQ.....FnJ7vty...... "C r................................................... Phone No:..... 5�! —021 G ...............................
FacilityContact: ..........`.....Z- Fr,........�r'..1.f....................Title:.................................................................. Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: T...d..�.k:...`r,f......................................................................... ...........Cl�.'.. ^...,�.. N� .. $3.25.
• ........... ..............
Onsite Representative: ........ .r�.t..........'... ....................................................... Intel;rator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:.............0,t.1.11.a.di...............2.g1nS. y.............................. Operator Certification Number:..... O, .2�.4
Location of harm: r
i
[l'Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • + 14 Longitude �• �1 66
Design Current
on
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity a Clo o
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps JEJ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes I No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If' discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes [ f No
b. If discharge is ohserved, did it reach Water of the Stale'? (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 [P No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes P No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes jVNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: L) — 7 Date of Inspection G- -v Printed on: 10/26/2000
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
[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
[M No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding A PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
2 Yes
❑ No
12. Crap type 'Btx" 231L OK15el
_
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
tO No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
[§ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
INo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
O�No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
t No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ Wo, chests, dciWn, , etc.)
❑ Yes
JffNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irri on, free rd, waste arlorlysis & soil sam reports)
❑ Yes
m No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[RNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
16 No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
j No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
OfNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
El
0 No
�VQ YiPi >�iQnjs:o deFcW' n' des •vvi�re jiQtp#.O(Wiog tbis'vis�t; Yoh wild treeeiye eta; I u tjtter; .
• correspondeh& ab' f this visit:
Comments (irefer to qu6stidn fit): :Ex plaiti'aay YES answers and/or�'any recommendations 'or.a►�y. otherrco`miime"Ats.' ,1 ; ' if;p ;
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)
g t3' p
I6} tie&A 40 Spnj -qx t.ueec�s inn all 77��tc(S. rMPcY '�'�«� u_"_ecYs
SO(Ki retie `i a nwn 1�-t�a![�. a �i s � r )-a sp r;33,'Aq a&' &J ejs LUe 6 CA-1
NO&- ! 10fc+snaat, 44if '�je- tns1-11J !'b I"(P � `4;ti=e [e P_'O(s,?en -fM" ! Paw. J'_r/ sp""Y .
115nI .r &t , Il S �o r 1e'Y i n 4.A. 'fi a2 �i'tv [ilt., .. f i 1aia n c3IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: (q 4 O / 5/00

Faci ty Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 WNo
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 (j No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 52rNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments an or raMngs: {
5100

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
I AT &4;1
ffl?W
•
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RE5ouRCES
June 5, 2001
PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC. S-6 �U 12001
PO BOX 349
CLINTON NC 28329 W rO
ATTN: DAVID H. JAMES
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS430007
S-6
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Harnett County
Dear David H. James:
In accordance with your Notification of Change of Ownership received on May 4, 2001, we are
forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Premium Standard Farms of North Carolina,
Inc., authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land
application system in accordance with General Permit AWG 100000. This approval shall consist of the
operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of animal waste from the S-6,
located in Harnett County, with an animal capacity of no greater than 2400 Farrow to Wean and the
application to land as specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
Certificate of Coverage Number AWS430007 dated January 24, 2000, and shall be subject to the
conditions and limitations as specified therein. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required to
operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit,
the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to surface waters. An adequate
system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be
established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or
increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by this 'COC will require a
modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual increase in either
wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS
143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

APR--19-2001 THU 10.38 AM PSF OF NC, INC
FAX NO, 9102993016
P. 01
I
,l
PRENfIUItiI STANDARD FARIv.IS
OF NORTH CAROLINA-, I TC.
N U. B 0 X i4? CT.fvT0N v�
.,Fax Cover Sheet
Date: Y tt _01 _ i Time; f0 : q0
Company:
i
From: \AqT
RE:
Number of pages including Cover sheet:
MESSAGE
Fax #: 6CB36 910. 41 & - 0 07
Phone;
Y�
Phone Ext.:
e �i�vw��na i s C. SIMOA
wc%%* -ap
vn 4kc 00fte
(60%wi% hof%j ca^ck
4nc1 vtiii�s w� �+•c1 bact
:n fib
Sri,`a1o..'
ony FLXIN' 1140%&4 ' I vq M c
4 Cai 1 anti
r 'I ) �c p ; �
addtd Th't PJWC
Ant- _
IlsdO
43�d Me
6 40CIA .en
p e 411
t b�•rhwi to }?On 1
�v hs
. li 4ey �o kip you
Cap(,(Cl
vn evcryp,,,. .
IMPORTANT CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
TI4IS FAX COMMUNICATION IS INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL TO
WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PROPRIETARY,
CONFIDENTIAL OR PRIVILAEGED., IF YOU ARE NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT (OR AN
EMPLOYEE OR AGENT RESPONSIBLE FOR DELIVERING THIS COMMUNICATION TO THE
INTENDED RECIPIENT), YOU ARE HEREBY NOT1rMD THAT ANY DISSEMINATION.
DISTRIBUTION, OR COPYING OF THIS COMMUNICATION IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED. IF YOU
HAVE RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR. PLEASE NOTIFY THE SENDER
IMMEDEATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN IT TO `I`RE SENDER BY MAIL. SENDER WILL
REIMBURSE YOU FOR ANY REASONABLE EXPENSE INCURRED. THANK YOU.

API-19-2001 THU 10:38 AM PSF OF NO, INC FAX NO. 9102993016 P. 02
PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS
OF NORTH CAROLINA, INC.
F.0,BOX 3,49 CLINTON, NC 28329-0349
FAX: 9 1 0 - 2 9 9 - 3 0 1 6
February 28, 2001
Bob Heath
NCDENR
Division of Water Quality ,
225 Green Street
Suite 714 Systei Bld.
Fayetteville, NC 28301.5043
Subject; Conversations concerning the lagoon levels and new lagoon gauges at our 96 (43-7) and Buffalo
Ridge (43-30) facilities.
Dear Mr. Heath:
This letter serves to document our discussions concerning PSF of NC's S6 and Buffalo Ridge facilities.
Due to the large number of projects and scope of the work that is being performed at these two farms, PSF
management has asked that I beep a detailed record of all State correspondence, written and phone, as well
as all designs, contracted information in order to improve the overall management of the farms. If there are
any other related topics we discussed that are not contained in the letter, please notify me and I will see that
they are added.
On 'Thursday, February 15, 20011 was notified late in the afternoon that Agriment Services had surveyed
and set a new lagoon stake at our S6 facility and we had lost approximately 6-7" of storage. In addition, I
was also informed that the buildings had just experienced a discharge. Farmpersonell stated it was backup
from the lagoon, which should not occur provided the plugs were replaced, as they should be. In order to
reduce the chance of confusion, I went to S6 to get a first hand look. When I arrived Gene Zimmer, a
member of the irrigation crew, met me at the gate and informed me that the recycle line he instructed them
to shut off the day before had been turned on and left on for a good portion of the night, The holes in i6
pit overflow were partially plugged which�caused the water to rise and overflow the pit. Clone and I Made
our way across the sprayfield on which the discharged had occurred. Most of the water had soaked into the
ground while it was still in the spray field. A small amount ran off of the field into a wooded and brushy
area, which is still on our property. We made our way through the brush to make certain the water held not
entered the water of the wetland at the base of the hill. We found the discharge had not entered the wedaa�d
and was in fact at least 200 feat (estimated) from any surface water. I questioned again to snake certain the
recycle liue had been turned off, and inspected the barn where the discharge had occurred to make sure
there were no other points of concern.
I then returned to the office to report the S6 facility discharge to DWQ. Do to the fact that it was after
hours I reported to the emergency BOO line. After completing this call, I phoned John Hasty with DWQ and
made him aware that I had reported the discharge to the emergency line. In addition, I notified him that a
new lagoon level gauge had been installed at S6 and that we had lost several inches. I informed him our
intent was to resurvey the stake to make certain it had been installed properly, and I would get back with
him to let him know of the correct level as soon as possible. i j4

APR-19--2001 THU 10:38 AM PSF OF NC, INC FAX NO, 9102993d16 P. 03
The following morning, Friday, February 16, 2001 while I was in the office updating everyone and we
were all discussing the steps we were going to proceed with, Gene called and said Bob Heath had been to
the farm and inspected the discharge area. 'I never received a call or message, which stated they were
inspecting the farm. If they had called I would have been present during the inspection. Normally, there is
not a strong English speaking person on this farm, therefore, a courtesy call prior to an inspection is best so
arrangements could be made to reduce the chance of miscommunication. This could be extremely helpful
to all parties involved. Gene was present and able to answer questions for Mr. Heath. Gene stated Mr.
Heath confirmed our findings from the; evening prior that no waste had entered waters of the wetland area.
Mr. Heath was concerned, however, that we had not reported that our S6 lagoon level was at 10". This 10"
reading was taken from the new stake installed the prior day. As mentioned earlier, I bad called this in to
John Hasty the night before. Again, I did not mention an exact level because the lagoon was to be
resurveyed, and the exact level was to be called in after we confirmed a correct level.
I contacted Mr. Heath's office Friday morning for his mobile but they didn't have it. I asked to speak with
John Hasty or anyone else from DWQ but they were all in the field so I asked to speak with someonc.from
Soil and Water. I asked the gentlemen 1 spoke with if there was a chance he could get me a mobile number
for Bob or John. He gave me Bob's mobile, which I used. 1 explained to Bob that 1 had left the message
on John's voice mail which he had no problem with. We discussed the level at S6. I told him we
reevaluating the stake and that we were planning to transport some of the water to Buffalo Ridge. He
stated this aught not be a good idea due tothe level at Buffalo Ridge. I asked him to explain that statement
because I had just received the lagoon levtil report and we were at 34". He told tree there had been a now
stake installed and it was reading 26".
We then got into the discussion on the lagoon design at Buffalo. Due to the dam height on this particular
lagoon it is mandatory that this lagoon have a spillway. He said this lagoon stake was suppose to be act so
that the 19" peg is 7" below the floor of the spillway. In addition our lagoon has more theft a 12" spillway
but only 12" can be considered in the design. I said, "Just to make sure I'm not confused, when the lagoon
was just beginning to tun out of the spillway the stake would read 12." He said, that was correct. Based on
this fact, the stake is set 12" too low. Currently the stake is set so the top of the stake is at the same height
as the floor of the spillway.
Next we discussed his concerns with us spreading on bare ground at S6 and Buffalo Ridge. I infornied him
that this ground was to be sprigged and the application dons now would be credited to the Bermuda Sprigs
as a 30 day preplant. To start with he was not sure that we could do that, but then renumbered that tha•
green up for Bermuda was March. He ended by saying that either way it was close, and it shouldn't be a
problem.
r
x
Lastly we discussed doing a 5-day Plan of Action for SC I let him know we were currently under a 30-day
plan of action where John Hasty determined we were at 16" of freeboard (our records show 1 S"), this being
the last week in January. Bob said to work up the 5-day and send it to them the first of the week. He
instructed me to send it to John Hasty if he was not available and let them know also what we determined
after reevaluating the lagoon elevations.
This covers the main topics we covered in our conversations on Friday.
John Hasty came to the farms the following Tuesday, February 20,2001 to do a follow-up. He observed,the,
work that was being performed. The lagoon bank at S6 is being smoothed, leveled and reseeded. A,
transfer line has been set up from S6 to Buffalo using two irrigation reels, which allows for only otie'..I S ;
connection point between the farms, making it safer and extremely easy to monitor. We discussed i'he 30-,
day preplant on Bermuda and he was also under the impression this was an acceptable practice. I asks d ' •.
him to notify us if he heard anything to the contrary. I asked him about the 5-day Plan of Action for S6; he, _
stated it was not necessary. We had the Buffalo Ridge lagoon reshot and a new stake installed too previous
day and the new level indicated our storage was adequate (34"), We now have two new stakes in the
lagoon; they ate set side by side near the pumping site on the lagoon. The tallest'stake is set according to
lagoon design and will be used for all official record keeping purposes. The shorter stake is set at the

