090122_INSPECTIONS_20171231

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
EDEHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
July 21, 1997
14.1
--RIM I I I R
Mr. Albert Shaw
2262 Burney Ford Road
Clarkton, NC 28433
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Wildwood Swine Farm
Registration No. 09-122
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Shaw:
On July 17, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality
inspected the Wildwood swine facility. It was observed that the waste application fields were not
planted in the required crops as identified in the CAWMP. This situation requires that a new plan
be issued by a technical specialist to meet all new criteria in regard to waste management. You are
requested to contact a technical specialist immediately to address possible crop options and
immediately plant the required crop as identified in your new CAWMP for waste application to
prevent an emergency situation due to high freeboard. In addition, you are requested to address
the following:
1. Consult with a technical specialist for assistance in record keeping in regard to waste
application.
2. General maintenance of the lagoon dikes is required. The lagoon dikes need cutting and several
areas need planting of a cover grass to prevent erosion. The base of the lagoon needs
maintaining to allow inspection for indications of seepage_
Please notify this office in writing on or before August 22, 1997 at the address below as to the
actions taken or proposed to be taken to resolve this deficiency. Nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and liability of any violations that have or may
result from these deficiencies.
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville NiC
FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 fr C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycied/10% post -consumer paper

Page 2
Mr. Albert Shaw
July 21, 1997
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call Bob Heath or Ed Buchan, at (910)
486-1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
Sam Warren - Bladen Co. MRCS
Kraig Westerbeck - Murphy Farms

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Mr. Albert Shaw
2262 Burney Ford Rd.
Clarkton, NC 28422
Dear Mr. Shaw:
L7�NR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
January 28, 1998
Subject: Notice of Violation
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Wildwood Farm
Facility No. 09-122
Bladen County
You are hereby notified that, having been deemed permitted to have a non discharge permit for
the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 211.0217, you have been found to be in
violation of your 2H .0217 Permit.
On January 23, 1998, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality performed a follow-up inspection of your farm in Bladen County. The inspection revealed that the
freeboard level was less than the required minimum of nineteen (19) inches. The inspection also revealed
that there are some bare spots on the lagoon dike that need a cover of grass to prevent erosion. There
was no cover crop planted or there was none visible to the inspectors except approximately one acre in
the field on the right, entering the faun.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following item(s) be addressed:
1. Immediately lower the lagoon level to the required nineteen inch minimum, weather
permitting.
2. Establish a suitable cover crop for irrigation of waste.
3. Establish a cover of grass on the lagoon bank to prevent erosion.
225 Green Street, Suite 714 FAX [phone]
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycled/] 0% post -consumer paper

Mr. Shaw
1-28-98
Page 2
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing it's deemed
permitted status and being required to obtain an individual non discharge permit for the facility.
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking
enforcement actions for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division of Water
Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than $10,000.00 per day per violation.
Please provide a written response to this office on or before February IQ. 1998 regarding
corrective actions taken or planned. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact either myself or Mr. John Hasty, Environmental Specialist, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Sam Warren - Bladen Co. MRCS
Audrey Oxendine - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Central Files - Raleigh

7
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Dear Mr. Shaw:
;;.
�Wftft �0*ft
DE NE-�
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 16, 1998
SUBJECT: NOME_OF DEFIC>[ENCY
W ildwood Farm
Facility No. 09-122
Bladen County
On January 23, 1998, staff from the Fayettteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality conducted an inspection of Wildwood Farm At the conclusion of the inspection, a notice-'
of violation was issued stating that there was no cover crop and the lagoon was within the
nineteen inch mandatory freeboard.
However, upon further review and after receiving a letter from Ms. Sonya Johnson, it is
noted that there was a field unobserved by the inspectors which had a cover crop established. It is
also noted in Ms. Johnson's letter that the lagoon level indicator was two to three inches lower
than the design specifications. It is understood that this will be corrected as soon as possible.
Considering all that Ms. Johnson informed the inspectors, the original notice of violation
will be reduced to a notice of deficiency. There will be no need to respond to this letter as asked
for in the notice of violation.
If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact John Hasty at (910) 486-
1541.
Sinc 1
ohn C. Hasty, Jr.
EnvironmentalZg
Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files Environmental Specialist
Audrey Oxendme
Ed Holland -Robeson Co. MRCS
225 Green Street, Suite 714 FAX [phone]
Fayetteville, North Carolina 29301-5043 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycleM 0% post -consumer paper

Feb 11 SIB 11:40p 5an�ja D. Johnson 910-645-6758 p•z
Harvest Net, Inc.
Agri Management Services
3597 NC 211 East, Clarkton, NC 28433
[phone] [phone]
February 11, 1998
John Hasty
NGDCHNR-DWQ
225 Ureen Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
Dear Mr. Hasty,
'this letter is on behalf of Albert Shaw's Wildwood Farm regarding the Notice of Violation
received citing insufFicient freeboard and lack of cover crop dated January 28,1998_ As we
discussed; the lagoon marker does not accurately reflect the liquid level in relation to the dike
elevation. The lagoon level indicator is two to three inches lower than design specifications.
Therefore:, at the time of the inspection the total freeboard was actually fourteen to fifteen inches.
Albert has been irrigating in an appropriate manner to lower this level and will continue to do so
to maintain the nineteen inch freeboard_ The marker will be corrected as soon as possible.
In addition, Albert's waste management plan has been revised since the fall DWQ inspection to
include fields in other arras of the farm. Adequate acreage of the crops listed in this plan was
planted in a timely manner and is well established.
Considering these facts and the recent high rainfall, I respectfully requcat a review Of the Notice
of Violation issued The only deficiency at this farm is the lagoon level which is being addressed
appropriately and within all NRCS waste utilization specifications. Thank you for your time and
consideration.

4 _ N
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Bunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
January 28, 1998
CERTIFIED MIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Albert Shaw
2262 Burney Ford Rd.
Clarkton, NC 28422
Subject: Notice of Violation
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Wildwood Farm
Facility No. 09-122
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Shaw:
You are hereby notified that, having been deemed permitted to have a non discharge permit for
the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 214.0217, you have been found to be in
violation of your 2H .0217 Permit.
On January 23, 1998, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality performed a follow-up inspection of your farm in Bladen County. The inspection revealed that the
freeboard level was less than the required minimum of nineteen (19) inches. The inspection also revealed
that there are some bare spots on the lagoon dike that need a cover of grass to prevent erosion. There
was no cover crop planted or there was none visible to the inspectors except approximately one acre in
the field on the right, entering the farm.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following item(s) be addressed:
Immediately lower the lagoon level to the required nineteen inch minimum, weather
permitting.
2. Establish a suitable cover crop for irrigation of waste.
3. Establish a cover of grass on the lagoon bank to prevent erosion
225 Green Street, Suite 714 FAX [phone]
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Telephone [phone]% recycle&] 0% post -consumer paper

if
Mr. Shaw
1-28-98
Page 2
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing it's deemed
permitted status and being required to obtain an individual non discharge permit for the facility.
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking
enforcement actions for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division of Water
Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than $10,000.00 per day per violation.
Please provide a written response to this office on or before February 10. 1998 regarding
corrective actions taken or planned. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not
hesitate to contact either myself or Mr. Joins Hasty, Environmental Specialist, at [phone].
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
cc: Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Sam Warren - Bladen Co. NRCS
Audrey Oxendine - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Central Files - Raleigh

