090026_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
090026 Facility Status:
Active Permit AW1090026
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit
Routine
County: Bladen Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:q123120i7 . Entry Time: 10:00 am Exit Time: 10:30 am Incident s
Fans Name:tire's Sow Complex Owner E ii:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 50' 30" Longitude: 78" 46' 15"
Farm Location: River Rd. toward Cedar Creek, 1 mile past 2nd Burney Intersection, turn right. It will be the third dirt road past the
Burney Road Intersection. Once on the dirt road just follow to the farm.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents N Other Issues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number: 23570
Secondary OIC(s):
On-Ske Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Michael Ammons Phone : [phone]
Or -site representative Michael Ammons Phone : [phone]
Primary Inspector. Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary hrspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

5
Permit: AVVIO90026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brawn LLC Facility Number. 090026
Inspection Date: 03/23/17 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean
3,500
_
Swine - Feeder to Finish
1,000
❑ Swine - Wean to Feeder
400
Total Design Capacity: - —^4;900
Total SSLW: 1,662,500
Waste Structures
Dlslgnated Observed
Type identifier Closed Dale Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 09-2&1 63.00
page: 2

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 03/23/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharggs & Stream Imeacts
Yea
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
[] 0
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No 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 (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. 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
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Wast@ Application
Yes No Na Ne.
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)?
❑
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: AN090026 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brawn LLC Facility Number: 09W26
Inspection Date: 03/23/17 Inpsecction Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Cecil
Soil Type 2
Lakeland
sand, t to
7%
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yea No Na He
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.
Wt1P?
❑
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?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
page: 4

Pefmd; AN090026 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 090026
Inspection Date: 03/23/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yee No Na Me
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?
❑
❑
❑
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
❑
N ❑
❑
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 activeiy.oertified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Other lssues
Yes No Na Me
2a. 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?
1101111
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface file drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
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
❑
N ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Facility Number. 090026
M Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Permit: AWI090026 ❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Bladen Region: Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 0712812015 EntryTime: 10:00 am Exit Time: 11:00 am Incident #
Farm Name: Squire's Sow Complex Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Facility Status: Active
Physical Address:
Facility Status: E Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 50' 30" Longitude: 78" 46 15"
Farm Location: River Rd. toward Cedar Creels, 1 mile past 2nd Bumey Intersection, turn right. It will be the third dirt road past the
Burney Road Intersection. Once on the dirt road just follow to the farm.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number: 23570
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Michael Ammons Phone: 910-28M087
On -site representative Michael Ammons Phone : 910-28MO87
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWI090026 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 07/28/15 1npsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
11 Swine - Farrow to Wean
Swine - Feeder to Finish
El Swine - Wean to Feeder
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 09-2&1
page: 2

l
Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 07/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges $ Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ N
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Led large
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 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: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 07/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Cecil
Soil Type 2
Lakeland
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
11011
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lark adequate acreage for land application?
❑
E ❑
❑
18, Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
M ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
19. Did the fatality fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
M ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
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

j
Permit: AW090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 07/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No No 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
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
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
Yes No No Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
M ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative?
❑
E ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number. 090026 Facility Status: Active Permit: AM090026 ❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit: Routine County: Bladen Region: Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 10/21/2014 EntryTime: 10:00 am Exit Time: 11:00 am Incident #
Farm Name: Squire's SOw Complex Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34' 50' 30" Longitude: 78° 46' 15"
Farm Location: River Rd. toward Cedar Creek, 1 mile past 2nd Bumey Intersection, turn right. It will be the third dirt road past the
Burney Road Intersection. Once on the dirt road just follow to the farm.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number, 23570
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Michael Ammons Phone: [phone]
On -site representative Michael Ammons Phone: 91D-289-6087
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection bate: 10/21/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
El Swine - Farrow to Wean
❑ Swine - Feeder to Finish
❑ Swine - Wean to Feeder
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 09-2&1
page: 2

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 10/21/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ E
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ E
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3_ Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na N
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 (Led large
❑
■ ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
N ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks 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
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN n 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 10/21/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Cecil
Soil Type 2
Lakeland
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
❑
E ❑
❑
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
❑
E ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
110
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
11011
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
[]
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 10/21/14 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?
0
0 ❑
❑
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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
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 Issues
Yes No Na Ne
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,
❑
■ ❑
❑
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 the drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number.
090026 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AW1090026
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: $laden Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
02/27/2013 EntryTime: 01:30 pm
Exit Time: 2:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Squire's Sow Complex
Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34" 50' 30" Longitude: 78° 46' 15"
Farm Location: River Rd. toward Cedar Creek, 1 mile past 2nd Burney Intersection, turn right. It will be the third dirt road past the
Burney Road Intersection. Once on the dirt road just follow to the Cann.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, 8 Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other issues
Certified Operator: John S Cain Operator Certification Number: 23570
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 2114113
Site visit 2/27113
page: 1

Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 02/27/13 1npsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine -Farrow to Wean
3,500
Swine - Feeder to Finish
1,000
Swine - Wean to Feeder
400
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 09-26-1
r
page: 2

P L
Permit: AW1090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 02/27/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
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)
❑
❑ N
❑
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)
❑
ON
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
N ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage $ Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
N 13
❑
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
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
E ❑
❑
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
Yes No Na No
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ N [] ❑
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: AW1090026 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number.
090026
Inspection Date: 02/27/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Gress
(Pasture)
Crop Type 2
small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Cecil
Soil Type 2
Lakeland
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?
❑ E ❑
❑
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?
1100
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
1100
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
[] 0 ❑ ❑
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: AW11090026 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 090026
Inspection Date: 02/27/13 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?
❑
❑
[]
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDFS 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
❑
E ❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
(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 Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewtinspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

"- - `Division"of Water Quality
Macitfliumber oZ OO Division of Soil and Water Conservation Not
®� f gees
Type of Visit: 40 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 011outine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 f 1 Arrival Time: Qg!OOQ,ti. Departure Time: County: UPO" Region: 1=120
Farm Name: S� rp f SDo `pyh� �?yG Owner Email:
Owner Name: mUX'p�u—>rdhl)t,)h ,�jw Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: rk pnity.0 yff Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: N
Certified Operator: V o kh Gx�^
Back-up Operator: + - mmon<,
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator: Mi. V,6,wy►0Wr1I�tLL
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
35?O
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry ' Capacity ` Pop.
Cattle 5C. Pop.
Wean to Finish
Non -La er.
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Dairy Calf
airy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
W0,112
esign Current
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,nu1acr
P._oP
Non -Da'
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Non -Layers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Othe
I
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
l . 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 1`0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ltd
[:]Yes
❑ No
NA
[] NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) Yes ❑ No Pg NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility,Number: qDate of Inspection: `I g /t
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 [14 NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): t o a-
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 T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ONE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes T� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 77��
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window //��❑ Evidence of Wind
Drift ❑ Application Outside of
Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): �S44 4 &IYIj6 C9rV � ��AW / -�, 6+ a; J 1 0K -
13. Soil Type(s): (r a r - Ce , LQ e jQ
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
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
[X] 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 1� No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I ° Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [] Yes [S No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes X No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

•
Facial Number: jDate of Inspection: J
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Ig No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
[] Yes
fj'Q 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
iL=t-j No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
T`
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
4� No
``f'
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name: t 0_61t' —AQ, 6 Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:-.3C1'� _ Date: 3 ! L
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Iiype of visit: 4p c:ompuance inspection v uperation meview v arrucrure r:vaivanon V t ecnmcat Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ai` Arrival Time: Departure Time: ; County.
Farm Name: O--J(0'5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: W n � Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region: FeO
Facility Contact: [� �s? Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: y
Certified Operator: �� ` C� �� `� Certification Number: �jrji C
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Cnrren#
Swine Capacity Pop.
Design
Wet PoWtry :Capacity
Current
Pop,
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish 000
W Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
La er
Non -La er
"" =' ,-
_ Design
Dr P,oul Ca aci
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Current
P,o
Da' Cow
Da' Calf
DairyHeifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream lmoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
FPNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E!!rNA
❑ 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
QTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