APR-19-2001 THU 10:39 AM PSF OF NC, INC FAX NO. 9102993016 P. 04
! 1i
spillway level and will be used for irrigation purposes only; the irrigation crow will use this stake as a
reference for the amount of "actual storage".
If you have any questions concerning the information contained in the above letter or have additimW `
information that needs io be added, plcase,contact me at [phone]. Thank you for your aesistaace` " T ,,
Sincerely,
q4��. 41,\ - tin,
F �
Jeremy D. Hill a
Environmental Compliance Manager w
i
.1 y,
4 M "
5' F
,
f

10 Routine O Complaint_ Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review ,$$Other
Facility Number O Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ' 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered JE3 Not O erational D to Last Operated:
Farm Name: ....... y Q.q..G[ 1l.Z� -d •-grml... a6...................... County:............ .. rn.. .......... ...............
J /.....`.?. a c�
Owner Name:.....L,�zpy..ht -AA:../........r!�'!5...................................... Phone No.......... � ...5(....�.... �� ..................
Facility Contact: .......... .C. . Wi. ....... !................... Title:.. 4 a:!J ................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ..... r.0.:...... .r.�x........1...-Y........................................................... ......... ........................ 229
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:
Certified Operator:..................................:............................................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
A
Latitude a 6 « Longitude 6 44
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?
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? (lf 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: Freboard (inches): ......... /.................. ....................
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes " No
❑ Yes 19No
❑ Yes R''"No
9yes ❑ No
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes VNo
3/23/99 Continued on buck

Facility Number: — d Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ 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
1 I . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the Facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1.5. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reg uired 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?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19,
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
123.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection 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
.. Rio vi.. ti#0s'or dgficiencies were noted dOffig 4bis'visit' - ;Yost wiil-receiytt' 0o f tth • .
;corres�brideitce'. about: this :visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
ti s V SI1 tv cS e �V x eec% ©4 - J-�rd e<e h ex r-d /&uIS 'fL WIVI-141
I Aof beaf�_ repor+eJo
A.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: z —6rl 5/00

Facility Number Date of Inspection • S / 24*-b
Time of Inspection �' -- 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ❑ Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated .
Farm Name. A43...........................................
Owner Name: r�r`g��C�t G Phone No:����,..
............ ... ,,......................................... ............ � ......................
FacilityContact:Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:. ....... yl...:..... 1,]....r........Z227:... .�/'y ..<.r(.: 1UL ... ,./........................................................ .1.......I................
Onsite Representative:....... t .fr'T �...... �+_ (.... ......................................... Integrator:................................,........................................
Certified Operator: ,,,,,,,,.�.�!�....G........,�ll•, Operator Certification Number:,,�9Iz
Location of Farm:
i is
Latitude �� �� �•� Longitude �• �� �«
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine i Ca acit Po ulation, Poultry` , , Cg "acit Po" ulatjoW CaEtle' Ca acit Po 'ulatlon�tl4E'"
i
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
pU
2 6U
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑Non -Layer r ❑ Non -Dairy
r
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
1Ta, i�t,�jr, , ,� i i �1 - € ° $ I n�
i
Total `Ss .
Number of Lagoons �3. ,
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Ai JE1 Spray Fie AreaEE€ '
ir,� , -. ,. , i� 1 it
�Holding?Ponds /Solid Traps � ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes ,c] No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. Ir discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (Il' yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c, If'discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/tnin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes .91 No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 9No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ,RNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes fttNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) : ...............3,,( !'....................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes �iNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 3 — Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes � No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes j$ 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 Anolication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
RNo
12,
Crop type ..w
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
allo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
. 0 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
P-0
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
.WNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
9KNo
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
)Z No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
A -Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
WO
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
RNo
22.
hail 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
S�No
0; iQ yi9laions*
;or , cje opi wire pptpo. ittlx�ift this;vjsjt! Yoh ;wi1jteegiye o fu .
... ...
correspondence.about this visit. ... . .
S answers and/or an recommendations or'hfie they comments
y ). , p aain satuattp s (use Sdd ti6hal page''S as necessary)
Use drawings of facility to better e t
4 �_--.--�.+r-r.. -7 , - '•_il ��'1 1 i k ,• l I Y•.�t..'�
Reviewer/Ins ector Name �? f ' " c € i-. f t
p
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3/23/99

Facility Number: f,�7 —
Date of Inspection / a
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
[A -No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
gNo
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
NJ -No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
�No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
No
Additional Comments and/or rawings:
3/23/99

Facility Number 7 Date of Inspection®
Time: of Inspection Z :mod 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Permitted [3 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
p r� �/
Farm Name: ..... ,1......!b..S...r�........•iEk'�...�........ Count,•✓�•..........................•.................•
.................. ................ 3`:............
Owner Name :...........P�4...cell .... `i7N¢!'' ...........................I. Phone No: ......................................
Facility Contact: ................................................•.............................Title:................ Phone No:
MailingAddress: .................................................................................................
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:........��� .. �r9�-" l..............
CertifiedOperator:..................................................•............................................................. Operator Certification Number: ... .......................................
Location of Farm:
t
................ .............................. ...........I. ................ ..... .
Latitude '° '4 Longitude a6 44
Design Current _ 'Design'.Current Design
g �€ ,i
SiAne; 4�,r i.- Capacity Po ulation , �Pouftr i��.Ca acit ..,Po nlation� ' Cattle a ;; : Capacity
y3..� �,,
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 12
"
Z p�o
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer " !❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
{ Total Design Capacity
I I E i t jdl 1 i l l i; I
.,E t 1 otal;SSLW
---------------
Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ S ra Field Area
Number of Lagoons / : ❑ g p Y
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps C� ' ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 'k No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑Yes 'JK No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes tNo
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/ruin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes gg 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): ...........1.//.....................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ict trees, severe erosion, fig Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

`�*rr�.. :�, .�,-,y d1;"'..r�,�;;,,�_•t,,;,,. —.a' ..��.;s� t7i ,� ,..� n .fl- Irt '�', d � _. — .. _ .' - � .... -.�,
I E ', III i 3 _. p)<LSe!"Y tion{3, `l erattiOn R@VfeEW
E 'D Df�iston of Sod andtWater C }} gMk
t F r .. - 1 �_ 1 I.€ _ '7r, " ' p , "' ;g; .�+7p Ji:,�h
TTT
_ t �1 Divisi6niof Soil and Water CgnserVa4on.• Com itanceiinspecfJon ¢!� ,'ij f i.,S! E' }j l ih {t9 1 Egli! tl,s i { i i a 5;;1 rt
.P: tit„=.c'. 4. €Esc.i3i+i.€ .€.iEi YI.3:', •as'tliii� �7r P11 ly,i" 1 'I�-,
;.4 .'DIvisjon N ate C' uall =, Ciim 11aklGe'glnts� BCtiQn<E �;w i..'i;jI,El,i+f< , tttll€' i� Eali,t ,?l�I,i, , �, } ll� o; t ,Eli1 l i`i t' V
,.€. al: .:'^ 'aft 'Other, Agency- '-- I Ope, rr;.a,+utfiiro. n!Rner- vri, e, w,.t;r€''<irp:'-'', t;pi,.Nd ',�li..Ir.:'.�.I-rsauE�E�l�lsll„l€ .€F a;.jSt?€ralj;:. �l€►€i.s. >t;"`"hl�.=snt";.Su ; h'�hxtasl. ' 1...ux'•r.tj I€z..i a ai[,,;.urs Sc
Q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of D!4 inspection 0-Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
FFacility Number 7
Date of Inspection _zT__f x
Time of [nspectiou i 3'D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted [3 pCertified []Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ,l bps I��^r-.........�w... 5f�. County ..........................................^�....................................
................. �..,... .1/1
Owner Name........... d�.'4�u� ....../.. A"? 5 ...... Phone No: ....
Facility Contact: ..................�............................................... ...Title: ..... Phone No:
MailingAddress: ............................................................. ............
Onsite Representative: .................................................:........................ ., Integrator:........ .-..�..............
Certified Operator: ..................................
....................:..........................................I............. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
J_
•�
Latitude �� �� �•� Longitude
Design Current
Ca acit Po ulation .
A
❑ Wean to Feeder
[3 Feeder to Finish
50 Farrow to Wean
2
ZYOV
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
4 Number of Lagoons
Holdi4 Ponds tSolld Tra s
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
�p
❑ Other
Design :,
Cattle ` Ca actt `Po
�� ❑Dairy
I' ❑ Non -Dairy
Design''Capael'tY_'
S,II�i�ll
T
Subsurface Drains Present 0 Lagoon Are
No Liquid Waste Management System
❑ Spray Field Area
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes AN No
Discharge originated al: El Lagoon El Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance rnan-made? ❑ Yes �Q No
b, If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Stale'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 19 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 P9 No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation El Yes El No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [I Yes 51 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway `vl Yes El No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches):...........�U.............'.....................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, S2 Yes El No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back .,
{

Facility Number: — % Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public -health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
M No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ 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
M No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management -Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
91 No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
® Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16, Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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 C@ 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
iQ Y�ola iQrt�s :o% d�fic�er�cie wire pQte dtr>r`irig �hjs'visatt Your Will -rep iye trio: #'ftho : .
curies oridence: about this .visit.
Comrrtents-(refer.to.question #)• 9xpluin-any!YES answers and/or any,recomritendations or`Eany other comments if, E � °,f, �� F � LLy�
Use a drawings of facility. to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)':
-# -=.6 i' x:P.. 3�._i-._I r,;t r.=.:e �1,. S.. I. •i.,*�.ti€.H,.�`.:,�,
f
k
Reviewer/Inspector Name i ; d ?.; `1' �' 1 6_1; ,'1
p g /�%�� >�� Date: _ ,�-,Z l S !`. 1
Reviewer/Ins actor Signature-
3/23/99