�� .,..�•; •,> ,,a::,, . .w- -.ws,�"'�'.w;:,:day".a,yak%�•a�w.#:;'�...az..wos;�-z.�:. _-.......w..:..::iS—� ,.,. sxt�rS�� � �& ��
[]Division of Soit and Water Conservation ❑Other Agency
[] Division of Water Quality
�..� �u X �.,:$:�"iY.:^.•v'r:.'..�k`,`�va`�.'°uC. ,s;.t�`:'-"'C...�. "^.':.'5..'IdSe°�°�4"`�. $•:,w;�."9P^'^�hi' Si-'t'°�-; �Re?3i. •Ybd '`u.�$�•. .6 iG «f� .
Routine 0 Cum taint 0 Follow-uE of DW2 inspection 0 Foilov►-u of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of inspection y 1
Facility Number C� Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh-mm)
© Registered [3 Certified 13 Applied for Permit 13 Permitted JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: _.... !� dam`-/_111�1''." •.. ...... Countv: _.... .. 1.. /
Owner Name: ..... ...1` L hr°? .— �......------ Phone No:
Facility Contact: , .... W..WV ,F c ..... fIW.............. Title :................... ^..... ......... .......... ........... ... Phone No........ ....._... ..
Mailing Address: .. e2 A 6�.Z .... ,,,c� �✓ ._ �1��f'1.�f- �.c��.�i* f.... ��. � � ��.2 2 ....
Onsite Representative:.._........_. ..... .............. ...... -....... ........ _ •••• ............ Integrator:_.. �....._.. _ .....,-......•. _ ...
Certified Operator. .............._ _...._. _ _-. Operator Certification Number;.,,_,--___....,,--.,.,,.._.
Location of Farm:
Latitude I & 6 L Longitude I ___ _ • L�J' 1�_ I"
❑ Wean to Feeder
l3 Feeder to Finish
7,1:, %2-
(7z.
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes MNo
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 gallmin?
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
maintenance/improvement?
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?
7/25/97
❑ Yes 13 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
0 No
A%//!
❑ Yes
31 No
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes W No
Continued on back

Facifity Number: !2t142
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ,fNo
Structures (Laeoons,Holding Ponds, Flush fits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _. W......_.............. _..... .................... _.
Freeboard (ft): .......f 2. �....................... ......
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes * No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
KNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
)kYes
❑ 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
No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type l�� ...? ......� .....1...�. �r ..27 .�1. .._....... W........ ....
.................
........ .......
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
0-yes
❑ No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
AL -No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
.❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
,� Yes
❑ No ,
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Yes
❑ No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities [lph
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No.vialatioits or deftciencies.were noted,during this:visit~ You:will receive na further
. - correspondence about this:visit:-
-Mom, fl � °� .i
Cortmettts (%r to question:#)xplaEn arty YES`answets and/or`anyhrecamnsendat�rons or any other ;comments,
s�tuaduns R
Use drawtiegs of facility to better explain +(use adddional pages -as nece_ ssary}
�54 _ f"c"..�+ i $„
,-5f?�'Lj Cii ^"c � /L�i��f /r ,,,]2-t J I /14�i�-+ G'(/!%!i l�- yr-rr S� d i✓ �,tjf ,fi(fu' i
7/25/97
7
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Impector Signature: �t1, T �,� �. Date:

North Carolina
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1 �f
Division of Water Quality
Fayetteville Regional Office
NCDENR
Michael F. Easley,Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
April 18, 20001
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Albert Shaw
2262 Burney Ford Road
Clarkton, NC 28422
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Wildwood Farm
Facility No. 09-122
Permit No. AWS090122
.Bladen County
Dear Mr. Shaw:
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non discharge permit for the
subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H .0217, you have been found to be in
violation of your 2H .0217 Permit.
On April 9, 2001, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality,
performed an inspection of the Wildwood Farm located in Bladen County. The inspection revealed that
wastewater was being applied to a wheat crop with a traveling gun and reel system. Further
investigation of the irrigation event identified an area of the field where wastewater was running off the
application field into a wooded section. The wastewater was ponded in several areas within the woods
and was running into a shallow surface water drainage way and migrating towards a small creek.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following items be addressed:
1. Contact a technical specialist. for assistance with calculating the application rate of the irrigation
equipment to the soil type and crop type, to prevent exceeding the infiltration rate of the soil
and hydraulic overload {run-off}. Calibrate the irrigation equipment to insure the proper
application rate and gun cart speed.
225 GREEN STREET - SUITE 714 / SYSrEL BUILDING / FAYETTEVILLE. NC 28301-5043
PHONE (910) 4WI541 FAX [phone] WWW ENR.STATE.NC.US/ENRI
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY I AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED110% POST CONSUMER PAPER
DENR TOLL FREE HOTLINE: [phone]

Mr. Shaw
April 18, 2001
Page 2
Failure to comply with the above conditions may result in the facility losing its General Permit
and being required to obtain an individual non discharge permit for the facility.
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking
enforcement actions for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division of
Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than $25,000.00 per day per
violation.
If you ave any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact either Mr.
Bob Heath, Environmental Specialist, or me at 910-486-1541.
Sincerely,
7\) c'), � - -
aul E. Rawls
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
RFH: PER/bs
cc: Sonya Avant - Compliance Group
Sam Warren - Bladen Co. NRCS
Trent Allen - DSWC, Fayetteville Office
Kevin Weston - Murphy -Brown
Central Files - Raleigh

2262 Burney Ford Rd
• CWrku n, NC 29433
ten
April 13, 200ILj
"APR "V6 2o�t
Mr. John Hastings `Y,�
North Carolina Department of Environmental and Natural Resources` i j �_�
225 Green Street, Suite 714 � - cl-rl
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Dear Mr. Hastings:
On April 9`s, we were applying our last application of waste on wheat. Due to heavy rains two weeks
prior, the soil in this field had become compacted. This resulted in some ponding in a low part of the
field.