` f
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: O r Departure Time: Z; County `' .Region:CeD
.c .
f Farm Name: G.CZI� S Owner Email:
Owner Name: r, LL C Phone:
71
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ('V\ e t �. Title:
�} u
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: '(` ���AN,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone i.,
Integrator: fyVg( tt ow r)
Certification Number: C'�)31 70
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Desi n Current P Design Current
Swine Ca ag Po Wets oultry-�,:,,Capacity Pop.
P ty P-
Design Current
.Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
airy Cow
.
W
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
D . P,oul :f
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Lx:)o
3500
:
Ca" aci P,o
airy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Other
Other
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes O)No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ZPNA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
[]Yes
[]No
WNA
❑ 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
E71, NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes
[EpNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: —_2
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
GfNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: S
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in).
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
5po
❑ 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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
T
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc_)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window f❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): a S�a--� � (V+u �o� L7[�S Y t:_) . sr`^ C-i fay r % 0 0e
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[e No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
P1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Ej�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
OaiNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[] Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
Rj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faeili Number: -? Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storagecapacity (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 EDNA ❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �]�'
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[:]Yes
Wo
❑ 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
[allo
[] NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
R? No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes r-"k No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): �gc�Stct �( iliu c� � �S v e � Srv1 (-n q cam+ h
13. Soil TYpe(s): ( P (%.E 1 , V 0L_4LP I ()
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
&PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
nNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Rj:jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
2�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[5No
❑ 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
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code • .
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[:]Yes
[D No
❑ NA
❑ NE'
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

FaciliNumber: 2 Date of Inspection: Z2 I -9 7.1/
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 0 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 Eg NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
[-]Yes
[2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
RI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
(� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments ; x
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary
ale
Reviewer/Inspector Name: l 't 1 ' a-V
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: gid-/433-33ay
Date: _ � Z//-3-
2/4/2011

RL'eason
ype of Visit: v Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U I echnical Assistance
for Visit: • Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:Departure Time: 0= County: SLA
Farm Name: d5&5_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: M txty t w —0 rvwn , LL[ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: jj
Facility Contact: M GA" Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
ll
Certified Operator: s0kr,., aako.'
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region: i5�_10
Integrator:
Certification Number:�]�
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design.
_Current
Design Current
Swipe -
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
CapacityCattle
Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Calf
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-La er
I
Iry
Feeder to Finish
Heifer
Farrow to Wean
45ZO,,D°esign_
Current
IDry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
opl D , P,
_Ca a acc t
.Po
Non-Dai
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Layers
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Soars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharp-es and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes E� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ 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) [] Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili ,Number: -71 Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a_ if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]No i— NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Annlication
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 �j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[a 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 0 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 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility. Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ML No
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, cheat ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [:]Yes �3No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAN') certification? [:]Yes [:]No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes (� No
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes QoNo
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Y, NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: -3 300
Date:' L
21412011

i
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit JoRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: T
Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
OwnerName: W Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
M t
Facility Contact: !' �, Title:
G
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: �� Pir1
Back-up Operator: 14 JTIQP7s
Phone No:
''��JJ
Integrator: A1I_ w 'a-C
Operator Certification Number: 1�-35-2g0
Back-up Certification Number: u✓ ! 1-0
Location of Farm: Latitude: [­]'0' = u Longitude: =o =]' = u
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capcty Poplation
C•atlle Capacity Popnlation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow----F—
DO Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
oulIF
"m 4
;❑
4s
❑ DairyCalf
El Dairy Heifer
D Cow
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean a
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
ElBeef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
-
a._;
_,, ;-.-
❑ Turkeys
Other
tic .
:. __.
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
El Other
INumber
of Structures:
Discharees & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
$3 NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
P N A
❑ 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
PNA
❑ NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
in No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — 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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes 4jNoM
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
PNA ❑ NE
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
"
Observed Freeboard (in): 3'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes tNo ❑ 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 10 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 NA NE
maintenance or improvement? El Yes �No El NA
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 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
1V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to. question ft Explain any YES --answers and/or any recommendations or any�other comments ^M ry
Use drawings of facility to better explain'situations (use additional pages as necessary}:
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1-1 j.i Phone:04
' 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: q /0
rage a of 3 1.�i�aiv4 Uunnnueu

1
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA WMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfali ❑ 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 Wo
❑ 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 nNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes b No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes nNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes 'M 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 }J] 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 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes hNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments.�andlor Drawings::.
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 4 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency0 Other ❑ Denied Access
(/l
Date of Visit: �j Arrival Time: ;t Departure Time: ;.70 "'County: B�� Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
r _} �� ll
Owner Name: mW�r >j I Ltc, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator: r r ' 1 >yK Ov1.s
Location of Farm:
Title:
j A Phone No: Q
Integrator: �u^42 Lam' L✓ �'D U3t'l1Lk(�
Operator Certification Number: �3 770
Back-up Certification Number: �$
Latitude: = c = 6 =" Longitude: = o = = u
Design
Curre©t
Design
Current Design Current
Iei0apaty
Swine
Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry opacity
Population Cett1Q pulation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
4 ❑ Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dry Poiilt�ry
❑ La ers
El Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Stocker
El Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
;
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Numtxpr ofZtructures:
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
FNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
N NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
rr
❑ 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
IF
[I [INA
El NE
other than from a discharge?
11
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 1
Waste Collection & Treatment r '
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No J� NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: s 7
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
�No El NA El 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
[9 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 [_3❑ NA NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
[ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
NNO ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc_)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window El of Wind Outside of Area
CEvidence �Drift
__❑ Application
12. Crop type(s) �mttJa &4L,,t) �,Sm • "j ,, 4wv3*
U. Soil type(s) Cec i t
1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Ep No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewerllns ector Name
P Phone: D `3 O
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
Pape 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 4ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑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 V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes FZ 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
qNo
❑ 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
$2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�5 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
0 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
05 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
IP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility Number I cr, Da
'Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency C8
Type of Visit r Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral Q EmJgency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: f v Arrival Time: FSY0__Z Departure Time:
t 4
Farm Name:
Owner Name: ut( nlrlA413
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
County:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Region�lz_o
Facility Contact: 1 I 1 1 +tom Title:�1imiPhone No: 1 fOM l01
Onsite Representative: 1 ' ` ti am mom--, Integrator: I r t &_ �
Certified Operator: LI'1 Yl Operator Certification Number: � F `o
Back-up Operator: r ; n Back-up Certification Number: 99
! F
Location of Farm:
Srrrine
Latitude: = 0 0 i Longitude: = ° = = u
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
QD 0 ❑ Non -La ct
❑ Wean to Finish
ean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
COO
FkFarrow to Wean
00
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures:
©I
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
KI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
05 NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
5,NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
—1
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
19 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
J] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection �� b
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[--]Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
10 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?
JQ
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
Pa No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�JNo
❑ NA [I NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
I%
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 i . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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) L.bz-1/ iYl1 _1 — G1 Y-
C
13. Soil type(s) tS�eQC� ti V�Ca
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre detennination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17: Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
(�,No
ElNA
ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
EPo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
V_ i ! �A (P S
�CL664to.01�1
k&j brtraaP r �-f' an a "1 S4-mtt 6 ezL,, U7 -09
b £act► . Vw : I 4alce d] j ne>G-� C•y
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 Tf f jT Phone: jo IH3__�Z_co
Reviewer inspector Signature: Date: O�
12128104 Continue

Facility Number. Q Date of Inspection [
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes IP No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes $allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropiate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n ❑ Maps
p 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 V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other )issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
nal Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes 09 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes b(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes D4,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes `P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[--]Yes JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [--]No
1j&NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 14No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Oj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑C No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

[��k 0S
Facility No. v�`-P Time In Time Out Date
•Farm Names YY1 Integrator
Owner T 1-�T/ _. _ Site Rep
Operator No. 1�2%O
Back-up e, No.�
COC Circle: General or NPDES��, V
I
C
Design
Current
Design
Current
Wean - F
Farrow - Feed
finish
Farrow - Finish
Feed - ' i§h
L
Gilts 1 Boars
arrow - Wean
Others
11_��_�_____' I i . -:/
FREEBOARD: Design
Obseved
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge
Soil Test
Weekly Freeboard
Spray/Freeboard Drop
Weather Codes
Wettable Acres
Daily Rainfall
_ 120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
- C�Qai�e� �=t
Sludge Survey l �f
Calibration/GPM / q3o
Waste Transfers ��-
Rain Breaker r�
PLAT
1-in Inspections
Date Nitrogen (N)
Pull/Field Soil Crop Pan Window,
r O
,I- -