)♦acility NumberLyl— 7 Date of Inspection
+� 6. Areihere 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?
& Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do art}/ stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Wartt_Application
la. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type A fice',. K
-z�
❑ 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)?
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?
V
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.).
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes M No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Q Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
© Yes [l No
❑ Yes ® No
0: q . i(Ap i0s'ojr d�# e�et�cies rp re nQt;e�1 d>!tt°i>r�g �his;vis�t; Yoij� wii� eetiiye ti u t gr
corres' &ideh& abaniti this .visit: • • • • • • •
-�+ :. 1 i 1•-.A 4 •"9. - E I {!'{9S .. 1R 4 1 -4.i i E t ! 'E4 ' 511..}M1 99 1} .�'Fp,pE t S I '9l195 i 6 €�".t491'EriBt'� i i .s}'•... E93 9 ad�<Stp
Comments (refer toiquestinni#) ExplainanyyYEEanswers and/or°any�recoimmendattpns111
Fdr any,otEterteoitnments.,,4
Useidrawings of faeilrty tatibetkerexplEam situations E (us addtttonaf pages asineceasaryj �'E;' ;�+:,g❑�'j�1�}'p,'l' r' i ,�{{ jj pq' ]7
• ..i, . . E _ .. € . .r `7, _•, n 1 ......< .. .. -I,S _ l 1.- iE E ,..t. � =i3d.IL.u<s ,..•.E:."�11 ii,.laEil, ii€•h, 4.a. � hP, eE� 1i•�1 .. �i; 1.�ie ss.i.3
fiac✓��" 6r�N�d' �l,�t �+En�s•�{��.r..�.�� �,.� ,�O LG�jocs•ll�+� -
y
{ ( t } E� i iii ck E
Reviewer/Inspector Name ff ti! �4��� 1l E �e��� gt�E ss� g4 �g}( �' s��,,,�is#ti��q(�
l .>E. r> FL ". �. 1 t IRl..:8: a - 1. ,..§;z _i6 �S a.< 1I}.<?. hiEEa s39�E9.A .rE&s, s. 4 }i..,�F}�?e i n $n...nt •, �.i1:8tT t JE[�4>.eE4i&d f. t 9, -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3/23199
M.S.:

❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
7$DWQ Animal Feedlot. Operation' Site Inspection
[routine �O Complaint 0-Follow-up of DWQ inspect
inn ire
Facility Number ctq —1
Farm Status•..
Follow-up of DSWC review
Date of Inspection Lo 9?
Time of Inspection 3 ()0 Use 24 hr. time
Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name:County:,.,.-,.4stA....-.........-........._...r.._.............
Owner Name: _. _ tom- v� e4{t Phone No: - la 14 caS-3 0°I
Mailing Address: Iql 4(3W&,; Q ed 2,.r%fs �G FA 30 `7
Onsite Representative: �.�►�`� �., �lo� ,,,_Integrator:.,�xr*L_.......
Certified Operator: E e'Lx— Operator Certification Number: . „ _....
Location of Farm:
4
Latitude 0 G
Longitude �• �+ t �K
10 Not 0 erationai Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
SW+Le ". w Mu^ Niem er ..'�� ,.?'Poultry' $ M r A Number• ` # Cattle ,,,L� % ,n W�
b Neimber-�...
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish Non -Lava Beef
a wto Wean%
Farrow to ceder
ET%mw to Finish c> e> P9 ❑ Other Type of Livestock
aw.. ... ... ',, +_,: a �'.:q...>•..s;'!w',`tit"xs�. .., �. �' �� "c.: o7Fc'� Via, �l5;^: .. .,_;, ,w ��� -
�ja,
..;aLsiumber of Lagoana f Holding kends r ]fC3 Subsurface Drains Present s
,,00ff�## >�•.
u
%{ w Lagoon Area JE3 Spray Field Area }
eral
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes JRNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes . 0 No
L If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes P No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) Q Yes (M 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
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 14No
4, Was 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 No
maintenance/improvement'?
Continued on back

- --- .. �..•••r„�,,,� wiur any appucaote setback criteria?
7- Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
B. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Struchrres (Lagoons and/or Noldino Pondsl
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft); Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 :Lagoon 3
I V%
10..Is seepage observed from any of the strucam?
I I. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need rna=* eaancelimprovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type 0 A
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
IS. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily -available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. ' Does facility require a follow up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/' tion with owner or o
P� perator is charge.
Comments.frefer.te<in��n;��:�- r_..t_ _:_�_i,,,,.,,.,..:•..::.. .....: --.- �..... .. .:...._ .
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Lagoon 4
Yes
❑ Yes J2 No
❑ Yes :4 No
Cl Yes tgNo
❑ Yes 29 No
Yes allo
❑ Yes RNo
S Yes 0 No
❑ Yes J.No
❑ Yes SNo .,
❑ Yes ENO
❑ Yes $I No
13 Yes 19 No
❑ Yes R1 No
�atlon, O -
gsyof facdttlC to better' Iarmsi "� ` _ , _ - : - .. <: ,.r coaimeutsr
F:: v tuagonnscaddttza pagesYas necessary�s,3s ":;,a..:....; . :s., '•5 :::;;'.
Cover Greta laws been i�roveSpAs
A stnuz LL
1 CeYlOti$ KIS\T, S-�Ill 1^AS S'Or++e. ���'tni���
SQri� Qer,r,ti,vd� -%t�.s sqr • _ \\
j��� � 4 on (o�oov� �•wrnywuE��t
,nn"'c�'-o`.-�V MOf1��r v��¢�grea�n�+ r`VEii�,� �1Eat•' lo�G00+1 �0.Y4L 'F-Dr �CE�°�'�Q'
` M•� gAvi�Q 3.d ,i,.,pcc AGrtS T.�t� ,��bL. nisp�►� JtaTiev�
a
Reviewer/Inspector N
Reviwe.r/Inspector Signature:
Date: ,3/Z o)
cc Division of if atcr Quality t`aterualti
Q n Secton, Facility Assessment Untt I I/ I s ioc

Upon notification.by the Division of this .COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall.be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change. application must be
submitted to. the DWQ prior to. a name change or change in ownership.
If any` parts,requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the-.
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting- the engineer listed below for
information on'this process: Unless- such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is=located in the Fayetteville Regional Office.. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at (9110) 486-1541. If you,.need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact J R Joshi at [phone] ext. 363.
Sincerely, .
_ A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc:; (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Harnett County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Harnett County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
A. Brad Bullock, Sr.
Three B Farms
900 Monticello Drive
Pinehurst NC 28374
Dear A. Brad Bullock, Sr.:
U.9 i
July 14, 1997
,111l. 18 1997
FAME T T EV:.LLk
SEG. 0rr=1-'-
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS430007
Three B Farms
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage
and Application System
Harnett County
In accordance with your application received on July 7, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate of
Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 43-7, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection, treatment,
storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached). This
approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of
animal waste from the Three B Farms, located in Harnett County, with an animal capacity of no greater
than 2400 Farrow to Wean and the. application to a minimum of 44 acres of land as specified in the
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001. Pursuant to this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and
limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of
wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater
than the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual
increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
In accordance with General Statue 143-215. IOC, Animal Waste Management Plans shall include
the following components:
- A checklist of odor sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- A checklist of insect sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- Provisions set forth for acceptable methods of disposing of mortalities.
- Provisions regarding emergency action plans.
.Your existing Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must include the above elements, by
December 31, 1998. Documentation of the certification must be available to inspectors onsite. Submittal
of the amended certification statement shall be required upon renewal of your permit coverage in 2001.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B.- Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Brad Bullock
Three B Farms
545 Highland Rd
Southern Pines NC 28307
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Three B Farms
Facility ID#: 43-7
Harnett County
Dear Mr. Bullock:
Xv?�WA
4��Iae
AM'*
E)F-=HNFZ
nECOVED
NOV 19 1996
FRIEW Fw u_
�:lp 4.
�. f
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission. on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A 'NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 919/733-0026.
Sincerel
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, W
NN"; Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687C An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
AW
Voice 919-715-4100 !! 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

__.. _.. FM 26 M
.. EMI. MANAGEMENT
FAYErTEYILLE RM OFFiC
� � ��
��
� �-

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B, Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
March 7, 1996
Brad Bullock
Route 3 Box 96
Mocksville, NC 27078
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION
Not Operating in Accordance With Certified Waste Management Plan
Three Bs Swine Farm
Marks Road
Harnett County
Dear Mr. Bullock:
This is to advise you that an inspection was conducted of your swine farm on February
7, 1996. The inspection revealed that no permanent cover crop has been established as of yet
which is in clearly not in accordance with your Certified Waste Management Plan (CWMP)
which is a violation of Title 15A of the North Carolina Administrative Code, Chapter 2,
Subchapter 2H, Section .0217(d).
It has been noted that your CWMP plainly states that your farm will need 44 acres of
coastal bermuda grass on which to land apply waste and your lagoon is designed to have
approximately 6 months of storage if managed properly. This plan was signed and dated April
2, 1994 which would then allow you up to 6 months to clear the land and establish a cover crop
and begin spraying. Otherwise, the storage capacity of the lagoon will be exceeded and the
lagoon dam integrity will subsequently be compromised. It was earlier observed that a breach
in the lagoon lining allowed waste water to escape via an underground vein that discharged on
to a down gradient field. However, this discharge of waste was quickly controlled by creating
a small "containment pool" and the breach was later repaired.' In addition, a previous inspection
revealed that waste from the above mentioned lagoon was being pumped to a new lagoon for
another new farm in order to charge it. This action was noted to lower the old lagoon level and
thereby obtain the necessary 1 foot of freeboard and the 25 year 24 hour storm event storage
capacity on the date of inspection., Therefore, it is recognized that while the new lagoon will
Wachovla Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville NO FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Mr. Bullock
Page 2
3/7/96
provide you with a way to keep the old lagoon level in compliance, a cover crop should have
been established, for spraying purposes as the new lagoon will fill up with waste from the old
lagoon and the waste generated by the new farm. Furthermore, it is clear that a winter cover
crop has not been established as was recommended in a previous correspondence and it is again
strongly suggested that one be established in the future so as to avoid potential excessively high
lagoon levels in the winter months. This office is also aware that recent wet weather and the
lagoon seepage has hampered efforts to establish a winter cover crop. Nevertheless, it is obvious
that a permanent crop of bermuda was not established and the CWMP was not followed.
Consequently, the purpose. of this letter is to advise you (1) To immediately begin
establishing a permanent crop of coastal bermuda as your CWMP states, ,(2) To warn you that
it is a violation of North Carolina General Statutes to discharge to the surface waters of the State
without a permit. The Division of Environmental Management has the authority to levy a civil
,penalty of not more than $10,000.00 per day per violation and failure to comply with these rules
can result in civil and/or criminal penalties or the facility may be required to apply for an
individual nondischarge permit.
It is requested that you forward to this office, at the address on the bottom of the previous
page, on or before March 25, 1996 a written statement indicating by what date you will ,have a
cover crop established and what actions you have taken to comply with CWMp. It is strongly
recommended that you contact Mr.. Parks Blake at [phone] for advice concerting this
matter.
It is also recommended that you contact this office upon receipt of this letter if you have
any questions. Please do not hesitate to contact either Mr. Ed Buchan, Environmental Engineer,
or Michael Wicker Water Quality Regional Supervisor, at [phone].
Sincerely,
MIac.-C.-Q WIC
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Diane Wilburn, DEM Compliance Group
Chris Walling, DSWC-FRO
Ed--Buclf&, DEM-ERO—
Michael Wicker, DEM-FRO

02/94/99 12:24 9108932795
-->4860707 ECM Ps. 01/06
RDISSiRSRPE.t
w •I�r if
FAMM
z7IR2S zi$
i+ A"-eia
zu can -CGS toys)
Waa Torts -ryas tort)
Buz=opmalmov
sa�■w .
Y3 =Now

ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
Producer; THAD BULLOCK
Location: ROUTE 3 BOX 205-1
CAMERON NC 28326
Telephone:
Type Operation: Existing Farrow to Weanling Swine
Number of Animals: 2400.00 sows
(Design Capacity)
STORAGE STRUCTURE: Anaerobic Waste Treatment Lagoon
APPLICATION METHOD: Irrigation
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a
specified rate to prevent pollution of surface water and/or
groundwater_ The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used
to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops
in the fields where the waste is to be applied.
This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the limiting nutrient.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle. Annual soil
tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant nutrients can be
balanced for realistic yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization
plan in order to maximize the fertilizer value of the waste and to
ensure that it is applied in an environmentally safe manner:
1. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be
grown and the nutrient content of the waste. Do not apply
more nitrogen than the crop can utilize.
2. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration
rates, leaching potentials, cation exchange capacities, and
available water holding capacities.
3. Normally waste shall be applied to land eroding at less than
5 tons per acre per year. waste may be applied to land
eroding at 5 or more tons per acre annually, but less than
10 tone per acre per year providing that adequate filter
strips are established.
4. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining,
or when the surface is frozen. Either of these conditions
may result in runoff to surface waters which is not allowed
under DWQ regulations.
---------------------------- Page. 1
40/Z0 'Bd W33 LOL0 M-- 96LZ£68016 9Z:71 66/7O/ZO

ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
5. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift and
downwind odor problems.
6. To maximize the value of the nutrients for crop production
and to reduce the potential for pollution, the waste should
be applied to a growing crop or applied not more than 30
days prior to planting a crop or forages breaking dormancy.
Injecting the waste or disking will conserve nutrients and
reduce odor problems.
This plan is based on the waste application method shown above. If
you choose to change methods in the future, you need to revise this
plan. Nutrient levels for different application methods are not the
same.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on
typical nutrient content for this type of facility. Acreage:
requirements should be based on the waste analysis report from your
waste management facility. In some cases you may want to have plant
analysis made, which could allow additional waste to be applied.
Provisions shall be made for the area receiving waste to be flexible
so as to accommodate changing waste analysis content and crop type.
Lime must be applied to maintain pH in the optimum range for specific
crop production.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements
for compliance with 15A NCAC 2H .0217 adopted by the Environmental
Management Commission.
AMOUNT of WASTE PRODUCED PER YEAR (gallons, ft3, tons, etc.)
2400 sows x 6.1 tons waste/sows/year - 14640 tons
AMOUNT OF PLANT AVAILABLE NITROGEN (PAN) PRODUCED PER YEAR
2400 sows x 5.4 The PAN/sows/year a 12960 lbs. PAN/year
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and
have appropriate equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
The following acreage will be needed for waste application based on the
crop to be grown, soil type and surface application.
---------------------------------- ------
Page: 2
90/£0 'fid Wad 10L0 M -- 96LZ£69016 9Z:Z1 66 M/ N

ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
TABLE 1: ACRES OWNED BY PRODUCER
TRACT
FIELD(
SOIL TYPE & CLASS-
ICROP
1YIELD1
LBS
ICOMM N
**
I& LBS
DETERMINING PHASE
CODE
I AW N
PER
AW N
IPER AC
AC
JACRESI
I USED
I
I-----
or
I-------
{ {
IAPPLYI
=
RESID.
APPLIC
1
{
I METH
{
N
I
I
TIME
I
3661
CAB
1$H
16.4
�300
29.0
I$700
II
I
I
I
I
(APR-SEP
3661
-1 1 GAB
I SMi
12 1104 1
129.0 12900
1
II
1 1 1
I (SEP-MAR
3661 2 1GAB
IBH
6.0 340
16.0
1600
I
II
1 I I
I
APR-SEP
3661 -2 JGAB
12 1100 1
16.0 1600
ISGH
I
I I I
I ISE&-MAR
fiND
1
I
I I I
!
TOTAL114000
- - Indicates that this field is being overseeded (i.e. interplanted) or
winter annuals follow summer annuals.
NOTE: The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while
meeting the N requirements. In the future, regulations may require
farmers in some parts of North Carolina to have a nutrient management
plan that addresses all nutrients. This plan only addresses nitrogen_
------------- --- Page: 3
90/VO 'Bd WOR 1O109W96M69016 9Z:Z1 66/VO/ZO

ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
__---_---------------------------------------------------------------
TABLE 2; ACRES WITH NOTARIZED AGREEMENT OR LONG TERM LEASE
(Agreement with adjacent landowners must be attached.)
(Required only if operator does not own adequate land.
see required specification 2.)
TRACT
FIELD
SOIL TYPE & CLASS-
CROP
IYTELD.
LES
ICOM N
**
* LBS
DETERMINING PHASE
]CODE
AW N
I PER
JACRES1
AW N
IPER ACI
AC
I
I USED
-----�
or
-APPLIC
APPLYJ
IRESID.
I
METH
I N
TIME
�MiD
TOTAL 0
Indicates that this field is being overseeded (i.e. interplanted) or winter
annuals follow summer annuals.
** Acreage figures may exceed'total acreage in fields due to overseeding.
* The AW N (animal waste nitrogen) equals total required nitrogen less
any commercial nitrogen (COMM N) supplied.
The following legend explains the crop codes used in tables 1 and 2 above;
CROP CODE
CROP
BH HYBRID BERMUDAGRASS-HAY
SCH SMALL -GRAIN I
TOTALS FROM TABLES 1 AND 2
ACRES LBS AW N USED
TABLE 1 35 14000
TABLE 2 0 0
UNITS IPER UNIT
TONS 50
TONS I so
Page; 4
90/90 'Bd W33 LOL0987<-- 961Z£69016 9Z:Zi 66/40/Z0

ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
I
TOTAL 35
*** BALANCE
14000
-1040 I
-------------------
*** This number must be less than or equal to 0 in order to
fully utilize the animal waste N produced.
--------- page: 5
ANIMAL WASTE UTILIZATION PLAN
90/90 'Bd W03 1OL099Y<-- 96LZ£69016 9Z:Z1 66/70/Z0

[3:Aivision of Soil and Water- Conservation='Operation Review
Pivision of Soil and Water Conservation - Complianct Inspecttnn
D1VrSlOn Uf,WateC,Quallty=tCompliilnce In§pection
OtheC'Agency Operatinn^ReV1L`W 4 r,,. I; i I' €
10 Routine Q Complaint ,Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up cif DSWC review Q Other ]
i ir�r�rr�r�ru
Facility Number. Mae of Inspection
Tinre of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted [] Certified y g' © Not Operational Date Last Operated:
[] Conditional) Certified ('� Registered
.................
Farm Narnc: Q � t��►-`— Count ..........�
....... FI................. ­­.1 . .....
Owner Namc:... ►...... .1 ..... { ...... A : ri............... Nhunc No: ...... ...........
�rf.�l.G.l. l'
Facility Contact: ....�. ,�.�� Gf( �,6. ...... 'Title: ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Phone No:
..... .
Mailing Address:......... V..... ...... ............ ... � YI C�. /l .frf.f"J�,..f./........&C.... 25--,7,7rt
Onsite Representative: .... G..�rr r .` .......�.J.A..i 4 .... 6,C�+... ......, Integrator:. ................... ....t.T.!/..-d.I&..........................
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
w
........ ... ................. . T
Latitude 0 9 �6 Longitude ' 4 6C
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
JCI Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Nan -Layer
JCI Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
24Ld}
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Othcr
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon syslcm?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
1Vaste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2
ldcntiricr:
Freeboard (inches) ................'................. ....................................
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes []No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
1/6/99 Continued ore back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -silo which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'?
(lf any of questions a-h was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need nriintenance/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 top of dike, 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? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop typo ..........................................................................................................................................................................................
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑Yes
El 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)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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 certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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
FI. NA'viola'tionS.Or: def'ici6icies :were nawd, dE in' .tlii' -visit.. Vo kvi11'ri c'eiv' ' i [lirthie'r.
et7rr• spoHidenee; about; this visit.. • . • . ' . ' . • . ' . . ' . ' . . ' . ' ... ' . . • . . ' . : : . . .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any_other, comments.; , vT
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
m GJ 04-ri-01 'S rfPreSerl, i ve5 4,
1 eve,I wr*- rz Arck ro r - a-J * tOas dderA4� 1,.ed
marker tr S no_� '-Ke- bW PO(VI_O-f- v h.e
a4,,al 4,_t✓ 6ar4 .sfc-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:

racuiry n'umDer_M.2._t
Division of Environmental Management '
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: �7T
Time: 3, Oo
General information:
Fans Name: Twtee 3 r f SoLk4,.i County: 1 kc r �\e-W .
Owner Name: Phone No:j( io)
On Site Representative: -TWhk Fa %Atx_k Integrator: C., ,rrro s
Mailing Address:._ &be-3 6 ox .2 oS - I
Nr_
Physical
Latitude:_ _._J_I Lon 'tude: I.�J .
QUratinn Descr'lptiom (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals 7jpe of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
A Sow _ 2'4 80 _ p Layer ❑ Dairy
O Nursery O Non -Layer O Beef
O Feeder
OtherType of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons:,_ (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1 foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
❑ Man-made ❑ Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
( list the cropswhich need improvement)
Crop type: M a n e; I Acreage:
Yes ❑
No Z
Yes ❑
No JQ
Yes ❑
No 14
Yes ❑
No 0
Yes ®
No ❑
Yes Q
No Cl
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located with'm200 feet of waste application? .
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application?
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
AOI - January 17,1"6
Yes ❑
Yes ❑
Yes ❑
Yes ❑
No W
No 0
No Lei
No W

Maintenance '
D soe�the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes U No
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes R No 0
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No %
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes 0 No IM
Explain any Yes answers-, l o'
1.0- ..rr �dye a ! P j . ! &&F . 1,4 S'��'ip� i [ S o r V-q- (-X,(Sf e l e a oLd Ao o (e cS Lu � � � L f & r w" 5 true v
r: 4-kp- , ,..'a w.. -,A - - moo + ',ill-t s„22�:A. -PCd h .X
Signature: Date
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments ('Needed
Drawings or baervations:
Ft ee bo�� a
u
AOI — January 17,19% Z

a.1. - rs ,ec 1' t+#.""•-� :`:: or. d .��,.:vr•. "�.,.- - �.. .4.r. Y -�:� .^rx'n .114.1 -Mlllll
n i
Facility Number: a3 - 2
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site visitation Record
Date:T/9f0
Time: 3: 00
General Information:
Farm Name: nt f& i SA _County: r, eAt
Owner Name: 13 rb 1, �,� loc_C , . Phone No: s-
On Site Representative., —n/wk Integrator: CA r-o k i ..
Mailing Address: go\i •4 . :I Sox -.2oS — f ... � ... _ .
0, 0 ra r
Physical
Latitude: 35 /_ 13 /„- Lon itude: 141 �_ d b 1 As—
Qpration WsCiuhon: (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type of Poultry No. of Animals 7jpe of Cattle No. of Animals
91 Sow 2K00 O Layer ❑ Dairy
U Nursery ❑ Non -Layer O Beef
a Feeder
Other7j pe of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons:j_-__• (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility„ ospection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1lfoot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?: Yes ❑ No 2K
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?: - Yes 0 No JQ
Is erosion observed?: Yes C] No �I
Is any discharge observed? Yes C] No 5A
0 Man-made Q Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?: Yes ® No C]
Does the cover crap need improvement?: Yes Q No C]
( list the crops which need improvement)
Crop type: 1,4e n & Acreage:._,
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application? Yes C] No 3
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? Yes C] No ED
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes 0 No Ib
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream? Yes ❑ No 0
AOI -- January 17,19%

Maintenance ;� f
Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes C! No$
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes R No ❑
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes 0 No IR
Did the facility fait to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes 13 ,No W
Explain any Yes answers; My- lj� joss_,,, 264,, -an 6,rl" _.,�.orb„ (wwA +b .
V'q sea]ed . Tk.rc I;z _ S+0 t sow cwr-csfie Ocoled w 'I-k bet,;,., Strvct-ure
t,J- Amto w a,4,( o'� c , �
Signature:_ `7-00:-- — - ---- Date•_ z _
cc.- Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed
Drawings or Observations:
AOI — January 17,19%
4