Beverly Eaves Perdue, Governor
Dee Freeman, Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
October 7, 2010
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Cohen H. Sullins, Director
Division of water Quality
Mr. Steven Tatum
P.O. Box 1416
Elizabethtown, North Carolina 28458
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY � Q�
Wildwood farms and Quality Farms Inc.v li L
Facility No. 9-122 l
Permit No. AWS090122 '
Bladen County
NOD — 2010-PC-1062
Dear Mr. Tatum:
On February 7, 2010, the staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), Aquifer Protection Section
(APS), were notified by Mike Cudd of a high freeboard level in one or more of the facilities lagoons.
As a result of this incident, you are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -discharge
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1300, you have been
found to be in violation of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) and the Swine
Waste System General Permit No. AWG100000 as follows:
Deficiency 1:
Failure to maintain waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance with the facility's CAWMP
in accordance with Condition V. 2. Of Swine waste System General Permit No. AWG100000.
On February 7, 2010, a lagoon/storage pond level was documented at 15 inches of freeboard. A level of
19.5 inches is the maximum level allowed by your permit and Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
Continue to follow the proposed actions outlined in your Plan of Action (POA) submitted to the
Fayetteville Regional Office. Take all necessary additional steps to insure lagoon levels remain in
compliance with Section (2) of your permit.
Mailing Address Phone [phone] Location No�ncthCarolina
1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone] N. Salisbury St -
Raleigh,
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Raleigh, NC 27604
Internet: www.nC-Rarer ualitv.ora Customer Service I-877-623-6748
An Equal OpporlunitylAHirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledl10% Post Consumer Paper

Page 2
Mr. Steven Tatum
October 7, 2010
If you have not already done so, provide a written response to this Notice of Deficiency once lagoon
levels are back in compliance.
Failure to comply with conditions in a permit may result in a recommendation of enforcement action, to
the Director of the Division of Water Quality who may issue a civil penalty assessment of not more that
twenty-five thousand ($25,000) dollars against anv "person," who violates or fails to act in accordance
with the terms, conditions, or requirements of a permit under authority of G.S. 143-215.6A.
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact me at (910) 433- 3300.
Sincerely,
C, C1,Y;
ac_ 1&e17
onv W. Honevc
Environmental Specialist
Fayetteville Regional Office.
cc: Keith Larick/APS CAFO Unit
FRO Compliance Animal Files
NCDSWC-FRO

Memo
To. Fayetteville Regional Office, Division. of Water Quality, AP
Frorm Kathy Barker, Gallberry Consulting Services
M
�Lq, ao fo
Re: Lagoon status report
Please be advised that the lagoon on loi ld (VO04 Farm, number
g- /2.Z that was reported "in the red" on ZA -A& - 09 (date)is now back
in compliance at a reading of Lq II - --.
fit � f.�►'�"At
1
ft�� 1,�AA /&�C,
910-6,A,1-&o9f

search Page 1 of 2
�-` /ZZ
Incident Incident Freeboard Levels Events Related Incidents
Details 1 Dctails2
* Incident Type: ro!-Comgnance Reportinci Incident Number: 201
* Category:. APS - Animal
* Started Date/Time : ` 02107/2010 06-116 PM
* County : Sladen Farm #:':090
Decimal DD:MM:SS
Latitude:: Position Accuracy: Select Vakie---
Longitude:: Position Method: ---Select Value ---
Position Datum.— S Iect Value-
---Reporting Person : Anonymous / 10
First Name: -Kathy _ �L Address
Middle Name:
Last Name:. Barkoi, City
State/Zip
Phone : [phone] Cell/Pager
* Location of the Incident : Wildwood Farms
Address:
City/State/Zip: Clarkton
Cause/Observation of the incident
Action Taken
Surface Water Impacted : ' ) Yes No *'Unknown
Waterbody : , ---Select Value---
Waterbody (Other) :
Report Received By : Revels, R;ckv. .
Phone : j(910)433-3300 1720
Directions :
Comments/Findings
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft
Groundwater Impacted : :�
Conveyance: - ---�c
RO Contact: ' Rey
Phone: (91 i
Date/rime: 02/07l2010 0 6: 1 c"; Prr: Date/Time
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us:7001/selectOnelncident.do?id=3MO5FMYGOOKPPDX4CD2TG... 9/30/2010

search
Page 2 of 2
Referred Via: Voice rnail
Specific Causes :
Severe Natural Condition . — Vandalism
Referred Via : --
_ Pump Station Equipment Failure
:.Finish ,_Cancel:
http://bims.enr.state.nc. us:7001/selectOnelncident.do?id=3M05FMYG00KPPDX4CD2TG... 9/30/2010

search
Page I of I
Incident Detailsl. Incident Details2 Freeboard Levels Events
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting Incident Number : 201000786
Date/Time : 02/07/2010 06:16 pm Farm #: 090122
County : Bladen City : Clarkton
Responsible Party:
Incident Owner:
Permit: AWS090122
Facility
First Name:
Middle Name •
Last Name:
Company Name.
Phone:
[Clear Responsible Party]
Onsite Contact
First Name:
Middle Name:
Last Name;
Contact Agency
Phone
Cell/Pager
Fish Kill: Yes . No , Unknown
Containment: Yes ' No Unknown
Storage tank. AST __ . UST
Written Report Requested
Information Requested :
Closed Date :
Find Owner Clear
Find Permit [Clear]
Find Facility jQlearl
Address • '�
City
State/Zip :
Cell/Pager :
Report Entered By . _ Revels, Rid
Phone: {913)433_33
Date/Time : 02I10/2910
Estimated Fish Kill:
Cleanup complete: _ Yes
Well Contractor Cert#: ---Select �!a
Finish Cancel
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us: 7001 /maintain Incident I .do 9/30/2010

Agencies
Page 1 of 1
Incident Incident Freeboard Levels Events Related Incidents Action I-iistol-
Details] Details2
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting Incident Number: 201000786
Date/Time : 02/07/2010 06:16 pm Farm #: 090122
County : Bladen City: Clarkton
Freeboard Levels
i
Delete Waste Structure Waste Structurc Freeboard Plan Due
Type Identifier (inches) Date/`Milne
Lagoon ___ 09122 5.0 -
Add ! Delete
,i1 i.W_Cancer_
0I�jU� I�I�P
�1 uJ
y
P„ ". � _ ZZ
Plan Datefl'ime
Deceived l"reeboard
Date/Time Level OK
http://bims.enr.state. ne.us:7001 /maintainIncident2.do 9/30/2010

search Page I of 2
Incident Incident Freeboard Levels Events Related Incident
Details I Details2
Incident Type: 1Non-Cotnpflance ReporlinQ Incident Number : 200
Category: F-APS - Anj��a,
Started Date/Time 12/28/2009 04:14 pm
County :,5BIaderi = Farm 090
Decimal DD:MM:SS
Latitude: Position Accuracy. ---Select Vajtjp---
........ ...... . . . ....
Longitude:' Position Method: ---Select vaiLje-__
Position Datum: ---Seiect1,,a_lUe---
Reporting Person: — Anonymous
First Name: Kathy
Middle Name:
Last Name : Parker
Phone: f9i0)G24-6094
Location of the Incident : Lagoon High Freeboard 09-122 Facility
Address:.
City/State/Zip:': Clarklon
Cause/Observation of the incident Directions
-,-.aste level 2 iTicbes inr_o red.
Address
City
State/Zip
Cell/Pager:.
Action Taken: Comments/Findings
K_i�_'­y indicated s�_,e ca T led
2.1 pr
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft :
Surface Water Impacted: ' Yes ')No :*;Unknown Groundwater Impacted :
Waterbody : --- Seiecl Value—
Waterbody (Other): Conveyance
Report Received By • Barnhardt, Stephen A. RO Contact: Ret
Phone [phone]( 1736 Phone : F911
Date/Time: 12,28/2009 04:14 prn Date/Timc: —
04:,
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us:70011selectOnelncident.do?id='3MO5FMYGOOMAQDV4FRXC... 9/330/2010