W A 7-F9Q Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
p C Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
February 7, 2006
David Nordin
Murphy -Brown, LLC
PO Box 856
Warsaw, North Carolina 28398
RED' EIVER
FEB 10 2005
pENR-IA`lEiiEV1L1wE REG10ML OT,GE
Subject: Permit No. AWI090026
Squires Sow Complex
Innovative Animal Waste Treatment System
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Nordin:
In accordance with your request for renewal received July 6, 2005 we are forwarding herewith
Permit No. AWI090026, dated February 7, 2006 to Murphy Farms, LLC authorizing the
continued operation of an innovative animal waste collection, treatment, storage, and land
application system in accordance with this Permit including, the management of animal waste
from the Squires Sow Complex, located in Bladen County, with an animal capacity of no greater
than 3,500 Swine Farrow to Wean, 400 Swine Wean to Feeder and 1000 Swine Feeder to Finish
and the waste application to land as specified in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan
(CAWMP).
This Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until January 31, 2011, and shall be
subject to the conditions and limitations as specified therein. Please pay particular attention to
the monitoring requirements in this Permit. Failure to establish an adequate system for
collecting and maintaining the required operational information will result in future compliance
problems. Any increase in flow or increase in stocked animals above the listed values in this
permit will require a modification to this Permit and shall be completed prior to actual increase
in either flow or number of animals.
Pay particular attention to Permit Condition 111.7. Quarterly reports providing the
wastewater disposal records (Permit Condition 111.1) and detailed chemical analysis of the
waste -holding structures (Permit Condition II1.5) for each quarter are required by the
Division.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this Permit are unacceptable, you have the
right to request an adjudicatory hearing upon written request within thirty (30) days following
receipt of this Permit. This request must be in the form of a written petition, conforming to
Chapter 150B of the North Carolina General Statutes, and filed with the Office of Administrative
Hearings, 6714 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-6714. Unless such demands are made
this Permit shall be final and binding.
tVTr Carolina
aturaT!!�
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center Raleigh, NC 27699-1 G36 Phone [phone] Customer Service
Internet. h1tpWh2o.enrs1ate.nc.us 2728 Capital Boulevard Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax [phone]
Fax [phone]
An Equal OpportunitylAffirmative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. David Nordin
Page 2
February 7, 2006
If you need additional information concerning this matter, please contact Todd A. Bennett by
email at [e-mail] or by phone at [phone].
Sincerely,
for OanW.imek, P.E.
cc: Bladen County Health Department.
Bladen County Soil and Water Conservation District
Fayetteville Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
APS Central Files
AFO Files

NORTH CAROLINA
ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
RALEIGH
ANIMAL WASTE OPERATION PERMIT
In accordance with the provisions of Article 21 of Chapter 143, General Statutes of North
Carolina as amended, and other applicable Laws, Rules, and Regulations
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED TO
Murphy Farms, LLC
Bladen County
FOR THE
continued operation of a 110,959 GPD spray irrigation treatment and disposal facility consisting
of one 348,000 gallon lined earthen basin with one 10 Hp mechanical aerator, one lift station,
two 363,000 gallon lined earthen basins, one 516,000 gallon lined earthen basin with one 7.5 Hp
mechanical aerator and one 5 Hp submersible pump for recycling wastewater, one storage pond
with a total volume of 8,940,000 gallons, and all necessary pipes, pumps, and appurtenances to
serve 3500 Swine Farrow to Wean, 1000 Swine Feeder to Finish and 400 Swine Wean to Feeder
with no discharge of wastes to the surface waters, pursuant to the request received July 6, 2005,
and in conformity with the project plan, specifications, and other supporting data subsequently
filed and approved by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources and considered a
part of this Permit.
This Permit shall be effective from the date of issuance until January 31, 2011 and shall.be
subject to the following specified conditions and limitations.
I. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
I The innovative animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application
system (Innovative System) permitted under this Permit shall be effectively
maintained and operated as a non -discharge system to prevent the discharge of
I ollutants to surface waters, wetlands, or ditches. Application of waste at
agronomic rates to terraces and grassed waterways is acceptable in accordance
with Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) Standards. If Squires Sow
Complex (Facility) is in compliance with this Permit, and unintentionally

discharges as a result of a storm event greater than the 25-year, 24-hour storm, the
Facility will not be considered to be in violation of this Permit.
2. A violation of the Permit may result in the Permittee having to take immediate or
long term corrective action(s) as required by the Division of Water Quality
(Division). These actions may include modifying the Waste Utilization Plan
(WUP), ceasing land application of waste, or removing animals from the Facility.
This Facility may not be expanded above the capacity shown in this Permit until a
new permit reflecting the expansion has been issued.
4. A copy of this Permit, the WUP, and certification forms shall be readily available
at the Facility (stored at places such as the farm residence, office, outbuildings,
etc.) where animal waste management activities are being conducted for the life
of this Permit. These documents shall be kept in good condition and records shall
be maintained in an orderly fashion.
For all new and expanding operations, no collection or storage facilities may be
constructed in a 100-year floodplain.
6. The spray irrigation facilities shall be effectively maintained and operated at all
times so that there is no discharge to the surface waters, nor any contamination of
ground waters which will render them unsatisfactory for normal use. In the event
that the facilities fail to perform satisfactorily, including the creation of nuisance
conditions or failure of the irrigation area to adequately assimilate the wastewater,
the Permittee shall take immediate corrective actions including those actions that
may be required by the Division, such as the construction of additional or
replacement wastewater treatment and disposal facilities.
7. The following buffers shall be maintained:
a) 200 feet between wetted area and any residence or places of public assembly
under separate ownership,
b) 25 feet between wetted area and property lines,
c) 100 feet between wetted area and wells,
d) 25 feet between wetted area and drainage ways or surface water bodies,
e) 100 feet between wastewater treatment units and any wells that supply water
to a public water system, or any other well that supplies water for human
consumption, and
f) 50 feet between wastewater treatment units and property lines.
II. OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE REQUIREMENTS
The collection, treatment, and storage facilities, and land application equipment
and fields shall be maintained at all times and properly operated.

2. A suitable vegetative cover shall be maintained on all land application sites and
buffers in accordance with the Permit. No waste may be applied upon fields not
approved by or prepared in accordance with this Permit.
3. An acceptable pH of the soil shall be maintained on all land application sites to
insure optimum yield for the crop(s) being grown.
4. Land application rates, hydraulic loading rates, cropping rotations and application
windows shall be in accordance with the WUP and/or a representative Waste
Analysis Report. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant Available
Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in runoff during any given
application.
5. Application of animal waste onto land which is used to grow crops for direct
human consumption (e.g., strawberries, melons, lettuce, cabbage, apples, etc.)
shall not occur following the planting of the crop or at any time during the
growing season, or in the case of fruit bearing trees, following breaking
dormancy. Application of animal wastes shall not occur within 30 days of the
harvesting of fiber and food crops for direct human consumption that undergo
further processing.
6. If manure is applied ory conventionally tilled bare soil, the waste shall be
incorporated into the soil within two (2) days after application on the land. This
requirement does not apply to no -till fields, pasture, or fields where crops are
actively growing.
7. Domestic and/or industrial wastewater from showers, toilets, sinks, etc. shall not
be discharged into the Innovative System. Washdown of stock trailers, owned by
and used to transport animals to and from this Facility only, will be permissible as
long as the Innovative System can accommodate the additional volume. Only
those detergents and disinfectants that are labeled by the manufacturer as readily
biodegradable may be utilized.
S. Disposal of dead animals shall be done in accordance with the North Carolina
Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (NCDACS) Veterinary
Division's regulations.
9. Unless accounted for in temporary storage volume, all uncontaminated runoff
from the surrounding property and buildings shall be diverted away from the
animal waste lagoons, storage ponds and/or open storage structures to prevent any
unnecessary addition to the liquid volume in the structures.
10. A protective vegetative cover shall be established and maintained on all earthen
basin embankments (outside toe of embankment to maximum pumping elevation),
berms, pipe runs, erosion control areas, and surface water diversions. Trees,
shrubs, and other woody vegetation shall not be allowed to grow on the earthen
basin dikes or embankments. Earthen basin embankment areas shall be kept
mowed or otherwise controlled and accessible.

11. The residuals generated from this Facility must be disposed in accordance with
General Statute 143-215.1 and in a manner approved by the Division. When
removal of sludge from the treatment units is necessary, provisions must be taken
to prevent damage to any dikes and liners.
12. All treatment units shall be kept free of foreign debris including, but not Iimited
to, tires, bottles, light bulbs, gloves, syringes or any other solid waste.
13. The Facility must have one of the following items at all times (a) adequate animal
waste application and handling equipment, (b) a lease, or other written agreement,
for the use of the necessary equipment, (c) a contract with a third party applicator
capable of providing adequate waste application, or (d) a contract for the purchase
of the equipment. Equipment shall be capable of meeting Permit Condition II.5.
14. In the case of interruption or failure of this Innovative System, the Permittee may
have to take immediate or long term corrective action(s) as required by the
Division. These actions may include modifying the WUP, easing land application
of waste, or removing animals from the farm.
III. MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
1. Adequate records shall be maintained by the Permittee .tracking the amount of
wastewater disposed. These records shall include, but are not necessarily limited
to, the following information:
a. Date of irrigation,
b_ Volume of wastewater irrigated,
a_ Field irrigated,
b. Current crop,
c. Length of time field is irrigated,
d. PAN applied,
e. Nitrogen Balance for field after each application is complete,
f The volume of residuals generated,
g. The dates and amounts of residuals removed from the site, and
h. The name and address of the party responsible for removal of residuals.
2. The Permittee or their designee shall inspect the waste collection, treatment, and
storage structures and runoff control measures shall be conducted at a frequency
to insure proper operation but at least monthly and after storm events. For
example, lagoons, storage ponds, and other structures should be inspected for
evidence of erosion, leakage, damage by animals or discharge. The Permittee
shall keep an inspection log or summary including at least the date and time of
inspection, observations made, and any maintenance, repairs, or corrective actions
taken by the Permittee. This log of inspections shall be maintained by the
Permittee for a period of five years from the date of the inspection and shall be
made available upon request to the Division or other permitting authority.