State of North Carolina W114,
•- Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources + • •
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor � �
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary 1 C P*4 P1
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
December 12, 1995
Mr. Brad Bullock
Route 3, Box 205-1
Cameron, NC 28386
SUBJECT: Three B Farms
43-7 CAFO #
Harnett County
Dear Mr. Bullock:
On November 27, 1995, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division
of Environmental Management inspected your animal operation and the lagoons serving this
operation. It was observed that there was some lagoon seepage in the new lagoon and the
old lagoon was leaching waste liquid via an underground vein. This leached waste material
was being contained in a man-made drainage pond. It was also noted that the older lagoon
did not have sufficient freeboard (approximately 16") but the waste liquid was being
transferred to the new lagoon in order to charge the lagoon. No significant leakage was
noted in the transfer pipeline. However, it was clear that there was no significant cover
crop on the spray fields.
In order to avoid any wastewater discharge, it is necessary that a cover crop of
winter rye be- established Immediately. In addition, the vein in the old lagoon should be
promptly repaired once the static pressure has been reduced enough to allow such activity.
It has been noted that Parks Blake, of the Natural Resources Conservation Services, is
currently providing consulting services so as to correct the deficiencies noted above.
Please be aware It is a violation of North Carolina General Statutes to discharge
wastewater to the surface waters of the State without a permit. The Division of
Environmental Management has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than
$10,000 per day per violation.
Wachovia Building, Sulte 714, Fayetteville, North Car oiina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 60% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Mr. Bullock
Page 2
December 12, 1995..
When the required corrective actions are, complete, please notify this office in
writing at the address below. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call
Ed Buchan or Michael Wicker at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ed Buchan
Environmental Engineer -I
EB/bs
Enclosure
cc: chael Wice
Harnett County Soil & Water Conservation District
Harnett County Health Department
Steve Bennett - NC Division of Soil & Water Conservation.
Operations Branch
Parks Blake - NRCS, Harnett County
Carroll's Foods - Howard Hobson

'E,Division of Soil and Water.Conservation '` Operation .Review y
1 [3 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance 5 1 `
,Division of3Waier Qu ilety :Compli ince Inspection Ise', j '�,'
� r EIS 3ono ,n
Other'A& cy'. Operatenn�,keVie i!i
LO Routine O Copl:tint a Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DtiWC review O Other �
Facility Number � Date: of Inspection —ZO--
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted Certified [] Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered IIE33 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: �%h,rt�� ,� Count . ►" e............................I.........
R.S'v.v........................................................ y= ...... 11.......
Owner Name: -A .... LaA B.k I l �ClkT...Sr.................. Phone. No: .....................................,........................................
Facility Contact: .....'J...,l ...Tt Phone No:
I f ..:��
Mailing Address ...... 170-0......
1.' 4.. � .�.... .! .+.tif4.�� j....!..`'4�....................... .7. ..
Onsite Representative:..... .LS.L. ...... ............................................... Integrator:.............. .. .G..�. 5................................
Certified Operator:...�. .F.. ............................. -ln ......................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................,
Location of Farm:
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
................................................................... ....
Latitude 0 4 66 Longitude • & 61
6wine Uapacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I 1E] Non -Dairy `
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity Llrb
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons JEI Subsurface Drains Present ❑ l goon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes J4 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. II'{discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. 1(discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge hypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ........pq... ......................
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
.............................................................................................
Structure 5
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
1/6/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: — i)ate or 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 arc 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/itnprovetnent`? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management systern other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need nurintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11.
Is there evidence of cr application? ElPonding ❑ Nitrogen
El Yes
El No
12,
Crop type........t............................................................. ........................... ..............................................................................................................
I........
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Ccrtil'icd Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14,
Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (limtprint)
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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 certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ 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
lVo:vitiiations or. ciefcienue5.werenoted during.this.visit:..Youvill.retreive nay further.:.
-P.
t•:respotridence, about. this visit.... ..... ; : .. .. ...... :. . .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments:
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):.'
//1:3 L11RS Gt 4/Z 'u k �iti l�1 rlS 2 �,� c,�� �p `1 r );l` ei004t^
r t� Av;_-�-J
��e✓. e��� s���� �t Ovjf. r.
-ae �err►ni QQ JJ f �!
G�hen.-
fl►e lea yaoale ue rr Ses c,6 b tie_ -4e- l " ree ut rr d aJ -lb I e& t-
f r,4e r ks W i _ 1 iti _; da,61
Revi ewerA nspecto r Name
ReviewerfInspector Signature: Date: r �%7
- ,..::_ c— - _,LQ1/6/99

o Eef # p,. '" bAIA YA.1AUAl U[E��7U11 dllU YY dLCr-.I.UFAaeCVdLI
t, Con
Dtvisian }af Soil and teservation
War Comp4ance InspectionF
a 9 o
Div*
of Wat'User,Qnality Comph�nce'Inspect�oh = > " ; "�` ,, ; €
v i' - 7 Ea F i�t 6 3 tE
OtheC A enC eratlan RCVIeW
g_. .p ,� a, •>.. , :... �. ,.,a:. . €t t', . �. . _ a s a : k.EE€::,€ , i i :"�_ ,<.,: € a Ez " s�f1> <•i,. e t • _ , a a ,a ,,,.
Q Routine Q Com laint Follow-u of DW ins cction Q Follow-u of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Q % Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ; 3d 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted E3 Certified E3 Conditionally Certified © Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ....Q...� 1a r� .. County:....�Y"......:.....................................
Owner Name:..r�` 4 �/� Sl• 1'houe No: G .
I/... �j 7......................
�/' �111 �1 .... �-t..................................... Phone No:
Facility Contact : ................................... C....................... Title: ,.
Mailing Address: � x�...L�..f.%ra....1..4.../.../.��.
..........................�......�
..: ���..................
OnsiteRepresentative: .............................. .................... . ...................................................... Integrator:......... .LT 1...I �5........................................
CertifiedOperator: ........................................ ........... ............. .................... I........................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
.................—..... ....................................................... ..................................................................
Latitude O'Oc0« Longitude �•�° 0«
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
z
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry _ _ Capacity Population Cattle _ Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I JEJ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid,Traps I No Liquid Waste Management System r
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
❑ Yes ❑ No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any 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'? A Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structurc 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier ���
Freeboard(inches): ...... "I'l.:...:.....:...:..""I'............"I'll""I............................................ I.........
1/6/99 Continued on back

cility.Number: — Q Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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 top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need tttaintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type..............................................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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 certified operator in responsible 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? 11
1p- 1Vo.vialatior�s or.deficiencies.were n'4&f during:thisvisit:. Yoti �vilfret�eive nil furiher: .
egrresp(xidefiee; about; this visit.; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; • • • •
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #}: Explain any YES answers and/or any, recommendations or any other, comments S t' ' ,
Use drawings of facility to:k etter explain'situations. (use additional paj es as necessary).:: _ r
a u. v i si
71 `m Q l�tCt1 •� u A r.
tv a S adv Sea( 4-A,4 ,`t` � la�� Awl rash 7 weire 45, n� �y
141wever 4?� -�CS 4r;ie •1- e level e;t- -7'-Xe `or Cr JT 6yedr �;Ac4es a-�
qs 1r 16-0 cz.r,, r`s 6rvr�'� ere- /t.� 4&e& 46 /]p�r'�-,`ca��c� @r�elr� OO�
0 jJ/�yY�f�1j �j� �yy, ��,tckcfed
/f'j} J�A kr(J oo �"- ca 'Gil/Isr M r, IJ a l of _, ��
1
r_11
0
Reviewer/Inspector Name '
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,G Date: / Zd 1
1I6199

Division of'Soil and Water Conservation = O aeration Review r r
l l,`t
�Drvision of Soil and Water Conservation - Complianc.e.lnspection I t
9P)nof Water.Quality 'Compliance inspection
Ot}rer"A ►l'nC O eC3tlon-Review-
y p i
Routine tD Com laint Follow-tii of l)W iris ectinn Q l+ollow-u of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number. '7 Date of lospeclion —17
Time of Inspection /$ ; D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
XPermitted [] Certified [3 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered JE3 Not Operational Date Last O crated:
Farm Name ,Y :...t rrY1 �..... County: 7` �`!�...... .
....
U�riier Name: , I E... � ................. l �yl/4!G./..... /t ............................. Phc�nc Nn:...............7J...a.�........5�/.S~.................................
1+acilily Contact: ... 4�..... �41� .......................'1'itic: ,. ..,. Phone No:.......................,...,..,....................
Mailing Address:.......9ao..., ....CPrl1�..... r^ti.................................... .. ..1..!Z .! .r y....�..".C.e....................
Onsite Representative:.,., US.............,........:......,..,.................,.,......,.,.................., Integrator: ............. LrA...(. �Q.II �f.......................................
'`� /I
Certified Operator:..,!..!.:!..711e/ eu.!T ...... �G..1 t!c L,l�iGf .I............ Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
......................... ... ......................... .......... ..... w
Latitude Longitude �• �� �«
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish 10 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
21
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity z
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ICISubsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JQNo Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream lmpact4
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated sit: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. II' discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge hypass a lagoon system? ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [:]No
3. Were there any 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? Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Siructure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) QJ.............. .................................... .......... ........ .................................... .................................... ....................................
1 /6/99 Continued on hack

Facility Number: 3 707% Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immctliate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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/inlpt•ovemertt`?
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11-27-971
0,Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes *0
❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type........................................................................................................................................................
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the CCrIIfiCLI Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14.
Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? ((ootprint)
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equtpulent?
❑ Yes
No
''11
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility rail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ 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 certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
freeboard
XYes
❑ No
(ictdischarge, problems, over application)
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?
AYes
❑ No
No.ViQlations or.deficienele's.were ni6t'ed.dar'in'g.Nii':Vlsit:..You w' ili.reeelVe nO Mrtfieir
eorrespgndei ee; about: this 'visit.:. • • : • : • ; • :.... :::.... : • „ • . • , .. • . • . • . • . .... • • •
Coma Tents (refer to question #): -Explain any YES answers and/or'any,recommendatiohs,or,any othermm coents a
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional /pages as neces{s'ary):
?5 Ur-si alas 4 6Go—up n � J ` t jj rr
Per 3Ose O�-�o,rw�. ��SCks$�� 4?i'� 65e/ w here 6e_5' t0 Pal,
ReviewerA ns pecto r Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
U6/99