search
Page 2 of 2
Referred Via: Mait
Specific Causes:
Severe Natural Condition Vandalism
Referred Via: --
Pump Station Equipment Failure
i Fini ,ii Cancel
http://bims.enr.state.nc.us:7001/selectOnelncident.do?id=3M05FMYG00MAQDV4FRXC... 9/30/2010

search
Page 1 of 1
Incident Detailsl Incident Details2 Freeboard Levels Events
Incident Type : Non -Compliance Reporting Incident Number: 200903227
Date/Time : 12/28/2009 04:14 pm Farm #: 090122
County: Bladen City : Clarkton
Responsible Party
Incident Owner:'
Permit: -AWS090122
Facility
First Name;
Middle Name:
Last Name:
Company Name : ,
Phone :
I -Clear Responsible Partyl
Onsite Contact :
First Name
Middle Name:
Last Name:
Contact Agency:
Phone :
Cell/Pager :
Fish Kill: Yes No a Unknown
Containment : Yes " No -*� Unknown
Storage tank: AST UST
Written Report Requested :
Information Requested :
Closed Date:
_ Find Owner [Clear]
Find Permit [Clear]
Find Facility [Clear]
Address
City
State/Zip : '
Cell/Pager :
Report Entered By :'.,Barnhardt,`
Phone : f �7 0)433-� -
Date/Time : 11212812009
Estimated Fish Kill:
Cleanup complete: Yes
Well Contractor Cert#: ---Select Va
Fi isll_ Cancel
http://bims.enr. state. nc.us:7001/maintainlncidentl .do 9/30/2010

Agencies
Page 1 of I
Incident Incident I:j-eeboard Levels Events Related Incidents Action History
Details] Details2
Incident Type : Non -Compliance Reporting Incident Number: 200903227
Date/Time : 12/28/2009 04:14 pm Farm #: 090122
County: Bladen City: Clarkton
freeboard Levels
Waste Structure
Delete
hype
---'Select value---
°Add [Delete i
Waste Structure Ireeboard
Identi Tier (inches)
# finis -g Cancel
Plan Due Plan Date/Time
Date/Tine Received Freeboard
Date/Time Level OK
hapa/bims.enr.state. nc.us: 7001 /maintainIncident2.do 9/30/2010

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
September 16, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL 7010 1870 0003 4774 71112
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Steven Tatum
PO Box 1416
Elizabethtown_ NC 28337
SUBJECT: Request for Information
Wildwood Farms
09-122
AWS090122
Dear Mr. Tatum:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On August 20, 2011 you or your representative reported a high freeboard at your lagoon.
As specified in your permit, the Division of Water Quality requests that you submit a
copy of all lagoon levels, rainfall records and irrigation events (IRR2) from January 1,
2011 through September 15, 2011. A copy of your WUP changes due to the crop failure
by October 15, 2011 to the Fayetteville Regional Office.
You may mail or fax the requested information to the address listed below. Your records
and any records submitted to this office are open to the public. If you have any questions
please contact me at 910-303-0151.
Sincerely,
Steve Guyton
Envirorunental Specialist
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
225 Green St., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301
Phone: [phone] FAX : 91G486-07071 Custorner Service: 1-877-623-6748
Iniemet- v,rww.h20.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opperumity' Afhrmmive k6on Ernpieycr
One
NorthCarolina
,lVatut-ally

c
1bk i
CENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water.Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
May 11, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Steven W Tatum
PO Box 1416
Elizabethtown, North Carolina 28337
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION / NOV-2011-PC-0307
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2T . 13 04
Quality Farms Inc Facility No. 09-156, Permit No. AWS090156
Bladen County
Dear Mr. Tatum:
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On May 6, 2011, staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), Aquifer Protection Section (APS), inspected
the Quality Farms Inc. and the permitted waste disposal system. We wish to thank Mrs. Kathy Barker who was
present and assisted during the inspection.
As a result of this inspection, you are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -discharge permit for
the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1304, you have been found to be in violation
of your permit as follows:
Violation 1:
Failure to conduct a sludge survey for the _year 2010 in accordance with your permit. (Permit NoAWS090156
Section Ill 19).
On May 6, 2011 a compliance inspection was conducted at your facility. A review of your records showed that no
sludge survey was conducted in 2010.
Required Corrective Action for Violation 1:
Conduct a sludge survey of your lagoon for calendar year 2011. Send a copy to the Fayetteville Regional Office
when completed.
AQUIFER PROTECTION SECTION
225 Green St., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301
?hone: 910-433-33001 FAX : [phone] Customer Service: 1-877-623-6748
Internet: www.h20.enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Opportunity l Affirmative Action Employer
One
NorthCai-olina
,naturally

y
Mr. Tatum
May 11, 2011
Page 2
The Division of Water Quality requests that, in addition to the specified corrective action above. please submit the
following items on or before June 15, 2011:
I. An explanation from the OIC for this farm regarding how this violation occurred
2. A list, from the OIC concerning the steps that will be taken to prevent this tiviolation from occurring in the
future.
You are required to take any necessary action to correct the above violations on or before December 31, 2011
and to provide a written response to this Notice by June 15, 2011. Please include in your response all corrective
actions already taken and a schedule for completion of any corrective actions not addressed.
Failure to comply with conditions in a permit may result in a recommendation of enforcement action, to the
Director of the Division of Water Quality who may issue a civil penalty assessment of not more that twenty-five
thousand ($25,000) dollars against any "person" who violates or fails to act in accordance with the terms,
conditions, or requirements of a permit under authority of G.S. 143-215.6A.
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact Steve Guy -ton or me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Step A. Barnhardt
Environmental Program Supervisor
cc: Keith Larick CAFO Unit
FRO Files
Danny Edwards-SWC-FRO
Murphy Farms

a
��g AJLA
9ACDEN
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Beverly Eaves Perdue
Governor
Division of Water Quality
Charles Wakild, R E.
Director
AQUfFER PROTECTION SECTION
December 29, 2011
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
CIG)y#s7001 2510 0003 8089 0974
Mr. Steven Tatum
PO BOX 1416
Elizabethtown, NC 28337
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Wildwood Farms Facility 409-122
AWS090122
Bladen County
NOD-201 I-PC-0645
Dear Mr. Tatum:
Dee FreeJnan
Secretary
On August 20, 201 1, staff ol'the NC Division of-WatCl- Quality (DWQ), AgLlifCl' PrOtCC:ti011 Section
(APS) was notified by Steven 'Tatum of a high freeboard level in the primary lagoon. We wish to thank
Mr. 'Tatum for notifying DWQ of this incident.
As a result of this incident, you are hereby 1iotifred that, having been permitted to have a Holz -discharge
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T Section. 1300, you have
been found to be in violation of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the Swine Waste
System General Permit No. AWGI00000 that you are covered to operate under, as Follows:
Del icieIlcy 1 :
Failure to maintain waste levels in your lagoon/storage ponds in accordance with the facility's Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan in accordance with Condition V. 2. of-Swffle W�iste System General
Permit No, AWG100000.
On August 20, 2011 a lagootl/storage pond level was documented of 18.0 irlches hi the primary lagoon. A
level of 19.0 inches is the maximum level allowed by your permit and Certified Animal Waste
Management Plan.
1611 Mail sei•,ice Center, Raf6gh, Nraii Caroline 97"c xJ-Jh17
Location: 512 N. Salisbury St. Raleigh, North Carolina 27W4
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Cusrorner 5eRke: 1-877-623-6746
inlernel: kvvny.ncwaterguaiiiy.org
',n F..ipraf C rnooyrr
011 C
NorthCttrol i mi
Alatlmally