Any major structural repairs must have written documentation from a professional
engineer certifying proper design and installation. However, if a piece of
equipment is being replaced with a piece of equipment of the identical
specifications, no technical specialist approval is necessary [i.e. piping, reels,
valves, pumps (if the GPM capacity is not being increased or decreased), etc.].
3. A waste level gauge shall be installed in each lagoon and other uncovered waste
containment structures. Caution must be taken not to damage the integrity of any
liner when installing the gauge. Waste water levels shall be recorded weekly.
4. A representative Standard Soil Fertility Analysis shall be conducted annually on
each application site receiving animal waste. The results of these tests shall be
maintained on file by the Permittee for a minimum of three years and shall be
made available to the Division upon request.
5. Analysis shall be conducted on wastewater samples collected from the waste -
holding structures on a quarterly basis. This analysis shall include the following
parameters:
TKN Total P
NH3-N Copper
NO3-N Zinc
6. All records, including maintenance, repair and irrigation records, shall be
maintained on site and in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three
years by the Permittee. These records shall be maintained on forms provided by
the Division and shall be readily available for inspection.
7. A quarterly report with the information documented per Permit Condition 111.1
and Condition 111.5 shall be submitted to the Animal Feeding Operations Unit,
1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 and to the Aquifer
Protection Regional Supervisor, Fayetteville Regional Office, 225 Green St.,
Suite 714, Fayetteville, NC 28301-5094.
8. Regional Notification:
The Permittee shall report by telephone to the Fayetteville Regional Office,
telephone number [phone], as soon as possible, but in no case more than
24 hours following first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following
events:
a. Failure of any component of the animal waste collection, treatment, and
storage and land application system resulting in a discharge to surface waters.
b. Any failure of the animal waste treatment and disposal program that renders
the Facility incapable of adequately receiving, treating or storing the animal
waste and/or sludge.
C. A spill or discharge from a vehicle or piping system transporting animal waste
or sludge which results in, or may result in, a discharge to surface waters or an
event that poses a serious threat to surface waters.

d. Any deterioration or leak in a treatment unit that poses an immediate threat to
the environment.
e. Failure to maintain adequate storage capacity in a treatment unit greater than
or equal to that _required in Permit Condition VI.3.
f Overspraying animal waste either in excess of the limits set out in the WUP or
where runoff enters waters of the State.
g. Any discharge that bypasses a treatment unit.
h. Any failure of the Innovative System. .
For any emergency which requires immediate reporting after normal
business hours, please contact the Division of Emergency Management at 1-
800-858-0368.
The Permittee shall also file a written report to the appropriate Division's
Regional Office of the occurrence within 5 calendar days following first
knowledge of the occurrence. This report shall outline the actions taken or
proposed to be taken to correct the problem and to ensure that the problem does
not recur. The requirement to file a written report may not be waived by the
Division's Regional Office.
IV. GROUNDWATER REQUIREMENTS
1. The Groundwater Compliance Boundary for the disposal system constructed after
December 31, 1983, is established at either (1) 250 feet from the waste structures
and from the waste disposal area, or (2) 50 feet within the property boundary,
whichever is closest to the waste structures and the waste disposal area. If this
facility was constructed prior to December 31, 1983, the Compliance Boundary is
established at either (1) 500 feet from the waste disposal area, or (2) at the
property boundary, whichever is closest to the waste disposal area. An
exceedance of Groundwater Quality Standards at or beyond the Compliance
Boundary is subject to immediate remediation action in addition to the penalty
provisions applicable under the North Carolina General Statutes.
2. Any groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the Division, shall
be provided.
V. INSPECTIONS
1. Any duly authorized officer, employee, or representative of the Division may,
upon presentation of credentials, enter and inspect any property, premises or place
on or related to the disposal site or Facility at any reasonable time for the purpose
of determining compliance with this Permit, may inspect or copy any records that
must be maintained under the terms and conditions of this Permit, and may obtain
samples of groundwater, surface water, or leachate.
VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS

1. The issuance of this Permit shall not relieve the Permittee of the responsibility for
damages to surface waters or ground waters resulting from the operation of this
program.
2. Upon classification of -the Facility by the Water Pollution Control System
Operators Certification Commission (WPCSOCC), the Permittee'shall designate a
certified water pollution control system operator to be the operator of the facility.
The designated operator must. hold a certificate of the same type(s) and grade(s)
as the classification(s) assigned to the waste treatment facilities by the
WPCSOCC. The Permittee may also be required to designate a certified back-up
operator of the appropriate type and grade to comply with the conditions of 15A
NCAC 8G .0202. The Permittee shall submit to the WPCSOCC a completed
designation form designating the appropriately certified operator(s) 30 days prior
to the introduction of waste into the Innovative System or within 30 days of
.classification, in the case of an existing system. The designated operator, of the
facility must visit the facility as often as necessary to insure proper operation of
the Innovative System, but in no case less frequently than as specified in 15A
NCAC 8G .0204(2), 15A NCAC 8F .0203, or both.
3. The operating level of lagoons and other uncovered waste containment structures
must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain at a minimum
a 25-year, 24-hour storm event, chronic rainfall, plus an additional 1 foot of
freeboard. The maximum waste level shall not exceed that specified in the
application submitted.
4. The Division may require any monitoring (including but not limited to
groundwater, surface water, animal waste, sludge, soil and plant tissue) necessary
to determine the source, quantity, quality, and effect of any waste upon the waters
of the State. Such monitoring, including its scope, frequency, duration and any
sampling, testing, and reporting systems, shall meet all applicable Environmental
Management Commission requirements.
5. Failure to abide by the conditions and limitations contained in this Permit may
subject the Permittee to an enforcement action by the Division in accordance with
North Carolina General Statute 143-215.6A-6C and may include the requirement
to obtain additional treatment or storage units and/or addition of land application
sites, and/or the modification of the animal waste management system.
6. The issuance of this Permit does not excuse the Perminee from the obligation to
comply with all applicable statutes, rules, regulations, or ordinances (local, state,
and federal).
7. If animal production ceases, the Permittee is responsible for developing,
implementing and completing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, erosion, and the potential for injury.
Closure shall include notifying the Division.

8. The annual permit fee shall be paid by the Permittee within thirty (30) days after
being billed by the Division. Failure to pay the fee accordingly constitutes
grounds for revocation of this Permit.
9. This Permit shall become voidable unless the facilities are constructed in
accordance with the conditions of this Permit, the approved plans and
specifications, and other supporting data.
10. This Permit is effective only with respect to the nature and volume of wastes
described in this Permit for Squires Sow Complex.
11. This Permit is not automatically transferable. In the event there is a desire for the
Facility to change ownership, or there is a name change of the Permittee, a formal
permit request must be submitted to the Division accompanied by an application
fee, documentation from the parties involved, and other supporting materials as
may be appropriate. The approval of this request will be considered on its merits
and may or may not be approved.
12. A set of approved plans and specifications for the subject project must be retained
by the Permittee-for the life of the project.
13. The Permittee, at least six (6)_months prior to the expiration of this Permit, shall
request its extension. Upon receipt of the request, the Commission will review
the adequacy of the Facility described therein, and if warranted, will extend the
Permit for such period of time and under such conditions and limitations as it may
deem appropriate.