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency " _ a
Division of Water Quality ref
nr
149 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number ;� T]�
Time of Inspection O 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered Of Certified[3 Applied for Permit Permitted © Not Opera Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:..................�.41-ke...................&�r .5.................................... County :.................... A.G�` ..........
Owner Name:........ c....... aP�4....................t tek�J„b. ��..�t.........`5�............ Phone No: ...............
....9/0..-�,?/.5'- clpo..................
FacilityContact : ...................!.14 .........$,td. j1 1. ........ Title:,..........,.................................................... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: ........ 00......1y70rr `iL,_-.lEj0.........a. i.c..................... I.... ...........1...1. .! .�1�'S f,......NC.............. °...............
f......
Onsite Representative: ..................... 14d.........11...4F, k. 4..................................... Integrators....... rry i I ........!.`�` k.......... ...
II ..
Certified Operator ;.......... T! .1&.45......... ..... ,A p kLlI BG ... Operator Certification Number•
Location of Farm.-
Latitude =a 6 ° Longitude • =` "
Ueslgn;Current :
,: * ,'N
�,
DeCurrent n Destgn CuKretat
�£
Swine'
Capacity Populhtion ..
Poultry °
,
Capacity Yopulatipn Cattle CapAc�ty 1?opulptio0;
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
10Non-Dairy
Farrow to Wean
21�00
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
`"l A
k .
Total Design Capacity.:: �
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds
❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110
Lagoon Area
❑ Spray Field Area
'z
:mm.....
`.
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
i.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
O(No
2.
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
PQ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
O(No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
*0
3.
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
[I Yes
No
4.
Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? `C�
❑ Yes
A No
5.
Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
(Yes
❑ No
maintenance/improvement? j
b.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design '-t-,—:.
❑ Yes
J�No'
7.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? r4,
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97'''

Facility ~umber: '9 —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need,to be properly closed?
Structures I,a goons 11oldin = Ponds Flush fits etc'.
9. Is storage capacity (Freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft). .......,...mat..«............
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures'?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 9 No
Structure. 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
........................................................................................................ ............. I ....... .........
....................... ......................... I .......... ...... ,.................... ......... ......... ............... ....... I....
0 Yes � No
11. Is erosion, or any ether threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12.. Do any of the structures need maintenance/imllrovenient'?
❑ Yes PO No
❑ Yes 1J No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack,.,, adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes 16No
Waste :kpplicaflon r'et:a+ri
14. is there f evidence of over application'? 9-Yes ❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or run�ff entering waters of the State, t otify DWQ) _
L .•
15. Crop type ........... t��,�,�:.......b. 1. m- .r .... .........OvIe .. -............................................1................I............
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the AnimalIste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes 19
No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? �-- ❑ Yes % No
I f
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? �� _ O K-Yes ❑ No
19. ,Is there a lack of available waste application equipment`? �A S N ❑Yes No
141
20, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? lia� r►- 7""` - r ❑ Yes jo No
21, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with otsrte reprgsent tip" iLL+re onf�" ❑ Yes (K\o
be I[
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ��� C� �� [Yes ❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities only �M ctc,.
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 )kNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'? ❑ Yes J9 No
0 No violations or d'iciende's.were,note'd during this,visit. Youm'ill receive no further"
eoerespondence ab.oitt this" visit'.,'.',.,',
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recotitittendattons or-any.oiher cortrittents� X,
Use'drawings of facility.ta better expiain `situatiitns. (use additiriti:iI pages"as.necessary) F£M y
S: 71�,1,c au a allAO K � -Put-) T�,�.
Wr aneao - Le c� i vt Gt �ar W&ks�- {hrx
Cowl 6P - V A/J ,l 1
�j
AW - -t PR�1 - t
5 — — — 1— .0 A]. AL /lam MR. w . • n.. i .. _ .. L�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
I Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:

Facility Number:......... L. . ...... I .... Date of Inspection:
1 .7.5-4E�2
Additional Co' m'm'ents "and/or" Drawings
�/,:�
?
AeYZZI t
L;l (51d .10-1 �1- l� �
COme- �D, S;941
6� ENV �- w,l�4 � ��-.�. .I�
4/30/9-1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
June 26, 1998
I llkT?WA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
A. Brad Bullock, Sr.
Three B Farms
RECEIVED
900 Monticello Drive
Pinehurst NC 28374
11 € 17 1998
Subject: Reissuance of Certificate of Coverage FAyM
No.AWS430007=-rK.
Three B Farms
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage and
Application System
Harnett County
Dear A. Brad Bullock, Sr.:
The Division of Water Quality modified the Swine Waste Operation General Permit originally issued to
this facility on July 14, 1997. In accordance with the issuance of the revised General Permit, we are
forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) to A. Brad Bullock, Sr., authorizing the operation of the
subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with
General Permit AWG100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but
not limited to, the management of animal waste from the Three B Farms, located in Harnett County,
with an animal capacity of no greater than 2400 Farrow to Wean and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
COC No AWS430007 dated July 14, 1997. The COC shall hereby incorporate by reference any specific
conditions of the previous COC issued to this facility. The purpose of this COC is to allow coverage
under the revised General Permit. Please review the revised General Permit (enclosed) and pay
particular attention to Condition II.10 regarding tree removal from lagoon embankments, Condition I1I.1
regarding inspection frequency of the waste treatment, storage and collection system and Condition III.6
regarding notification requirements for system failures, spills and emergencies. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations
as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the
General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance
with NCGS 143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive
relief.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS430007
Three B Farms
Page 2
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable; you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer -listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at (91-0) 486-1541. If you need additional information concerning this
COC or the General Permit, please contact Katharine Keaton at [phone] ext. 533.
Sincerely,
for A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Harnett County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Harnett County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

> J❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency_
® Division of Water Quality
�
_n :. 6 m•Ponr.x... k, i�»: _ +-wm.n:.R �`f: ..-.-,� ..:
f „ �' ^,^k .
♦. ..� <
0 Routine O Com hint 0 Follow-up of DW ins ection O Follow-up of OSWC review Q Other
Facility Number 7 Dale of Inspection
Time of Inspection = 24 hr. (hh:mm)
D Registered U Certified [3Applied for Permit M Permitted IMNot Opera Date Last Operated:
FarmName: ........Z eFr............................. I ................................ County:...........,,. x ................ ............
Owner Name........... ........ .,�dd.......................................................... Phone No-. _(M)...�fS .� ..................
................... ......
Facility Contact: ......2 ... !> 11 .................... Title:......................................... ................... Phone No:...................................................
1
Mailing Address:........' 14....� ��l..r+,drr�✓. � �rf....s�r�.f�.. ........... ..........................
Onsite Representative:.................��� .............................. Integratur:........G��...�/-? J,.,�.".t...
Certified Operator-,. .................. : ............ ! ................. ..... I .................................. .............. Operator Certification Number,.........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude �•.�� �" Longitude �• ��
Desin Current
bwme Capacity Population Poultry
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
,x 0-o
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
Mation Cattle Capgcity, P
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
�.
Total SSLW
❑ Subsurface Drains PrVsent ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray
;, ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Area
c
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
[:]Yes
;R No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IN No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon' ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[11 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what'is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
IR Yes
❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
X No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
'Yes
❑ No
maintenance/improvement?
C. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
5No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
01 No
7/25/97
Continued on hack

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need;o he properly closed? ❑ Yes .0 No
Structures (Lal;oons.11olding Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? A Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 StrULtUIV S Structure 6
Identifier: /!Mr .................................. .......... .................................... ................... I............... ...................................... .,................ ,.,....,......
Freeboard{ft):.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
IQ No
t I.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
KNo
12,
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
XINI 0
(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?
WYes
❑ No
Waste_Ar1pIication
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application'?
g'Ye,;
❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type.......xy-Ir..........................................................................................................................................................................................................................
16,
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
KNo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application`'
Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
es
1W No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?'1'cs
❑ 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
NrNo
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AW,MP?
Q-Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No.violations or. deficiencies were; noted -during" this visit. You.will receive no further
coerespiltidence ab`otit this. visit.,','.
Commentsi(refet .tc►.question #): Explain any YES answers andlor a6y recgiitimeitdations or any' other coixunents
Use drawings of facility to better explain'situati(' {use additi )nal PaIGeS xs.nec�ssary) j F:
r. .
�. /t �� 9 L✓A�S �3� �P% OAS J V f"r CfA-7 ev . ^S'T
f/�it Cr1�
�C4/Q%�%AlO7/%r -
����.,w,rA
/%dvX 4 C.OV�CXyO. We t:WO&V KVyAeAOLr���� J
/+� � � s .i-��� •ram i�,e��.�
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name �'•��,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �-� Date: S

ot
•ji`�awwr, Jp J"'A�r,'p� �..v ago,. �1�� � J
. . - J,).� " 04 V.j
6) oo v1�
vL
TO'd b660 S69 0T6
i
S5NIalOH,m3o ina Wa 02:SO 8B-Zz-aaW

Ar
%12a •�,Rr�t -,' �!` orx� L oaf,
/r
,�,� �,,, � �- � �':"��/ '.•�`�' `"�'`� � u "�� cam% _
Mom% 7/Y
WNM
Z0•d V660 969 0TG
$DN I alCH , ooi-1 a Wti T £: 50 86-4Z-z!lww

MAR-27-98 05:31 AM BULLOCK.HOLDINGS
910 695 0994 P.03
ATLANTIC COAST CONTRACTING, INC
P.O. BOX 1088
DUNN, NC 26335
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
DATE; March 13, 1998
BILL TO: Thad Bullock
INVOICE X,. 3 B Farms 0 2 March 1142, 1998
..rr-,vr.rr �rrrry ,. •rrrv.r•
Terragator 10,00 $135.00 31350.00
210 TOTAL $14,360.01
PLEASE SUBMIT PAYMENT TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
PAYMENT DUE UPON RECEIPT. AFTER 10 DAYS 1 1/2% INTEREST
WILL BE APPLIED.
Sincerely,
Ronald Draughon
Vice President )� c ��,itj

MAR-27-96 05231 AM BULLOCK.HOLDINGS
910 695 0994 P.04
' e
ATLANTIC COAST CONTRACTING, INC
P.O. BOX 1080
DUNN, NC 28335
Phone [phone]
Fax [phone]
DATE: March 11, 1998
BILL TO: Thad Bullock
INVOICES. 3 B Farms
03/09/98 Trucks_ -. 32.00 B 52,080.00
03/10/98 ' Trucks 65.50 65.00 $4,217.59_.
03/07/06 1. Terra ator -- - _-_
�. .. -. � oe� TOTAL �,a17.5o
7,7ea.,aa
PLEASE SUBMIT PAYMENT TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.
k
HAVE ANY QUESTION PLEASE CONTACT OUR OFFICE.
Y NT DUEU N RECEIPT. AFTER 10 DAYS 1 112% INTEREST
BE APHI�IE
Rdhold Draughon
Vice President
1440
/;sue

01w a.Nuuw auuuwIaWr r'nucuu9n; „W
Facility No. - 2
DMSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGFMEa
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 1► , 1995
Time: 4130 ?.My
Farm Name/Owner. Tr►,� - _r- ,r= 0 ro.1 _13.ik"k . _
Mailing Address:, at x P. o. G 2 os_ r G. �e� r c!. 4 z 13 a `
County: HS-rne
Integrator: C..rrotlt Phone: fvc1S - T22.
On Site Representative: '.e_sPhone:
Physical Address/Location: r o u est bkaA Go N ;1 •rt,,
&a •fin
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
`
Design Capacity: See,. Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE.,..____ DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: • '
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have suff ie freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes orW Actual Freeboard: , „ Ft.1V I b Inches
Was any seepage observed from the la�n(s). Y or No Was any erosion observed? (mess r No
Is adequate land available for spray? a or No s the cover crop adequate? Yes or s• ra be loca
Crop(s) being utilized: bJk{kex 0..e, , Fesw.o.. -6 l es ia Ll ....
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s?.K or No
100 Feet from Wells?�or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes 000
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue e: Yes
Is animal waste discharged into water of)hp state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or p' If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray 'irrigated on V Ic acreage with cover crop)? Yes Nod requdre b is't'
Additional Comments:° -Ib •n
�5 1A o n A n r'o rt rl • *,tiw
-- N e A 'te +�a+�
ALMS -MA 44, 1,40C
0.S Wks{- i u 'Q, i t I W45
� w"o�rw�9i" .'Al- '� 1W A i AOL . No Grey _�ouer _wc�c tc'i4�Jr��
�teM�e a�s��e'%'y..�' a�•.�.�` O•�C' tie& 1��vi ! �t baaw.-4r+w►,�e,si'ed f�•w. .1�, i�r. +o d-t,•4....ew l.e�s�
L � B�[Coc.� �.u►d "� ft�Q►iY t/.�+'w. W�4'�. c� '�'•¢.c.�+R�� w�,v'�+- Frww P••rks $ia,IC�,(n!k
will j'&f or.w„ k4^t- FRo v-cA- +0-4- ftf-r' Y+ac•J jypA�,, Go �•„*1t 4.�Q.
Inspector Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Signature
Use Attachments if Needed.
y