Cont. Page Two
December 29, 2011
Wildwood Farms
Required Corrective Action for Deficiency 1:
DWQ has received a copy of your 30-Day flan of Action (POA) for the high freeboard occurrence. 'fake
all necessary additional steps to irlsnre lagoon levels remain in compliance with Section 2 of vOur hermit.
You al•e require(1 to take any necessary :lctjOil to correct the above deficiency and to provide :l
Written response to this Notice within 30 days of receipt of tilis letter. Please ii]CILKIC In VOLI1' response
all corrective actions already taken and a schedule for conipletion of ally corrective actions not addressed.
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact nle at [phone].
Sincerely,
Steve Gnyton
Bnvironulental Specialist
Fayetteville Regional Office
cc. Bladen County Soil and Water Conservation District
MLlrplly 131-Ow11 I'ar111S

AVG tyyr
REG- l �
FF},cam
�C
15-7 'KIP
yrJ

.•->_� M<
�: .e_ . �_. � _. � .. �--
t
� �-_
E .. �_

dp� a
1

iM.�S�'.:. •1�.r �..,� flu,_ � �.,•y`.

06
AN

We 01.
J it �- !t �' • 1
ID
• '
41
• � , ter. �lr.� '� � , �, � � �i �
�so
e
r r.� APO _ !

_. .%. .
�4 '' � � ,..�.,..�. mil• .. �
t ,J

c-T 17 AL
z
Type of Visit: erCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 011koutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: BL Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: ! o County: f&We Region: RC-0
Farm Name: t'.•'+� as -f Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ii CG {`` 1� G+�` Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: i Integrator: YO 9_9
Certified Operator: L�`�- (A'""
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Certification Number: r frS T? l
Certification Number:
Longitude:
WRICF-1
SwinePoPoultry
Vesig�i Cnrrent
Capacity
Resign Current
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
7
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,onl
Design Cnrrent
@a ac P,o .
Dry Cow
Non -Da'
Farrow to Finish
La ers
on -Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Beef Feeder
Boars
1pullets
Beef Brood Cow
her
4,T'urkevurke
7�OtPoults
s
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes E3-1 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
e'NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[; -NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes [ o
❑ Yes ErNo
[ffNA
❑ NE
❑NA
❑NE
❑NA
❑NE

Facility Number: Ll - I 1z; Date of Ins ection: aTf
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [g_No-- ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No 0-NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): l 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
1❑. o
E] NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[i]-o
❑ 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 enviro ental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
Yes
["o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[f N
❑ 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
[q'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 or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > t0%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): G, j(_-) 13
1
13. Soil Typ e(s): �. (a �o &�
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
ET —No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[3' l�O
❑ NA
[] NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EA-'YU
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[3 Yes
E]-K°
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑'b]o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] Yes
[]'kio
❑ 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 I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: o
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes Io [ 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 ❑ NAgNE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ,ENo ❑ NA b NE
]Yes Ej'No ❑NA bNE
I
❑ Yes -O/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [D No ❑ NA L] NE
[D Yes E]"No
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes LErinfo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refernto goesfior,.#� Explain any YES answers;and/or any additional recommendations or anyfottier comments.
Use drawings of faciLty to better ex lai© situatious' ' i k
r 1i x`
p (dse addttionalpages as necessary).
lb A( 3
f-7
c� '?l0- '?0 ��sl
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
Page 3 of 3
Phone:-?'0— Cu?—d y -
Date: L
21412015

r
type of visit: Cg uompuance inspection U uperatton Keview U structure Evamatton U Iecdntcai Assistance
Reason for Visit: (Q'Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
1
Farm Name: W Jw ciao �` g Owner Email:
Owner Name: A�r� vtti Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region: F-cw
Physical Address: rr�� �l
Facility Contact: k�ty �Ja0 41 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: l4 0
Certified Operator: 5 4-t a Certification Number: Y
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
`� 0�� b a a o l -2 P-+U�G
Desi nCurreiit� • g Design Current�� Design Current
Swine Gapactty.T Pap Wet Poultry Gapac� tyPpp Cattle Capacity Pop.
.,
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish°_
Design Cur__
Po "
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,oul
Ca act _
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
1=
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Nan -La ers
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
BoarsPullets
t
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Oche r-.
+
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made? [-]Yes [:]No �A ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [:]No [ A ❑ 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 �A ❑ 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 Lai"Nb ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

liacili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No C;�<A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[2,55
❑ 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
Ej o
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[ Ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
❑moo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aaolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
La -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Q'lgo ❑ 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): C ��6 C ,cu ll @ Q f
13. Soil Type(s): L g�jo 00
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E]�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[2r&O
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[ErNo
❑ 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
E2Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Eno
❑ 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
[5No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�[a-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
P!fNo
❑ NA
D NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Z Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes D-ND ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes g-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge Ievels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes K No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes Og-No ❑ NA 0 NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[:]Yes
�o
❑ 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
[Zo
❑ NA
ONE
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
0 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface rile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[;>o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
1�fYcs
[;�4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[g-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[;pNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Connments:(refer to question 4): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or r any otber'comments -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
04t
4gr,x� t ) z(f
VV_ Vt6l�6
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �� Phone: K
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412011

�Ns 3o s M Is 5,o
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
090122
Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS090122
Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Bladen Region:
Fayetteville
Date of visit:
09/28/2015 EntryTime: 11:30 am Exit Time: 12:55 pm Incident t1
Farm Name:
Wildwood Farms
Owner Email:
[e-mail]
Owner:
Steven Wayne Tatum
Phone:
910-862-1829
Mailing Address:
PO Box 1416
Elizabethtown NC 283371416
Physical Address:
5720 Elkton Rd Sr 1710
Clarkton NC 28433
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farts:
Latitude: 34° 29' 40" Longitude:
78° 36' 37"
From E-town, take Mercer Road to Elkton Road, turn left -cross Lisbon Road and farm on right approx. 1 mile.
Question Areas:
Dischrge R Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, 8, Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other issues
Certified Operator: Steven Wayne Tatum Operator Certification Number: 985731
Secondary OIC(s):
on -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Kathy Barker Phone
On -site representative Kathy Barker Phone
Primary Inspector. Bill Dunlap Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

w
Permit: AWS090122 Owner - Facility : Steven Wayne Tatum Facility Number: 090122
Inspection Date: 09/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Shaine - Feeder to Finish 4,800 4,833
Total Design Capacity: 4,800
Total SSLW: W,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.50 27.00
page: 2

r
Permit: AWS090122 Owner - Facility: Steven Wayne Tatum Facility Number: 090122
Inspection Date: 09/28/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yea No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
M ❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc-)?
8. 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
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ El
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
[]
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 101Y6110 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