Permit issued this the 7`h day of February, 2006
NORTH CAROLINA ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT COMMISSION
Alan Kklirnek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
By Authority of the Environmental Management Commission
Permit Number AWI090026

f
10 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 'RCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency '& Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:
Farm Name: A 1 f
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: _
Physical Address:
County:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: +VL_k ! W ties Title: _�.—� Phone No: y 0p%9 W%1
Onsite Representative: Integrator: ► ' 1 U-C
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Nit
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = c 0 i 0« Longitude: ❑ 0 0
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ ❑_ Layer
❑ Non-Laye,
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ TurkeX 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 Currenl
Cattle Capacity Populatio
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
EFDry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:En­.
°
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 (XLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ ,NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
N*A
❑ NE
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
C�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

+I
Date of Inspection I ,1
Facility Number —p
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
1`,� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[5jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
St ru ture I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
6 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
2 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.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [XNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ❑ 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 Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NANE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
01NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
PNE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Lpl-NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
P!LNE
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):
—7 . V eA t� t, pa* M J 0. � I "S ` o UA �JL Lx S-e 1%
Qetra4,'o), .
Reviewer/Inspector Name I / NC— Phone: aLQS 99
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �a
!L/L6/U4 C.Un[rrsucu

Facility Number: p 4); Q Date of Inspection D
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �kNE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ).NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA J�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
)4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
AN
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
V"
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
JK NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
PINE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
tNE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
J�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly.dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
10 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
P 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
'% No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
JA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Division of Water Quality S__j
Facility NumberEK::� O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit (�<om pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ® Arrival Time:
;.3 fl Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: / w ofRn le-X Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 rarun 1 G Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: i % /!�/y+cs"`� Title: Phone //No:
Onsite Representative: _ Integrator: �w /4lcA
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: 10;K_53
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:[--] o 0 Longitude: = o = 1 = "
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
PD ❑ Non -La ex
❑ Wean to Finish
® Wean to Feeder
Dd Feeder to Finish
V V 0
Dv'd
CR,Farrow to Wean
b
,jW
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ElStructure ElApplication Field ElOther
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current..,
Cattle Capacity Population ;:
El DaiEy Cow
El Daia Calf
ElDai Heifei
El Dry Cow
ElNon-Dairy
ElBeef Stocker
ElBeef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: _3
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —
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 Structure 4
Identifier:
❑ Yes 5d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): '5;7�
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes JnNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes g 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
J&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Rio
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) ri�irc/da zee/n- '-
13. Soil type(s) Lta /�r �+%' e C i L
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWVP? ❑ Yes
�KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
J@ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[-] Yes
®,No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ 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 ✓z� :'� �- Phone: O/D—y33 -3Jpp
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: —
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -P, (o Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes JgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes gNo ❑ 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
ONo
❑ 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
O(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
BjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphors 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
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
f RNo
❑ 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
KNo
❑ 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
J&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
W- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

i1
Type of Visit WCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit *Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Qra Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: _m u r l2c, tom_ @>.��'-1 LL C Phone: _
Mailing Address:
Region: V_-0 n
Physical Address: (� pp
Facility Contact: + ke. vn S Title: � � '` ` Phone No: 4 110 -,-2Q l o �
Onsite Representative: +`"t + ke `- L ' M a-A5 Integrator: MU ra �.
Certified Operator: �cb� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Q o 0 ' = Longitude: = ° = ' 0 v
Design
Current
Design . Current
Design C►urrent
Swine
Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry
Cap tvPopulation
apacitV51111r.0pulition
❑ an to Finish
10 Layer
❑Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
5_0
/ Z_
❑ Non -Layer
❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
/b00
D R40
Dairy Heifer
91 Farrow to Wean
S-ao
Z3Q
oult
Dry Pry
� .. ,
El D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Daily
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
El Boars
ElPullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turke s
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turk e Poults
❑ Other
!Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Ao
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
)I NA
❑ NE
b_ Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
9�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
ANA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
VINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
//may
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 09 - oaly
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
Identifier:
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
NElYes No ElNA ❑ NE
ElYes ❑ No A�)NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _,::::2
t�
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes '?$o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
(/ ��
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes VNo
El NA
El 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
El NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
1-1Yes 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 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s) e La kt- C a c j f T
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 acre determination ?
❑ Yes
'1h
t9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
tE No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
_J�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or -any otiier comments ?" ,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): '$
Reviewer/Inspector Name F� S �%�/1~ % Y Phone: ! / OZ33 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: (�
Pane 2 of I2/2RA)d _antinued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Reduired 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
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes/QW ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stacking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes pjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes Na No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes jb�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
*0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
VjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
:: 1 uzA ` 0 A (9, kL av1
c_z, PC ss" 6LV
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility No. O� _()2(X) Time In Time Out j Date
Farm Name S-� 5 SGW CJ�) V1,iP Integrator
Owner u L lMA,A LL-�-- Site Rep L6—M-it ,y
Operator Q_C�;.- No.
Back-up
COC
M
Circle: eneral or NPDES
Design
Current
Design
Current
Wean — Feed
oc ,
Farrow — Feed
Wean — Finish
Farrow — Finish
Feed — Finish
/ o v
Gilts I Boars
Farrow — Wean
5'0o
Others
REEBOARD: Design tt ( Observed
dge Survey o 3 I Calibration/GPM '� 1
Crop Yield Waste Transfers
Rain Gauge Rain Breaker
Soil Test 1 q 6- rf ! WYC PLAT Wettable Acres
Weekly Freeboard ✓ Daily Rainfall i/ 1-in Inspections �J
Spray/Freeboard Drop Mg,-" 1 4 r "" �P Q J, I l�
Weather Codes 120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
COWCOW1 01315
S I I t, Z ,2.
�I-q. z .%
Date Nitrogen (N)
Zt(- ( .9
Pull/Field
Soil
Crop
Pan
Window
3AU
Izz z M
is
1
Sic)
lal
S- A �
50
� --

A5/
Feeder to Finish
10W
0 6S
Farrow to Wean
WOO
it
El Farrow to Feeder
JI
Division of Water Quality
Facility ggMe01 E3 Q Divmon of Soii and Water Eonservation
49 Other Agency
Type of Visit &Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4kRoutine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q ' Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: °t..- Region: Fk Q
Farm Name: vl Owner Email:
Owner Name: M raW Fits+ ly Phone:
Mailing Address: �D C_ �.$ - _ _ C_
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �� �^r Title: Pbone No:
��++��tT�lr [f
Onsite Representative: _ t-'& rtr Integrator: -M,,,{-pl..,
Certified Operator: _�p{ti.� S• : h Sr Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o ❑ i Longitude: = o = = u
Design Current Design , Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish 10 Layer
56vean to Feeder 1GD ILI Non -La er I_ _ J
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts .
❑ Boars }
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ 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 Population
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
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
LgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
6d NA
❑ NE
ERNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes $d No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ®No ❑NA ❑NE
12128104 Continued

4
Facility Number: —Zip Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 53 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No P9 NA ❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: rx.a'c-=la'.ee�e.,r-Z Te•.w,�-5
Spillway'?:
Designed Freeboard (in): -ig • S (q , s �19"•S _ l`t • -i.9► -
Observed Freeboard (in): 9t lj' %2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 69 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 54 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)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require []Yes BNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes PK No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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) U*XWtV j,&_
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those de ignated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
C.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,[]
Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
I & Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
2!;�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name "� y Phone: - 6
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AA Date: N/4/0
12128104 Continued

i
Facility Number: — Zis Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? $Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WvP"' ❑ Checklisig" ❑ Design"] Maps "O Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ®,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application/El Weekly Freeboarat"10 Waste AnalysiV❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall' ElStockier ElCrop Yiel9lar❑ 120 Minute Inspection✓❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspection❑ Weather Codes/
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
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
USNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
54No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
gLNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
EA�NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
M�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes *KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
iR . � �� Pam' � -� � s s� �l � � rw� �� ; w �►.[.e:i k . `rc,�
ear read Noy 10, Zoo
Zaa`[ a v lt° 3�" +o
sYs�
12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for visit ® Routine Q Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number a (P Date of Visit: TUUe:
O Not rational O Below Threshold
IlPermitted [!I Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ©Registered Date -Last Operatedd or Above Threshold: . .
` L� 4�t+
Farm Name: - .� u r� s s�.�....._C.rz.�....�.�............ County: Q
Owner Name: �i'1. tiw ��� _ Phone No:�
p c
1U-01;ng Address: . L• . s �c�.x L .� . �-� . 1 �., _ ... o? �'`f
Facility Contact: __ --Title:
Onsite Representative: G ►' ,r-q
S
Certified Operator. � c� ry _ _ -..... -. CS yY. S a^ .
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: YVI 4c r �p�-,u; — _ is r- o W 13— - ---
Operator Certification
Numbm
njSwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' u Longitude •
Swine Caaacitv.:Poiiglation
Wean to Feeder
q o o
Feeder to Finish
000
Farrow to Wean
cars
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boats
.. - Nimlbert�LagoDrss-:c
i.
-
'r
ri'eat • � -: ' `Design .-�Cur�"eafr
ihttion Cattle ` Canacdv: Da an
Dischmes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field 0 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 gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 10 No
'j"I& •
❑ Yes M 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 go No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): C10
it
12112103 fi:r-�t ttgoc� . Continued