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
SM
1
E) F= "" t
r.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL. MANAGEMENT
December 12, 1995
Mr. Brad Bullock
Route 3, Box 205-1
Cameron, NC 28386
SUBJECT: Three B Farms
43-7 CAFO #
Harnett County
Dear Mr. Bullock:
On November 27, 1995, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division
of Environmental Management Inspected your animal operation and the lagoons serving this
operation. It was observed that there was some lagoon seepage in the new lagoon and the
old lagoon was leaching waste liquid via an underground vein. This leached waste material
was being contained In a man-made drainage pond. It was also noted that the older lagoon
did not have sufficient freeboard (approximately 16") but the waste liquid was being
transferred to the new lagoon in order to charge the lagoon. No significant leakage was
noted In the transfer pipeline. However, it was clear that there was no significant cover
crop on the spray fields.
In order to avoid any wastewater discharge, it is necessary that a cover crop of
winter rye be- established immediately. In addition, the vein in the old lagoon should be
promptly repaired once the static pressure has been reduced enough to allow such activity.
It has been noted that Parks Blake, of the Natural Resources Conservation Services, is
currently providing consulting services so as to correct the deficiencies noted above.
Please be aware it is a violation of North Carolina General Statutes to discharge
wastewater to the surface waters of the State without a permit. The Division of .
Environmental Management has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than
$10,000 per day per violation.
Wachovia Building, Sulte 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28MI-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Actlon Employer 50% recycled/ 1096 post -consumer paper

Mr. Bullock
Page 2
December 12, 1995
When the required corrective actions are complete, please notify this office in
writing at the address below. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call
Ed Buchan or Michael Wicker at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ed Buchan
Environmental Engineer 1
EB/bs
cc: Michael Wicker'
Harnett County Soil & Water Conservation District
Harnett County Health Department
Steve Bennett - NC Division of Soil & Water Conservation
Operations Branch
Parks Blake - NRCS, Harnett County
Carroll's Foods - Howard Hobson
N

t

}j 1
County: 40,mt:}+
Water Quality Complaint Form
COMPLAINT FORM.
C
Date Received:November 28. 1995 Time: ;t'30 P.m • DEM contact: Wicker
Complainant: W-\sA}e, 043-tr ,Telephone: {ato�499-93y3
Address: Kf, 3 P. O. 9OX 2(D5'- t C,wK4L
Nature of Complaint: N�e,tg0oor- j-
WttiS}¢ ew%u lef°.k� nq �'n'�{� W - lfvhsi S �r0 W+ iovnnlJMn +k� dGI f'V�f+ ram} WgSf`G
�ro�r►ti a!� t}0.0.j]�oT
Location/Directions: Ner
Investigator : C--j g u,.",,, 'Date: tt (11 j j r- Time In: �+ = 3 p P• r).
Time Out: il, r1.
observations:
0l1 t -F a. �t W La Ih 5 /1 �+ G� l 0..Q u t� V� • �1 e �O '�
Q � pro1A d n o a ern 5 GYt1"C ��e.
��-�--
lqc.� w � i '�' fin•. d
w {r. leA ke,b waste- f�,- P d toy ©„L dtve In a dU aW► v.►
Resoj� �.o, cu�n was eo+nse.ft v p �� a rom d vt f'.k
lUtlOn�7 rnundw,�fiv ytGq+�e +'n i a�ooy� dwv+nned v� . ed 6�nwt[ow WN�%t
sl�.d. --� M r, C_Q,.; S •-� � � r �.�,�
.�, InaYt c�,�P-o�•i
��
-Fta es�4•f;, � I� s�• � c �.re� cs� L w, c�$�r ���) 4"t o�
cx
Q� a
Su erviso A p p r a 16 Si inature
Date

i
.. ! .... . .: -- j'." "'
�.1)ivislon o. , oil and Water Conservation - Ope'ratlOn
Division of Soil isnd. Water. Conservation - Compliance Inspection t {
iv,Won of Water Quality' -'Compliance Inspection
Other Aglncy ,OperationReview,
12 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other 1
Facility Number Dnce of Inspeclion
"fine: of, Inspection r o'i24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted P Certified © Conditionally Certified [] Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ............................... .......ir► ......... County:.............,1��'I:t�.//
Q%...%...............c..........,. q, ...........
Owner Name: (f :.....SraJ ................. .....K /ml.C.l,....` . :............... Phone No:..,.,...........,.., lI �.. .......��."...�5�.��..,...
Facility Contact: ...... (lllts� � .> QCIt, Title: Phone No: ...................................................
:.. ........................
Mailing Address:..................g............. .1..,1 !�!!.Ge �..��............. ..............��.t'.....�. �, r � 7([
1. oo ..�. ......... ... �.........N.�. ... �..... f�
Onsite Representative: ................CXI?... Integrator:..,., C�,Ct fl.�5... �...�.. !!�f'..,...........
Certified Operator:... ............. .yam..... .....................,.,................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
.............. .... .l
Latitude Longitude
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
PQFarrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
F1 Farrow to Finish
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I I[] Non -Dairy
❑ Other I I
Total Design Capacityp [�
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons F Subsurface Drains PresenEILI Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im^ c
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (Ii'yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance tnan-made?
h. Ifdischarge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated slow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & 'Creatinent
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ,
Freeboard (inclies):............. /? .............. ........... ................... ............
Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes XNo
d
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes it No
❑ Yes ((No
XYes ❑ No
Structure 6
1/6/99 Continued on back

A.
Facility Number: 43 J2 Date of Inspection
Additional mi ments and/or Drawings;
"e4 C. "L,
V" �zu
t�-Aj
sk
N�Tk CAwa10 6../ dx,�i
161AC P&V ?17
YWA 4"
rb�,C sl�U 6
az 4"
7/25/97

Facility Number: — Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes gNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'? ❑Yes No
Yes (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 pai t of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? j�%J Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum �\
liquid level elevation markings? Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes YNO
11. is there evidence of over applicati m? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen ❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop type ..... .........
........I........ ...................... ............... ...........
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes No
14. Does the'facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) 40�s
15, Does the receiving crop need improvement? XYes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes [�N0
19. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ 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 certified operator in responsible charge`? ❑ Yes A5No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes PNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes XNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'? Yes ❑ No
No.violations:or. deCcie><icie.s .werenand. dtirin' tlii''visiE.V. ou will.reeceive na ftirttieir
egrr�sp+peri�deitce' tibout; this 'visit.; • . • ; . ; . ; . ; . ; .. .............................
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any, recommendations or any. other,, comments., i' ' + u.;
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): 'j 4.
7k— C�O
f&—, CsZe�
- dt #,E4
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: .2 --3--
l /6/99

, ' j] Division Of Soil and Water Conservation -.Operation Review
a Drvisionrof Soil and Water Gonservatiun -„Compliance Inspechon y�!
Jf Division of Water Quality `-'Compliance Inspection
Other
th gency - Operation Review
10 Routine Q Complaint t,WFollow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSIVC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection Z_l_9 'I
Time of Inspection 124 hr. (hh:mm)
APermitted [3 Certified M Conditionally Certified 0 Registered ❑ Not Operational Date Last O erated:
Farm Name: .......1 h:r.e�..B. qS.....I .................................................... Cuunty:....�(�L �.. ...........,
Owner Name:. :rQj _,b ... d. f.. /:.......................................... Phone Nu:............. � ..Q. $ .<.. ............................
Facility Contact: 0-71-�d ...411otl •............ Title: ................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: ....... �...... ���'1.L�.�.�f.(..�....1............... I., ................. ........`....... V,...�.�......... ....2.'Y�57.1
OnsiteRepresentative:........ .......................... .............................................. Integrator:...............)r !'..[..(...I ...................................
Certified Operator:...A.<'-..�....................�( G�iC.................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude "
Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
[],Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean e0 .
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JO Non -Dairy
❑ Other I I I
Total Design Capacity 2 q so
Total SSLW
i
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains 1'resent ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges R Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes kzk
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. II' discharge is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection K Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
. ../1 r r
Freeboard (inches): Q T ...7
❑ Yes 5No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ( No
❑ Yes ONO
19Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
1/6/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: q3 , O 7 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any pant of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, 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? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible 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 �eviewhnspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
1VA.via anions •or. def cierides .were noted during .this•visii. - V-ou valfre�ceive no further.
eorrespgiidence: Abilf this visit.: :: : •
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 4,No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes : ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any.other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary4):;:_,
A .446LO— Ito See t� Q� �G i��e15' S%ice
Lcuej <"S s_kgl 1.64- ° 6 -HILO G­Cfa t'k-(V-if
M.ila � Mtn u wl. ,
IV
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 2 /r--i 9
1 /6/99

Facility Number
Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
F
f Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technlcal Assistance
n for Visit O Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 ( Arrival Time: d f ; � ►N Departure Time: OV i ) K County: Region:
Farm Name: S ��� I v Owner Email:
Owner Name: 44 �h u-C Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1'� ` 4 C&4j Title:
Onsite Representative:
s
Certified Operator: ram' L �rQ,V
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: �ItirOt�—
Operator Certification Number: 176t
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 0 f 0 Longitude: ❑° 0 1❑
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish �1
Farrow to Wean 00
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ TurkeyPouits
❑ Other
Discharges &Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field ❑Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy'
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (Ifyes, 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[5 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[8 NA
❑ NE
� NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[� No
[[P
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
12/28/04 Continued

i+acility`Number: u Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes m No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No A NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �0 n
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in);
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes )U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �9 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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Wind w E idence of Wind Drift ❑ App`1i_c_atii n Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) _6 ' v►M.l �t . �'`-v'A Oji`�J�1
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
1�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments {refer to question.#): . Explain any YES'answer's and/or any recommendations or.any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional page.`s as°necessary):
_. F
E
3 jq
/
1
d�
1 0,01 r
f
�1 J'
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name -'' a" i Vie' rr rr Phone:
�,�E,r.,��Dili _..�
�a" 33~3300
Reviewer/inspector Signature:�ihbzf-4�Date:
3 ( I
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Numlier: — ' Date of Inspection 3 Z
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Ycs M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
QgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
FS No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual
Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and i"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
IRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ;@ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ 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
J�l 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
El NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
'PQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Ulo
❑ NA
❑ NE
U✓�-t°J� rU ' �� l . Set"V rC I- 5p� �•`� Lr� S.
i ��
'to
N D O C1 @fi W Q S {� nP r� o �e�
� N� was Ct•�IOI9� jN��vl s , /!�a G�G�,
�Ca A S<- Co)s� I ( f
Page 3 of 3 12128104