P
Permit: AWS090122 Owner - Facility : Steven Wayne Tatum Facility Number: 090122
Inspection Date: 09/28/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application roe No Na No
Crop Type 1 Com, wheat, Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Coastal Bermuda Grass w/
Rye Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
E ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[]
N ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
E ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
roe
No No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
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

f
r
Permit: AWSD90122 Owner - Facility : Steven Wayne Tatum Facility Number: 090122
Inspection Date: 09/28/15 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
26. 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,
❑
M ❑
❑
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 file drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the 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

(Type of Visit: AZI-Coal�Hance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:RD
Farm Name: f�Vtood E "s Owner Email:
Owner Name: ✓h. Phone:
Mailing Address:
f
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _LAY &ke I-- Title: , Phone:
Onsite Representative: i
Certified Operator: S'Ir L I 'Vvi
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
-1
} sIntegrator:
Certification Number: 7l J Y
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine Eapacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
to Finish
„.
DairyFeeder Heifer
Farrow to Wean
�
Des gn
Cu • rrent
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,oW
Ca aci
Pp i
Non-D m
Farrow to Finish
ILaycrs
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
i
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
- -
Turkeys
t]ther
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[fNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[] No
[]'RA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[-'Iqo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
E(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

A
Facility Number: % - f As -1.1 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �J❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [�J1 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E T%o
❑ 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
Ef No ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[:]Yes
Now❑
NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[D-K'o ❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste AppUcation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
L..J l"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑
❑ 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): ;, f
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designate d�in he CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Q'1`o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Flo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
jfN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
No
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E3 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 KNo ❑ 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes R`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
34. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
El Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes [2- ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2'lqo� ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NEB
❑ Yes �Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? [::]Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? [—]Yes [ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3of3

Type of Visit: �CWmpliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: tine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: c County: Region
Farm Name: f 0'I F:;L'r' Owner Email:
Owner Name: 4F-r te (y( { L Phone:
IF
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 15a4_1 i-I Title: l Phone:
It l Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: s V- -- x � Certification Number: 7of l
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
nt
CurreII
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet�P,.oultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle.
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Non -Layer
-' `:'",o `' ' -
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to WeanCurrent
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D ol?ou1
Layers
Ca aei
I;o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
I
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
$oars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ga,<
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
g3-NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Er i�A
❑ 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
[] NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IJ-''"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
Z ` o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: G
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes L No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
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?
[:] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes M-<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes L(k<. ❑ 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 To ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Anplication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes g2-1To ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes To ❑ 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): G
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops dither from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
Q5'30
❑ Yes
[T'1Go
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
[:]Yes OE].tdo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes []44o DNA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
'
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
0Yes
[L�'NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
[LLX'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
E! o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
L c
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[—]Yes
W(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 07-ti`T Date of Inspection: jo
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [:]No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey 0 Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer torquestion #1) Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments
Use"drawings offacility to better egpEain situations {use additional pales as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: A&
Page 3 of 3
Phone:o-YJJ �3,J
Date:3
21412011

0
Type of Visit: (`JCompIi nce Inspection U operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: rrival Time: r? ; D !7 Departure Time: • p v County: r
Farm Name: �i ��1 0J �Q j S Owner Email:
Owner Name: �ri/ r--:- - �f�I s Phone:
1-1
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: A�, ,Garr` -me— Title: � ne � Phone:
Onsite Representative: �'a�. �. Integrator: 1,�®�4y
Certified Operator: ^5L�t/Ck1 W� n e- Ti Z�_;er, Certification Number: g{�•�73
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swiae
Design ,�Curr ent
CapacityPop;
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
Design Current
Dr, P,oultry Ca acity P,o
Da' Heifer
Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I 113eef Brood Cow
M
Other
Other
Turkeys
-Turkey Poults
I 10ther
_Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
❑ Yes rNo El NA [3 NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes J&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 l of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of inspection -
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?' ❑ Yes to No
R
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):�
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. 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 'o ❑ 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 [gNo ❑ 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): (f/ &^tt IGU�r' ! AYdA�ns �Sm�11p 6e. i', 60U rI—
13. Soil Types)X / �/�` i Z ND '
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes URNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes Lj§,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Jallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes 24 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes FZJ No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes C4 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:24
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2�,No
. 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes "No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ® No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit'? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question,ft Explain any YES answers;nnd/or;any, additional recommendationsror dny otticr'coiuriients.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations"(use addittonal -paies;as neeessarv). i IN
3'(rn/
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 770 S 70 0
Date: 7 ZO/
21412011

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O Operation Review & Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint ollow-up 0 Referral 0 Emereenev 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: / Arrival Time: Q' Departure Time: O County:
Farm Name: _ &Ifl aced &n t, Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �� _ / CLGt�L� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current -Design Current
Swine @specify Pop. Wet 1'onitry Capacity Pop.
iWM5
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
D
a Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , PoulCa achy Po ,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c_ What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
,] Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): / (o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 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
JA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[Z 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
Ea NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
RNE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of,incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
fR 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 Typc(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?
l6. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes [::]No
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ 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 E NE
❑NA ONE
❑ NA MNE
❑ NA � NE
❑ NA ONE
❑ NA 2 NE
❑ NA ZNE
❑ NA aNE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
[] NA [53 NE
❑ NA 0,NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: --
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA r NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA C. 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
[—]Yes [:]No
[—]Yes ❑ No
❑ NA J& NE
❑ NA � NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA V] NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Pj No [D NA ❑ NE
3 1. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes fallo
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes $Z] No
33. Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes H No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? fi� Yes ❑ No
to -question #): Explain any YES answers: and/or any additional i
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ONE
pfz , t4- Dl� rn✓1L S,e'TNecu it o-4-er
rr,,� r�c.� ✓�� %�'a�y1���-tom �'i-��.�f r ��" •E.� d ��� � ���$����c e--��
o
.v 1 fv �ec v--cc 2 '�z � 1. er.�
1�'A*L
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: T)
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit: m lance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: , jJ i7 County: Region: 747V
Farm Name: �U� LaIlsaal ? , rom y Owner Email:
Owner Name: �i�ti /!r/���� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: S'YQ , _ Integrator:
Certified Operator: ,,� �� Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
Current
Popp
Design Current
Wet Poultry CapacityC►►attle
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
[Layer
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
eeder to Finish
""
Design Current
D . P,o_ultry Ca aci P,o
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turke s
TurkeyPoults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Imoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c_ What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does 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
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 I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: .%
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _ Z
Observed Freeboard (in): �,03
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 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
0 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?
[M Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
SYes
❑ 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
[,a 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): /
13. Soil Type(s):O
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designate 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
H No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[a Yes
E4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
54 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
§�JNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
53,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 C&No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes RNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of inspection: —
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permii conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes E&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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT") certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
go No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes g—No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �DLNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ;allo
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (referto Use drawings of facrltueto better ea laic situation4);Explain any tions S answers. ans use add tso ala es as necessa additional recommendations or an other,�comments�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
s' r— DI'r3!
U
V
� r;�',e
Phone: �yf ---S-T%.)o
Date: 2192 I%
21412011
Page 3 of 3