Facility Number: �`j — �� Date of Inspection 1 // o / o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes Q1 No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑Yes j No
closure plan?
(U 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 maintenancefnnprovement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, ganged markers with required mazimn and minimum liquid level El No
elevation markings?
Waste ApjLhcation
10. Are there any buffers that need mantenancelitmprovement? ❑ Yes Q No
l l . Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Excessive Pondiinng ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Prozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12- Crop We .C7 Q Yrn u a� 9r c. s r+n u 4�ca i
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 [j No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes j No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ( No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property) 1
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes [4 No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Use drawings offlewnq to t- elm s t dons. {use-adammai pages as ueoessary : Feld Copy ❑ Final Notes
7- 60sc- QrcCa W'��� SOv�c� �r�slbltil s�� 6h 5hC_ }op Por4i00
O _1"+e 5•t'QC- 0.s' G�i p� DV.w.P,�'r•4 Ict� t7��Ci� rtcscc� or ��c.QrVV�Ss 4s
!- �}kw•��L�YnSpQ_4,rV d,� CL �\L&i\. A-Cz_'__ nN -t1.c �qJ� horse (tea
lnonw.v��. i'11cs+G L-1aS a �� (yQ-6 q 4C_ kous� 5C'Ae__ tq ."k cv,01' {dK
-cc— c- e— 1 � � a �' � r t a � w a 1 �tw. � max c -A -1 C 6 tJ _� oe'k A
S-�-oPP.fCC Pcs-V L.w.rcJq
ReviewedInspector Name :�
Reviewer/IaspecWr Signature:
Date: &Z429 /
Continued
12112103

Facility Number: Date of Inspection /! o
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
ED Yes
❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
['� No
❑ Waste Application [3 Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
ff] No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[P No
26. 'Fail to notify regional DWQ,of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
tB No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewhnspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[!ANO
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
W Yes
❑ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP7
❑ Yes
'® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
01 Yes
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[][ No
32_ Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
n No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
U No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
VQ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Datc of Visit: Time: Q C) O
Facility- lumber t
_ - •-• t Not O erational Beloyy- Threshold
I' Permitted M Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Regaistered pate Last Operated or Above a Threshold:
Farm Name: S �i i7z5_t` County.: R I G &
Owner Name: Phone No: ��j —
Mailing Address: _ P'Q. r3� emu_ +s-! i _ e AC . a R (
Facility- Contact: Title:
Phone No-
Onsite Representative: i�. 1 -i Integrator: �„ L.. Pt_., `
Certified Operator: � :;; y ._ Cr,i Operator Certification number: a 35 +0
Location of Farm:
® Swine []Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' z OK Longitude ' •
Design Current
Swine C`anarifv Pnnnlaffnn
® Wean to Feeder
I 41)t
® Feeder to Finish
10O b
IS Farrow tc Wean
3 � a
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capackv Population Cattle Ca aeity Po ulation
❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Nan -Laver I I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Otber
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S ray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is ant, discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Svrav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsen•ed, 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 obsmed, what is the estimated flow in _alimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): �.
05103101
❑ Yes [)a No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
El Yes
[,9No
❑ Yes
P No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: q— Z Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ 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 F ] No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes MNo
Waste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [�[ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [ LNo
12. Crop type R,v r r•-," A,. I,-k, is r'G.. t '-, YV\ 4",C'_
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes [RNo
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
10 No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
q No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
[I Yes
IS] No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
MNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
qNo
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 ONo
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
�+63�3k+8 yF��l.i... -�.... _�ao .=4 ._:�'_.-usrsw.__=awe `P •... -. .. .. --. . _ _ _sK .-__�a.iwwcxTa. �.E��I,aa _�... .�€rA¢.r.r_msti i+YRi�Yi�", :-_
L a �"L S'e'-'J
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date: A a-1 I(.
0510310I Continued

Facility Number: C' —1&, Date of Inspection (. b
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. andlor 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?
El Yes ❑No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes Qj�No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ER No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Addition al"Commentsand/6r Drar+•ino:
�'..--
05103101

Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
-0 Other Agency
Type of Visit $ Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 9 26 Date of Visit: 4-&20D2 Time:
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ®Certified r] Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Squire.' . a.H. arnot.....................................................................--- County:Mad= ................................................ FRO
Owner Name: MMrP.[W.FAfflily.Farnm ....................... Phone No: (.$RR}..11-Q4S$................
MailingAddress: F. .B.9. 59............................................................................................ Rmsc.HULSIG......................................................... U458 .............
FacilityContact:- dOb.It...W1<........................................................ Title:................................................................ Phone No: ...................................................
Onsite Representative:,W..ajj.U.urjaey..................
Certified Operator: ,J.���[T1lY.I?u�n......................... Tyudall,...
Locution of Farm:
Integrator: }Y,lurpbY. ;:m"lly.Farms................
........ Operator Certification Number:.ZHM............ _..............
zarrn Location: River Rd. toward Cedar Creek, I mule past 2nd Burney Intersection, turn right. it will be the third dirt
oad past the Burney Road Intersection. Once on the dirt road just follow to the farm.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 ' 50 l 1 Longitude 78 • 46 42
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
® Wean to Feeder
400
N Feeder to Finish
1000
® Farrow to Wean
3500
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I A 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 4,900
Total SSLW 1,662,5DD
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? N Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ® Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes N No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ®No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Stnicture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 32
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 9-26
r
Date of inspection 4-8-2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need 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/improverent?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed Matua
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
13_ Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reouired Records & Docum[nts
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19_ Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to`question.#}: Explain any'YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additioual.pages as necessary): .; 0 v
geld Copy ❑Final Notes
I- Discharge occured when the lift station in Bioreactor #1 failed and allowed waste level to rise. Waste exited the system though a
cracked pipe that will eventually tie into a future drying bed drain line. Minimum waste exited the system and was maintained on -site.
Remediation efforts were to incorporate waste into grassed area near discharge. No waste left the facility property or entered waters of
the state. Notification was made to DWQ on Monday 4-8-02 at 8:00 am during scheduled routine inspection of facility. Discharge
occured on the previous weekend. No emergancy notification was warranted. 5-day written notice should be forwared to the regional
office.
Closure form for abandoned lagoon is included with farm paperwork noted on DS&WC review).
Reviewer/Inspector Name Paul Sherman
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 r Continued

.
Facility Number: 9-26 Data of Inspection
' 4-8-2002
Odor Issues '
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
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?
a
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
J
O5103101

FaeffiryN �- ----
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
General Information:
FarmName:� Sgu�Q.�,ttMr�S-_potj,; �B�AO�nn
Owner Natter ne No• 1-ion , 28°� -2.�
On Site Representative: 5�a";Zi�+��. _ integrator. IL
uYL it
Mailing Address:. ,'C 1 o]C
Physical Addres&Ucadon: . S li.s -�Mm Wt- ,1WWL 't2vAts\ �U
Latitude:. �_� Longitude:
Qperation ascription: (based on design charaetarWes)
T e of Swine No. ofAnimaLt. Type ofPoaldy Na ofAnimak ' . Type of Cattle No. ofAr imalt
S3_ 0 Lryer 0 Dairy
0 Nutsay O Non -Dyer 0 Bead
0 Feaft
Other a of L:nestoet NWnber of Animals:
Nbmber of Lagoons— (include in the Drawings and Observations the froeboaud of cast tasoao)
FacIl'�tp on:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than I foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the Iagooa?: -
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
o Man-made Q Not Man -rye
Cover Creep '
Does the facility need more acreage for sprayitxg?:
Does the cover ctvp need improvement?:
( list the crops Which need improv me e)
00P type; Ate:
Setback G7rftcriaIs a dwelling located within 20O feet of waste application?
Is a well located within IOO feet of waste application? - - -
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Lint: Stream?
Is animal waste Sand applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
AOI — Jaauiry 17p" -
Yes 0
Yes 0
Yes a
Yes 0
Nou
No 0L
Nola
No it
Yes 0 No
Yes i7 No
Yes E3 No IAL
~ Yes 0 ,_-No IQ _ =-
Yes ❑ No
Yes O No ;

Does thz facility neain=uce need improvement? Yes O
Is th= evidence of past discharge fiem any part of the operation? Yes a NOW
Does record keeping nerd improvement? Yes O No 1�
Did the facility fail to have a copy of tlu Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes 0 No I&
Explain.any Yes ansv mrs•
ec FacilityAwessww—Vib -- (,-;-
prawirigs or Observatlo=
Date: %-I
Use AftwAme a IrNeeded
• - y,�l�/t-..�u.�i• ._ .:z. -�. - .�. w��•i�nwirn�• ��+r•rra.Me�•frlk�w�'��. ��'�y"��..�'�+�t�+s�•�*+a:
�C!• i.i = -y - - - -• •. ' ,-+!�:.: '-:!#"�.::ai: „tr';G "��.'�' +?i''�;� �s?!47rrti:'�5-� r�'�•._ .
��. . � - .-.. .. ~-. � _ � -'+;•. .. � �• -•���- .. �~� a-.�� �.
AOI — ?annar717P%