DENR--FRO
Murphy -Brown LLc
November 27, 2012
NCDENR, DWQ
Fayetteville Regional Office
Aquifer Protection Section
225 Green Street
Suite 714 / Systel Bldg,
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Subject: Revised Nutrient Utilization Plan and
Irrigation System Design Parameters for
S-6 and Buffalo Ridge Farm; Facility No. 43-7
Harnett County
NOV 2 9 2012
PO Drawer 856
2822 Hwy. 24 West
Warsaw, NC 28398
Tel: [phone]
Fax:[phone]
DW4
Enclosed please find the revised Nutrient Utilization Plan and Irrigation System Design Parameters for the
above -mentioned facility. The revision was made to show an addition to the solid set system at S-6. All
other parameters remained the same. Please place in the appropriate file.
If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to call
me at [phone] ext. 5363.
Sincerely, II
Kevin Weston, CID
Environmental Compliance
Cc: Murphy -Brown, LLC Files
Harnett SWCD

search X7N L .� go . Z Q_ ! o c� 4 81.-9 , Page 1 of 2
Incident
Details]
Incident Freeboard Levels Events
Details2
* Incident Type: Nan -Compliance Reporting
* Category; APS - Animal
......................... .................. ........._...._....
* Started Date/Time : r02110/2010 02:20 pm j
R1
Related Incidents
Incident Number : 201
* County: Harnett Farm #: 430
__. _
Decimal DD:MM:SS
Latitude: � �-� _ _ I Position Accuracy: ---Select Value--- a'
..... ._ ..... -
Longitude: Position Method: j ---Select Value--- -
Position Datum: ---Select Value ---
Reporting Person : El Anonymous
First Name : Mike j Address
Middle Name:
Last Name: Cudd City
State/Zip
Phone: [phone] —„� Cell/Pager : L
* Location of the Incident : I S6, Buffalo Ridge
Action Taken :
.............. _ _. Ron
Comments/Findings
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft i Q '
Surface Water Impacted : O Yes O No Q Unknown Groundwater Impacted: O '
W a t e r b o d y : I -_-Select Value =-
Waterbody (Other) : - Conveyance
Report Received By: I Revels, Ricky. RO Contact: Rer
Phone: [phone] j Phone : (911
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us:7001 /createhreeboardLevels.do 2/11 /2010

Agencies
Page I of I
Incident Incident Freeboard Levels Events Related Incidents Action History
Details] Details2
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting Incident Number: 201000819
Date/Tim'e: 02/10/2010 02:20 pm Farm #:430007
County: Harnett City :
Freeboard Levels
Waste Structure Waste Structure Fi-ccboard Plan Due Plan Date/Time
Delete, rype Identifier (inches) Date/Time Received Freeboard
Date/Time Level OK
jLagoon JS6,67061 120.0
.. . . ........................................................................ :::� ................................................ . ............................................ . .......................
Add Delete
FF_In_lsh� FE'ai—nc7er
I ... . ...... ............. . I . ..
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us:7001/maintainlncident2.do 2/11/2010

Reels, Ricky
From:
Mike Cudd [[e-mail]]
Sent:
Wednesday, February 10, 2010 2:20 PM
To:
Revels, Ricky
Cc:
David Nordin; Toni King; Tonya Cavenaugh
Subject:
Lagoon Freeboard out of Compliance 2-10-10
This lagoon went out of compliance 2-10-10:
S6, Buffalo Ridge Facility 43-007 Permit# AWS430007
1)S6,67061 start pump 20.4", current freeboard reading 20"
Mike Cudd
910-217-1836 cell
910-276-0648 (463)

io�
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
woo
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor � E H N rp
i
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 10, 1995
Mr. Brad Bullock
Rt. 3, Box 205-1
Cameron, NC 28326
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
COUNTY: Harnett
Dear Mr. Bullock:
On August 8, 1995, an inspection of your animal operation was
performed by the Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find
enclosed a copy of our Compliance Inspection Report for your
information. It is the opinion of this office that this facility
is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and that Animal
Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please
feel free to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
D. T. Jo s
Chemist
DTJ/bjs
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENV`MONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: u u S h 9 , 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Addt�ess:.gU K ve 3 &Y' � vS= _G FiM�'R a/✓, �I/G 2 � 3a-� /� � 0/(i -
i✓c
County: _ Ae-
tl"—
Integmtor• c ge 12 U 1 s - jjIZ145 Phone -
On Site Representative: 1�Nn Tll f-l� /341 L)-rc.K Phone: -
Physical Address/Location: I4w2-1 Wts f 7o rLvr %1d T{2n� / •v n�c �ic�s�-�i�'
67c 3 M I-c5 fic A,4fzK a2� rwi v 14 2- m d 4v-
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: SIfd 3 ? s(,Ws r4,e4kl Tc Welfw
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: '
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of l Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) �;or No Actual Freeboard:Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or(l$b Was any erosion observed? Yes or Ko2
Is adequate land available for spray? eO or No Is the cover crop adequate? 60 or No
Crop(s) being utilized: (-0/1 5 TH L Ml-' Kllf t { A -
Does the facility meet SCS minimurn setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? 1&4 or No
100 Feet from Wells? iol or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or&1
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Felt of a USOS Map Blue Line) Yes a&
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or & If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management m78701r
(volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? No
Additional Comments:
T ES
Inspector Name
�f.:j'gu_ -
Signature el
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.

State of North CarolinaIVA
Department of Environment, I"'
Health and Natural Resources + •
Fayetteville Regional Officeso
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor p E H N
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
August 10, 1995
Mr. Brad Bullock
Rt, 3, Box 205-1
Cameron, NC 28326
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
COUNTY: Harnett
Dear Mr. Bullock:
On August 8, 1995, an inspection, of your animal operation was
performed by the Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find
enclosed a copy of our Compliance Inspection Report for your
information. It is the opinion of this office that this facility
is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and that Animal
Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please
feel free to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Wt ` D. T. Jo s
Chemist
DTJ/bjs
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovio Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE. Auikik 8 , 1995
Time: _. 11,1/0 /1 M
Farm Name/Owner:
7w c &', b r'lirzMt, - Iwo lqu u oe K
Mailing Addiws: Raqve a 3
tarn,
/f/G ��_3 PA 9l1/- 2e'29ff9
County: _ At& -tf '
Integrator: C,¢912 rr 11 s
Phone:
On Site Representative: 011_
1Nn Tlf)
IC
Phone:
Physical Address/Location: 14w
7-7' Wtr fTo ,eo✓r
/2d 7u2* e 6,,v
'
Type of Operation: Swine
Poultry
4
Cattle
Design Capacity:
Number of Animals
on Site: SY 37 sews � f.-glt,W r we4,v
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: ,
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) (6 or No Actual Freeboard: j��Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or(i % Was any erosion observed? Yes or
Is adequate land available for spray? I 9e or Na Is the cover crop adequate? re or No
Crop(s) being utilized-.- Cogs r
u
Does the facility meet SCS minimurn setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? W or No
100 Feet from Wells? 6L or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue )nine Stream? Yes or@i
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line) Yes o I&
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or & If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? 6or No
Additional Comments: .
D , T J-vCS
Inspector Name
�f - '-) , giil� ---
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
A �5till��K
e20
G�-wI�M ^V(f,
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
CountyrT—
Dear : 01Z, A
On an inspection of. your animal operation was performed by the
Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find enclosed a copy of our
Compliance Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this
office that this facility is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and
that Animal Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact
me at (9I0) 486-1541.
F-dij]
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Sincerely,
o son
X,wv i en ng i veer

i
(fP1211G)II
FORTS CARC MU pEPkzTX=r- of EIZr S & NA=.u. RZ50C-Rcs
D=SICN 0? MIMOKyr� CIAL NAtiA� M—"NT
Fayetteville Regicral Office
Animal Operation Compliar.ca Inspection Pori
=-:IN �r.GTIQN "DA.
:.�aCYLITTY ,:gaoi�ra -
Al2. questions =%veered negatively will be discussed in s::ffic-ent detail in
the Cosneats Section to enable the deemed Perzittee to per,o--= the appropriate
corrections:
IgCTzCN I
}1r.?maI O=eration Type:
Horses, cattle, swine, poultry, or steep
SFCrI0N II
ail 7�0�4�
GAS
Y I N I COM11 'PS
i. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? (Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
Poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
System)] '
3. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation M=STR.ATIOH?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period?
4. Does this facility have a gggX=PiP.fl 1 njy-xL
5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Vcluaes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated an specific acreage with
specific cover =0p)7
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
set -hack criteria for nei9hbcrir.g houses,
Wells, etc?
!Y)

Is ani=a'_ waste s -=k7--lei or la;,--cn
ccast��c_1C:. w=thss. 100 ft. o: a USCS
Na= Slue Line Sl--a ?
Z. is a -.,=al waste lard a, -plied or spray
irrigated, Within. 25 ft. of a USCS Map
Blue Lima 5trea--?
3. Cces t': s faCility have adegaate ac aage
to ap?lp the waste?
4. aces t.'.e 1&nd ap-;lication'sy:a pram a
cover czc= in accD_ dance w:L , tha
5 . Is a:.iral waste d scharged i nta Waters cf
the state by ma:.-:ade ditr-h' Bush,-.- syste..,
or ct:er similar maa-made devices?
6. Dces t-he animal waste management at Lhis
fa = ad`*era to Best Mar.age=ent P_act_cas
(;:'?} of t::e approved —CZRTi?,U."ION'?
7. Does an -;=al waste lagoon have si'ficier._
F_e_bcard? Fow much? (Approximately }
S . Is the general c: nditicr. of th,rs CU O facility,
i -c u-4i: 7 mznaya=e:L. and operatics,
sat_s?actozy?
' S7s`-_-ICN rV
N.

a.1a .a a•.w • v•� �
ie of large oak and beech trees.
.xcellerit giNcer and creek fishing may be
eyed at,Raven Rock State Park where
passive rock outcropping, 152 feet
a, juts out at a 450 angle over Cape
:r River.
LM
IM
[I S111 r
1UZ
{ 4 • , , 1 w l 11� r LUL " 03
Liu T 1171
Slit. � 1SIA as �
24 u , 2LV SLID
1!!i ,,y ! 5pae SPAW ?s
Ua a
UZ4. I •S M1
Ain Lui i
Sul
lUY L l n 1.3
�z
ui±
Jul � T� r9N
s
Ma
N
r
Uu
11!].
1UA- ►Ywrlrw
LZU

DOGWOOD FARMS, INC.
P O BOX 49
CLINTON, North Carolina 28329-0049
February 2, 2000
Attn: Jeffery Brown
Division of Water Quality
225 Green St. Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Dear Mr. Brown;
fE3 1 4 2000
RED /lLLE
SCE
I am writing this letter to comply with the BMP's established on January 28,
2000. 1 have put together a plan of action to deal with the high lagoon levels for each of
the lagoons in your region. The lagoons that I have, prepared plans for are Dogwood
Farms S-1, S-2, S-5, S-6, Buffalo Ridge Farms, and Bearskin Nurseries #3. These plans
will be sent with this letter.
Thank you for your assistance in this matter. If you need to contact me for any
reason, I may be reached at (910-592-2104 ext. 317 or 910-596-7647).
Sincerely,
Brya 7Spell
Nutrient & Structure Technician

Plan of Action to Address High Lagoons
Dogwood Farms S-d:
Step 1) We have moved an additional pump and two reels so that we can move three
times the amount of water than we usually do. This will allow us to lower the
lagoon level much quicker and by not exceeding agronomic rates.