Type of Visit Qtompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0410utine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: I p y Departure Time: County: d"uRegion:
Farm Name: � n'►� Owner Email:
Owner Name: .1-�f �- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: "A Title: - Phone No:
Onsite Representative: C` Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator -
B
ack -up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 v = , = « Longitude: [� ° = s = «
Desig Current
Design CurrenE.:. Design Current
Swine Capacity+Popula'on
Wet Poultry Capacity Populo n Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Nan -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish 1 ZIYC,9
J'',
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry ❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets ❑Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turkeys
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
I
Uther
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Pvuits
❑ Other Number of Structures:
E]
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
C. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
Il��d<�A
[I NE
El Yes Yes
No
❑ NE
R-9A
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
P<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — / Date of Inspection v
Waste Collection & Treatment
,,//
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
El,,,,__
Yes
rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
2 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
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
&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?
es
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
9No ❑ 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 > l0% 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)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes R,�<,o El NA El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? El Yes I_4Y<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ El NA NE
18_ Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? El Yes L 1� ow ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ar-
Reviewer/inspector Nam ` rR02TT
Reviewer/Inspector ature:
.,� (-- 0 act c_&j,
Phone: �lJ ` 4a __201
Date: %2 h ,�90 /Q
Page 2 of 3 1 V 12/2&04 Continued

Facility Number: —/v't Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents ,�
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes L�: o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes UK'
In ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Lll.Xo ❑ 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 []'lqo/❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes [L El NA [IN E
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes LyKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
O'Koo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
&<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑,<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose 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?
r s aAdditional Commen_.,ind/or Drawings: ,
❑ Yes U<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes u &o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Lk10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[9io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
io
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

. /KS /0-05?- ZOO 9
Facility Number
(."ivision of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit ,,�/ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
C� Reason for Visit Routine 0 Compiaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: d,, 9 Arrival Time: /Z.'09 Departure Time- Ol,'�O County:
Farm Name: �N ,0(0✓00 d v^ts Owner Email:
Owner Name: , S-fe-v Y- 70-4-U jt , Phone: _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:�✓� la.•-,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design.. Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
IN Feeder to Finish JW00
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Title:
Integrator:
AF411t nJ
Phone No:
Region: 11=1ZO
Operator Certification Number: 9857.3/
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = 0 0= Longitude: = o a t= 9
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Cattle
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
I_
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes Er<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
L7 N/A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�'NA
❑ NE
IA
El NE
❑ Yes
El No
El Yes
3 o�❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
U-i' o ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

7.1
i -
Facility Number: Q — f ZZ Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) Tess than adequate? ❑ Yes EVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes LRo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �Gtol
Spillway?: /V O
Designed Freeboard (in): It?, 5
Observed Freeboard (in): 36
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes Io ❑ 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 L.3'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes No El NA El 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 [a . ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
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
L"TNo
❑ 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 Evidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) ✓N , LJ L t1- � &ZW S
COC
13.
Soil type(s) �jC� t 6b�_ 46A && -
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? El Yes
/
E4 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
El NA El NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
,B-9.o
[I NA [I NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? Yes
ElL�
,I�ivo
'lvo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
D<o
❑ 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):
Reviewer/Inspector Name ! Re- V s Phone: C`/O, yy, , 333
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 8- // - -2OQ 9
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: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. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N'o
El NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
LENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
B<
❑ 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
B o ❑ 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
/
ONo ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 I.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
ONo ❑ 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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional'Commeng�andlorDraw�n s ='&
ts-
Page 3 of 3 12128104

HAts e't A.- c o< 7 -0/- 0 6
vision of Water Quality
Facility N�mbeir © 9 / 2 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
�■ �� -- Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Ortompliance
Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
(DICo Jtine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: s-2,3 r3 g Arrival Time: Z'3)' w Departure Time: 3�'D/ �,,. County:
Farm Name: Of rjoo d f ca vy-LS Owner Email:
Owner Name: S+eJ L aj u �"` Phone:
Mailing Address:
;?/4 d,-"l Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Kam -Z� A/. Title: �s �=�� • �P� Phone No:
�A
Onsite Representative: R`a 4 D+� ti 4 Integrator: /�'/itt4 &rb Aj
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = I = " Longitude: 0 0 = • 0 "
DrtgnWN-0,urrent
e ap
j ,6nlatton
Design great Design$
Wet Poultry @apa"City Pop lotion ,Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -La er
[]
DairyCalf
eeder to Finish Q
Dry Poultry
ate."' '�
❑
DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Non -Dairy
❑ Layers
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑ Non -La ersBeef
Feeder
ElPullets
EBoars
Other,
_� z t
Beef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
-. ....
NU xu)er of Structures:
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Bl�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
E �o
❑ 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
, ,
L.1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0'�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
C3-1�_o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Q — /Z Z Date of Inspection S Z3 O $
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
2rNo
❑ 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: 4-1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in). 1 R
t,
Observed Freeboard (in): 33
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
G [vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
Yes
[IE
.,�
3 o
❑ 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
❑<
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
��
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Bl�o_
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ETI o ❑ 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) Co rr.l
13. Soil type(s) 9�"l G bA N d A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes BNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
G o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
[3,90
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
Bq(-)
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to grsestran #)*#Explain any Y S nswers andlorm recommeend�a�tions or any other comments.
Use dr> wiiitgs ofifaciiity to better explain sit ons. (use additional pages a�s necessary).
s
Reviiewerlinspector Name j 17'LV C.` S Phone: 9/0 . Si T3. 330 O
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: S— Z-3 — Zo a 16
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 9 — /ZZ 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 [�l No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ ❑ Maps
Design
g 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 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?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[�g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
RNo
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[;R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [;U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [;g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional{C©mmeiifs and/or Drawings;, fir r
P,.. .:� r ...:a-
AL
T
Page 3 of 3 12128104

by ,e,e 7- z 49-Z C O I
W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Q f Z Z 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agencv
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit @ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7`fZ-07 Arrival Time: ZO Departure Time: 3� SQ County: B «J Region:
Farm Name: W r WU d ¢ /�� t'J Owner Email:
Owner Name: S �v e— Tit-
G[ 7Lu "_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: f
Facility Contact: �S'f w tq� ur.!�.. �u,�'''1Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ka�a.. Z�UjadAl Integrator: A1.';'0 V 'enrW ✓
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = 6 0dl Longitude: 0 0 0 ' =
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current.
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
I' 1E1 Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Disc_ ha- rees & 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 Curti
Cattle Capacity Populaii_Ok'
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifei
❑
Da Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures: ED
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
[9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[)Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Q — Z Z
Date of Inspection
1 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 [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes N'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): / g,
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
TO 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
�ffNo
❑ 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
K No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ yes
W 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
[13 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
M Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
5'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/Drill [IApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) (�_ _ C _ ,S� y 6 ea Aj Co YN (G!
13. Soil type(s) 6xA 4,48 A" . A„13 -
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[FNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
[3No
❑ 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 �� k �/ ��S Phone: 9/�. �33. 33319
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7 - /Z — zoo
r1Zi-div4 uonrtnuea