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. _ Oct _xt.
DIVISION-_OF=ENVIR'ONlVMEN :]MANAGEMENT
ANWAL FEEDI:Of CIO R'AT!ONS 'SITE `VISPTATTON RECORD
DATE:' I995
.J
•Farm NamelOwner. 'r
Mailing AddG—
County; a c
Integrator- m,,c .; _ Phone:: tg lc$ N .22q % 210 ._
On Site Representative: :i
Physical AddressMocation: -A3o fn o
I Ma
Type of Operation: - Swim g Poditry ` Caine.
Design Capacity: , Soo _ Nunnb0 ofts-on-Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM- Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude:_]S • = AID'
Circle Yts or.No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficitiit fr eaboard :. of 1.-. Foot + 25 year. . 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) ' �or No : ': ' ' , . A , Freeboard �= 3 FL Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoons)?.:Yes:o Was -any:crosion observed? Yes or � (Seepage was
Is adequate Iand available fdr spray? - Yes;oi No �Isaho cover, crop. a equate?' Yes or No Not Evaluated
��,<:
Crop(s) being utilized: S ra Field'°or covericro • 'was-'--not-evaluated
Does the facility meet SCS minimum 'setback" ente iar.,:200"TeeA from D.wcllings? or No
';IDO`Fect'fromWrlls? QSt or No
* Is the animal waste stockpiled within Iariet 6f1USGS BIuc°Lihc'Stream? Yes or �*
* Is.animal waste land applied or spray .ir igated:� 1Nh 25 Fe t•of a USGS -Map Blue Line: Yes or No
Is animal .waste discharged into water of the'statc by.`man-made: ditch;' flushing system, or other
lt :j�:
similar man-made devices? . Yes-'o o : :;..If Yes,. Plcas�Explain,
Does the -facility maintain adequate waste°,!4ifiagement records -{volumes of -manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage wit}=coveraop)? Yes:or<No�y�aste management records were not
Additional Comments: =' ''reyiewedL
This was a yrry brief insg ction: a=lino �;"rharou h' insaec ion -will be cMducted in the future.
Please contact.t-DEM should nay. •condition' -arise that•°posei'�a.•danger -to surface waters. _
* This farm was not located on -a ,t1SGS:,T0P0`•:map to"'determine value Line" status.
If you have questions . concerning -this :-report'-please do -not -.hefkftate tcr-contact the inspector
at (910
Inspector Name
• Please contact'
s iuspector'.:0 -the''abcve 'information is incorrect.
,Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Regli m Immei Ve Atoefm: �
Fac Mty No.
DIVISION OF; F.riYI1t01 NTAL MANAGEMENT
A�r FF,E =L .`OPEi IONS SM VISITATION. R=IW
DATF.:I99S .
'Earle NameJOwnw.,
Waft .
County: 4 I
P .
On Site
Physical
Type of Operation: Swine _jL Poultry Cattle.
Design Capacihr. _ !I'ICZQQ Nsuaber of'Aidix�ais on Site: a
DEM Cadfieadon Number. AC�. -':DEW Cestificadon Number. ACNEW
Latitude: • �' ,,;�' Longitude:�' �;'�' . .. -
c3rck .Yes or. No -:.-
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have suf dent' -free mM. of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 isuhes)' �c or No , - :. A Fiaeeboard'. ' 3 Ft. finches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon�sj?..Yes',or Was sny erosion obsaved? Yes or (Seepage Was
Is adequate land available for spray? : �Yes� or No :It -the cove Drop adcquatG?' Yes or No Not Evaluati
Crop(s) being ut`lized: S ra ;cro ' wan not evaluated -
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback -C itii a?.' 200.-Ped from Dwellin ? or No
_.300 Feet.fiom`V�ells? or No
*Is the animal waste stockpiled within I00` Feu of .USGS Blue Ikle Stream? L.YCS or a*
* Is animal waste land applied or spray.irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Slue Line: Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch-Ilushing system, or-bdw
similar mars -made devices? Yes If Yes, Pleas' Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate gemeilt records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage witli`cover'Grop}? Yes or NoVaste. management records were not.
Additional Comments:
Thia Was a Yer4 brief 3nereet jMn -- will be conducteA in LbS future.
Please contactE-DEM should and condition-- arise that posei`.a danger to surface waters.
* This farm was not located an -a USGS-TOPO map to determine Mue Line" status.
If You have questioas.concerAing this report•please do-not-heditate tcrcoatact the ector
at (9� _ I_.4I. please contact.:tbs•itispector'i! the~abova•iaformation is incorrect.
InSPeC x Name
,SignalM
c� Facility . .:�a=� . .. -
Assessment Unit Use'AtWhments If Needed.

Site Requires Immediaxc Attention:
Facility No. `©q -xig _.
DIYiSION D .-ENYIRONMHNTAL MANAGEMENT
AND&AL FEEDLOR`'
OPERtiTloNS SrrE YISrmnw RECORD
DATE: i995
•`: 1 T LV'
e-
.Fwm Name/Owner.... .
Wailing Ad
Integrator. n1� -Phona: .% 0 % ma.
On Site Representative: -Phone'.. �•
Physical Adders fLocadon: ',-w 1jfi6 r' :milt . -ih di . Prl kckfi i
Type of Operation: - Swims Y Po)iltry -Cattle,-,
Design Capacity: . S'o(nNumbcr-or"Aiiiin_ als-on Site . - 5,5�6 s&Z, e. - -
DEM Certification Number. ACE-­� . :DEM_ CutificatiNumber: ACNEW
Latitude:�'.,.�' .�,' Longitude:' -4�'••a�• . .. Circle Yes. or.No'-.:
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon .have- siiffiaaii,;irszboard. of I Foot' + 25 year. 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) ' r or No .. ''` - A Freeboard:, _ 2 fit. - Ia _ Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoons)?. Yes or�Was any,=sion observed? Yes or (Seepage was
Is adequate land availabh for spray? Y or NO.". - the cover, crop. adaquatc? Yes or No Not Evaluate
Crop(s) being utilized: S ra Field'�oiYcaver'Icro ' was . not'=evaluated
Does the facility mew SCS minimum setback"crite4a?'-200.:Feet_-from .Dwedlings? W or No
:100 Feet:from° or No
*Is the animal waste stockpiled within 1aFcct `of .USGS Blue tine•Strcam? Yes or
* Is animal waste land applied or spray.imgated within 25 Foet of a'USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into water of the 'state�by.man-made'ditch: flushissg system, orbther
similar man-made devices? Yes If Yes, Please Explain. ,
Does the' facility maintain adequate was gemeat records, (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray Ungatad on specific acreage with-cover.crop)? Yes or No(Vaste management records were not
Additional Comments: rpm gRPffi
_This 3jgs,11 very brief insoe�tion:~aroug�}gQ�-3dj1 be conducted in the
Please contact,-DEM should any. -condition"arise that posed'•.a danger -to surface waters. _
* This farm was not located on•a USGS-TOPO map to determine :Blue Line" status.
If you have questions .concerning -this report please dd-not-heAxtate tor.contact the inspector
at (9 486-1541. Please contact.. the- inspector`i# tbe"above 'information is incorrect.
Inspector Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
''SIgnatum
Use 'Attachments if Nxded.