r
Facility Number: 0 41 — /2Z Date of Inspection
1
R
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [;rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
(0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
PJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
'R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
ym No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other lssues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[� No
El NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[� 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
12128104

r-
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1z'/3-oL Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: rIQ
Farm Name: �✓i �Q itiln n 1:1 Itea J-A4 Owner Email:
Owner Name: ST W 01 / Gt-'�c � Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: /ea'k! D k Sa A.1
Certified Operator: t- oa / a�k
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator: I;yp .Br0-Z.1 ✓
Operator Certification Number: % 9-s731
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o [= t 0it Longitude: 0 e =1 = "
>jh/1%Y
Desi n Current =ig�Cy
g urrent
Design
Current
,��v_.
Swine Capacity IPop lation Wet Poultry C►apaty�opulatton
Cattle Capacity
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Laver
❑Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
x Y ;. "s ❑ Dai Heifer
DrJ' Poultry r= s ❑ D Cow
El Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
":" a = "' ` . " rA ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
El Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑ Non -La ers
ElBeef Feeder
❑pullets
❑Beef Brood Co
EE]Boars
El Turkeys
El Turkey POUIts
vti
OtEter
❑ Other
El Other MENUMMot Structures: 1
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?
El Yes
Me
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ 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
19 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
F No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Q q —jZZ
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: LJ
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes (� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
Wo ❑ 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) 14Yti1 _ (� cam `_ Say, �uc�✓S
13.
Soil type(s) (-,'•6A AlvA
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
1�No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
121 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
IT
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
Wo ❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name r � i y � Phone: �g/ $ 33 -3330
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /Z /3 — ZoD (,
1 -91 J ....►.ncu

Facility Number: 6 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ElYes UNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [;9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
14 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
W 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
Pd No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
OrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
91 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:.;? �.
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit V Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit '* Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ! Z 1 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: 9-1A Region: FJE!2_
Farm Fame: __ W+ YC re- fcr.(tS _ _ _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: - 4� W . r., f lzm& Phone:
Mailing Address: ylb __. _ — � C 2-633:7
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:K4JAU bwt 0.41—
Certified Operator: SAe. a Irt�O►M �Q- l 0.
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
l,rrPhone No: pp
Integrator: lyfl414 irrt�
Operator Certification Number: 1 �1 S
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [ o ❑ . = Longitude: [� ° = i ❑
Design Current ' Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
ElLayer
❑ Non -La et I
_
❑
Wean to Finish
El
Wean to Fee
®
Feeder to Finish
$�
K OO
El
Farrow to Wean
El
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
El
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
ElNon-Layers
El Pullets
ElTurkeys
El Turkey Poults
El Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Popu%atiou ..
El Dairy Cow
❑ DairyCalf
El Dairy Hei1ei
El Dry Cow
ElNon- Dairy_
El Beef Stocker
El Beef Feeder
El Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures:
�1--ll----"a
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?
J
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
© NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
E� NA
❑ NE
6 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
(YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection IL O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4- Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Eallo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
iR NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: H 0
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ yes
ERNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
P& Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
EN 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
IQ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
[?�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
W 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) ^ Ccrv., ` 3 c7k% V% �P a�S
13. Soil type(s) to A p No R
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, El 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
M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
-6110
Reviewer/inspector NamPhone:
e �f Gj- } Z
S;xt w �,
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 41 — !ZL Date of Inspection 9 0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes K] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
H No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 05
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ 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
D(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
8No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
JQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
94 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
§QNo
❑ 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
r-A 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
�i No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Cbmeatsand/a jDrgs�
12128104

(Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: /;,? D7 Time:
O Not rational Q Below Threshold
41 Permitted Ej Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date- Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: w J IN v E= ,`^_a County: la z l ._ _ _ `�0
Owner Name: ='4- ,^- �_��_}} _ Phone No: + p L �% ��
Mailing Address: `�.2 d �G:a�_ .ISc _ 0 a . C
Facility Contact: --- ..... --Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _ Integrator.
Certified Operator:— -T+ m.4w r_ _�o..:+� � r Operator Certification Number: � R. 7 /y
Location of Farm:
0 Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • �� �C.9 Longitude • � �u
Disc es & Stream Linpacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. 1f discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? iiJ /�
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 P"No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structuue 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifies: __. - /_ _..... - --
Freeboard (inches): 7"
1.2/I2M3 Continued

Facility Number:
C - -
Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Cie/ 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 maintenanceftmprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance!improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type [ wj h e. d '+ . 1, to r r-% i Cr a ks t .""--,. J C_ a w, " S • •'• L ► +
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes Jfl No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWNT)? ❑ Yes J No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �j No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acne determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre demon? ❑ Yes No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes P No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [;5 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 [A 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 P No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Q No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes W No
Air Quality representative immediately.

Facility Number: —/2Z Date of inspection ;I G
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes j No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
&I discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
P No
27. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
JEJ No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
R No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWW.
❑ Yes
q No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
J@ Yes
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
PNo
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
(P 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
q No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

lZA
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH & NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Form
Farm Name/Owner
WILDWOOD FARMS, INC.
Mr. Albert Shaw
Mailing Address
ROUTE 2 BOX 341-D
Inspection Date Farm No.
7/12/95 BOC#266
CLARKTON, NC 28433 WK. PH. 910-646-3355 HOME 645-4336
�1A cis(
C.O.
All questions answered negatively will be discussed in sufficient detail in
the Comments Section to enable the deemed Permittee to perform the appropriate
corrections:
SECTION
Cgnfined Animal Qperation Type:
Horses, cattle, swine, poultry, or sheep SWINE
SECTION 1
Y N CoMments
1. Does the number and type of animal meet
the CAFO (.0217) criteria? [Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system)] _X_
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGION? _X_ —
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period? _X_ —
4. Does this facility have a CERTIFIED .AMI L
WASTE MANAGEMENT .PLAN? _X_ -- —

5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
* HAS NOT SPRAYED
Admini5tration and ProgralnManagement
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
SECTION III
Field Site Management
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Map Blue Line Stream?
2. Is animal waste land applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a USGS Map
Blue Line Stream?
3. Does this facility have adequate acreage
on which to apply the waste?
4. Does the land application site have a
cover crop in accordance with the
CLUIFICATION PLAN?
*IN DEVELOPMENT - HAS NOT SPRAYED
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
6. Does the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(BMP) of the approved DER IFICATION?
7. Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately _8 FT)
8. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
Y ff Comments
—X— - M--
Y ff Comments
—X—
x
—X— --
-X—
X
N/A
`X—
X

m
SECTION IV
Cgments
THIS FARM AT PRESENT HAS FIVE HOUSES WITH A CAPACITY OF BOO/HOUSE. THE WASTE
MANAGEMENT SYSTEM WAS CERTIFIED FOR SIX HOUSES ANTICIPATING CONSTRUCTION OF AN
ADDITIONAL HOUSE. ADEQUATE GROUND COVER SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED ON ALL SLOPES
AROUND THE LAGOON IN ORDER TO STABILIZE THE LAGOON DIKE AND PREVENT FURTHER
EROSION.