4
h g.
❑ DSW.0 Animal Feedlot Operatioa Review � _ .
A Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSNVC review O Other
��
Facility Number Date of Inspection 0 26
Time of Inspection / % 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours �
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
tH Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel and processing2
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: _ _. .. _ _.__ . _. _ .....
Farm Name: County • .... ..._ .. ._._� _.. _..... �.._ . .......
Land Owner Name: f'BCr' r�/lT .. _ Phone No: ------
Facility Conetact: J . Title: %%%fw _ Phone No:.. .. �.. _.. _...
Mailing Address: _�... .. _.... ..
Onsite Representative. ....
�Lo �yC —_ ......... _ Integrator: --�� �r
...
Certified Operator: .. \%J k ✓• 1s OF�. ? .. Operator Certification Number:
Latitude 6 Longitude • 6 Du .
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
�s on a .Ca act
Design u Mt �QSIgn renitTr
wine 0013ulah.o.
n ulatt�aaact XPo elation .
N` ❑
Wean to Feeder '`f ❑
' [] Non -Da'
❑ Feeder to Finish ,Laverry
Farrow to Wean J f00q�2m ' u
Farrow to Feeder Total Dt:SIgII CIIpaCity
#n
El Farrow to Finishx ry x�r'k x x
Kam❑ Other wx �
€.a`
fFv.FiFa:r',:4"D- �`i Arlo ee - ,»„"-:;`��RJpt-fie•.', ,a,x,dsn.,v
,..,_..,. ....._-,.uA¢jl5kro?i
Numberrof�Lagoons I�,Halditxg Ponds /�� ❑Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area - ❑ Spray Field Area
a
.General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b- If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
[:)Yes J@ No
❑ Yes 55 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes No
Continued on back

r
Facility Number: .f2.q........ .
6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding. Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
1 I . Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
El No
❑ Yes
121 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
No
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes -1@ No
❑ Yes
®.No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type . v .. .......... ...................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes 91 No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes No
Yes [] No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ( No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
,Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,�l No
Comments'(refer to"question-# Explain any YES;answers and/or any recommendations or any°other comments: y
^ol. - -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary) - a
„ t x»...
12-_ r,C 1,,f
r
cc: umision of wafer Lluarrry, water S!uaruy aecuon, Paerlrty Assessment Unit 4/3U/Y 1

® Division of Water Quality.
0 Di4 ion of Soil and: Water Conservation '
- Q Other Agency -
;.--Type of Visit -0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit B Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date, of Visit -
Facility Number p
® Permitted WCertified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered
FarmName: .......... ..... /^.........................................................
Owner Name:
Facility Contact: .....fin./1t"/ .....aS.i,�+`��€-� .......... ................. 'Title:
Time: � Printed on: 7/21/2000
Q Not —operational 0 Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .......................
Count•:
...................................................... ....................
Phone No: ... ../.0
.............................................................
Mailing Address:......�....e..71?...r�....!//l/.,
Onsite Representative:.._��.._�✓ '
Certified Operator-
..... .
Location of Farm: /
....................................... Phone No:...................
p ,
C.......��
0............................................... ..........................
Integrator:...... .......
Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
[]Swine []Poultry []Cattle []Horse Latitude �� �6 =i Longitude ' 9 44
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Ca aci Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer I ID Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer L 11­1 Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean 7p�
❑ Farrow to Feeder Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains PresenE ❑ Lagnnn Arta ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges R Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑jes KNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes RNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) El Yes gNo
c. If discharge is ubsorved. what is the estimated flow in gal/ruin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes OgNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ;R No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [I Yes &JNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structurk 1 Structure]).,
Structure 3
Identifier: .......... :.iG..T..........................�.............. .... .........................
❑ Spillway ❑ Yes [RNo
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Freehoard (inches):
5/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: 0 — 26/, Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes'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
(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 ANo
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 R No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 1'eNo
1 I. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes >47No
12. Crop type-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes ,KNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes �No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes KNo
c) This facility is pended fora 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 ANo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0?'No
1 S- Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(e/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes XNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes VNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes )KNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'? ❑ Yes XNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ElYes ;4No
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'? El Yes XNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes KNo
0: Ito yiglatioris;oir' d-dide.n ies were noted• di}rinthis - You wll •feoeye Ro furthr •g ; ;
' Torres oridence: abouk 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): Y .A
old J �.� ��,�-���/�•, .
r
/I Ape,,/
li 1 Iwwc
A
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: p9 2� Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor 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 PNo
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 JNo
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 Wo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes J9No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenUtemporary cover? ❑ Yes VNo
5100

_ - Q Division of Soil and_Water Conse�rvahonOperafeon Rev,ew G T' -
{ Q Division of Soil and Water -Conservation,, _Compliance Inspectio
Di�ision of Water Quality _Compliance Inspection Y x '<� '`
M71 r Agency Operation=Review , -�
j'
Routine O Com faint Q rollow-upofDWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 1 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 13 Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered E3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: >�. c r....5e County: ... ... /..-...............................................
Owner Name:........... 11...i. Li l` ._f. ............ l Z!........../1:.-.............. Phone No:............. L,t...''. Y... ...........
Facility Contact: .... J�J..�.�`r ......... .... Title: f �q .. Phone No: ...............................................
....!'"....................t i
5�1Mailing Address: ......... f..... ................. / ..................y`6.......... f ....., .......... �
Onsite Representative , C................ ......... ...... ... Integrator: ,,..,,,,..,,..,
p C✓..n.e ..........................................................................I.....................
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
A
.............................................................. ....................................... ............................. ................................................................................... -.......... .........
...............................
Latitude �'�` ��' Longitude �• �' �'°
;Design Current _ .
Swine Capacity Po ulation
.... .. . .. ... ... f.]..._ - .. .
-'
❑ Wean to Feeder
5490
rl,
❑ Feeder to Finish
f Qp
-
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Design r'Current Design Current
C :aci ..Po"ulation ...Cattle Capacity -'Population;
Non -Layer Non -Dairy
_ -----
Other
-
_,:
-Total Design Capacity.
f
.T0t91 SSLW
Number of Lagooias. _ ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area [j Spray Field Area
_ . �=
folding=Ponds% Sdid Traps _': ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System •` '
r _
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is ohserved, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ........�� " ................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes 6 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes 0
Structure 6 ,`
❑ Yes No
Continued on ba
3123/99

Facility Number:0 — 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
;VNo
(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
XNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
,ryes
OW
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
9No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need main tenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ONO
11. Is there evidence of ver applicatio ? ❑ Excessive Poling ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
ON
12. Crop type rat e �f 1
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in (e Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
MNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
jrN0
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
jKNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
D NO
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
9Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Q�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 �Na
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
0No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
KN0
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
4i0
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
0: v yiola(ioris'oe deec encies •mere roofed• diWifig this'visit.' • :Y66 Witl•ree iye do furt�t�
correspondence. a)b t f this visit. ......... .
4I5- /Lue 4d wor moo_ he,-m K Wa
�� /�mau� �a s,� l�ro-�- �ay�-•
` .. '' �=sF'.•.� C -.. � �—was^--+--'s^r^^ _..'_''..� ��1.
Reviewer/Inspector Name, cL
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3/23/99

s= -
-
Facility Number: - 24 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
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
o
2&
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
ElYes
/
®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
VNO
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
VrNo
3/23/99

[] Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency�f5 �; u
oA
® Division of Water Quality„
10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number eoe
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered E3 Certified 0 Applied for Permit © Permitted [3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:.,...,,,,
� L
Farm Name: tx�4 .....���'!.—�''i''�`. ............................• R County:.......,��1.�......r� `J...............................................
...... Q
Owner Name: Phone No: `�� v� i�0 l///
,,��.........r¢-�............ ..........................
Facility Contact: .,r �C.E/tC ................. Title: . Phone No:
......d• y,s,.....s�..,_�'.`
Mailing Address: ............. �.. .... �...,... ... ,•y� /......................
Onsite Representatives.... iL .�a', .G4�............ ....... Integrator:..... fir..... `.......................
Certified Operator...... ,� /............ ,, .�.._....... .. Operator Certification Number,.../y1f �
.................. ...... ...............
Locution of Farm:
Latitude a & " Longitude ' 6 «
Wean to Feeder
rD
Feeder to Finish
pfl
/G29�
Farrow to Wean
;T
,
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
12 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
KNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If -discharge is observed, was the conveyance than -made?
❑ Yes
Wo
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 -,aVmin?
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
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
ElYes
KFNo
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility Number: a —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons,flolding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes JO No
OKYes ❑ No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (n): ...-- ..1.,,_3....
............ .................................... ................................... --------................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes Q'No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes VNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? XYes ❑ 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 b�No
Wrote Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes allo
(If in excess of WW1, or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
r
15. Crop type ....... AA¢ - -- j... a!...........................................................................................................................................................................
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 �i to
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
kYes
❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
PkNo
1
21, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
,'o
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
IkYes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities nl ,
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
kINo
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No.violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit..You.will receive no ftirther
correspondence about this:visit:.. :: ... :..:
Comuments (refer to` question #) Explain any �r ES answers andlar anv recomrnendateons or any other comments`
Use drawings of facility to!betterexplain situations. (usc additional pages as,necessary)t AT
mow, c; x• ,.v
AL
���-� - ��>.a- ,� sum ' .�..•� ,� --
/Z.
�pa..yo it?,:✓co ,! r�.✓e,� T y o2 -- ,� ./ J99�' /„�o!e.,%
� Z. si,fj � �/� OG27�.r✓/.,rr e� �a s� �.o.s �.�.�jr.►�! Accar�.7 � �.���ro� � -
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: „/� _ Date: w 7