090141_INSPECTIONS_20171231

I/
Type of Visit: &Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: / County: �� Region:
Farm Name: i 1 rF — F Owner Email:
Owner Name:C. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: uQ..Y't'1 es Lam 6 Title:
14
Onsite Representative: pp 4
Certified Operator: Jl �r��'L t'I h
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
Pre 5��
Ll
Certification Number: - [ aZ> 7 5U
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
Correct ©esign Current Design Curre nt
Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
La er Dairy Cow
-Layer Dairy Calf
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Dairy Heifer
Design Current ' Dry Cow
D . Poult . @a aci P,o Non -Dairy
Layers Beef Stocker
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
I ITurkeyPoults
Other
CI
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
-w�iai..siiQ-�Uosi�:�lb's
illillillillillilllllIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Ot1 ell"11
Other
aPi"'^-••-•:.
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA [] NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No [ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No NA [] NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility NutEnber. - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
[3 NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
� No
P NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
identifier: ` C f)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):T� if
Le
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
0 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 P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Cro Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12_ Crop Type(s): � S►h U-r�-+1v�
13_ Soil Type(s):
14. Da the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes (0 No
i_No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes 7� No
T
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re4uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes P] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 N
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis [] Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
o
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

x
Fadlity Number: - At I jDate of Inspection:
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 E] 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes No
IR
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ Application Field ElLagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes � No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No
[] NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015

Type of visit: W Compliance Inspection V Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: f Departure Time: Q County:OI Region: F500
Farm Name: " 7 Owner Email:
Owner Name: pr'eS f-0-,W- r\5 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �Q IIZTVII� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: _PreS4qe
Certified Operator: l��r^ �l�lSph Certification Number: 2�`�75V
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
en
Swore Ca actty Po
et Poul Ca act Po,,
Design Current Design Current
W try p ty .= p: Cattle Capacity Pop.
La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
3W9
Z=q Et
WG %Z,
Design Current
. acity Po P.
Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Outer
Discharges 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?
E] 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
Fj No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
F21] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

IFar.iHty Nt unber: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
,U NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: — — B
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
31, �jo,, 2 t�
Observed Freeboard (in): � (�
�
2
� �
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
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?
❑ 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
P 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 WNo ❑ 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 Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): �{ ' � iT �V
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ l20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
X]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Ep No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

FaEli Ntihtber: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes No [] NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes 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 Qg 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 M No ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA
T�
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any`-�YES. answers and/or. any additional recommendations or any other comments:.
Use drawings of facility to.betterexplatn situations (use additional pages. as necessaty).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: + 0`Z 33-33C0
Date: " l 13DIlb
21412011

r
(Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: • Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7-7p
Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: Z ` County: Region:FarmName:Owner Email:
Owner Name: �F`� �drycgs _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Tapas L." Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: p:yS i g
Certified Operator: _ Teremse &6soh Certification Number: 9ES75D
I_,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry ,Capacity
Pap.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
iry Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
iry Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
e i
�aci
1DrvCow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,oul . °
Ga
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
ILayers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts Non -La ers
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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)?
[:]Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [-]No
❑ Yes [] No
]Q NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

r Faci ' Number: jDate 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 j2KI NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �^ � JE_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Q§No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P0 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 ind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
fia7d 12. Crop Type(s): 4
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
M] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres detemtination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19_ Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
LP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20_ Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
IP
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21 _ Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [] Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [] Yes '� No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [] Yes 11 No
❑NA ONE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

)FaciliNumber: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. T
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
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?
any
rof-facility to better ei
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
as
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes in No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes `P No
❑ Yes In No
❑ Yes [)I No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: 7/D - ty_z"_ tW
Date: t�
2142014

type of visit: Mp Uompliance inspection U Vperation Kevtew U Ntructure Evaluation U Iectnmcal Assistance
Reason for Visit_ 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:-K--�-"�-' Arrival Time: Departure Time: p;- County: Region:_
Farm Name: P—r7 A - Owner Email:
Owner Name: �l'50 e1'KSC, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Imo" Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: 1 L
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
.:'Design Current gesign Current
Design Current
Srsine_ -_ _,_ Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Cattle Capacity PoF.
can to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
can to Feeder
Non -Layer
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Z Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,ouitr Ca aci P,o
Non -Dal
113eef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
I
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Other
TurkeyPoults
Other
Other
Discharses and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
X) NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
N NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

aciliumber: - Date of Inspection:
Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
JIP
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
qir K
Observed Freeboard (in): Z�j�j �p �24
✓? y
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Qg 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
tau No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[:]Yes
V] 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
E] Yes
[)g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window j❑ Evidence of Wind Drift \❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): v l IE�C.f^/ytil l�R &OISS-
13. Soil Type(s): Al
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ® No 0 NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
TP
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
0 NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis [] Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Pacili Number: - Date of Inspection: 28' Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ® No 0 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
LFJ 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
[DNA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations.{use;additionai pages as necessary).....'-..-►,'
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: Q ounty:Region:
Farm Name:? �� Owner Email:
Owner Name: a �$(]1r�S Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _Na � � Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Cattle
Dairy Cow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
I
jNon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
D , P,oul Ca aci_ P,a
La ers
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non-Laye
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
i keys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify 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 E) No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E? NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes [�j No
[:]Yes allo
,R NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: LA - j y N. I Date of Inspection: k
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes M No 0 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):
32� -3 N yI Y
Observed Freeboard (in): � 3S
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 ®allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes <0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes Eg� 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 ONo
❑ NA
0 NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Cro
p Window ,�- - f❑ Evidence of Wind Drift j❑ Application /O'�utside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 0,aaS. &r l ..[ 1.-7r ss CPaSfufe) t � - L- 0-1 1 f) 61)P_fise-ei
13. Soil Type(s): P Li
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ,® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
'® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Ea No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
0 Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑'Yes
fS 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 5 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ffj No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [-]Yes nNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
[] NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [—]Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ 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 CAWW?
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?
Comments (refer to gnestton&tExplam any.YES answers and
1, as nec(
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
[—]Yes ® No
❑NA ONE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: '?% 3 � 40
r +�f
Date: 1 � 1f[
21412014

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: _�Departure Time: 'oo County:L�
Farm Name: P"ti A — F, Owner Email:
Owner Name: }Tres-[ qW_ hvywc. T;,C l Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: S integrator: S�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design C*urrent Design
Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity
Pop. C+attle 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 35
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , Point Ca ael
P.o
Non-DaiTy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turke Points
Other IS
10ther
Discharees and Stream ImDaCtS
I _ Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
T
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
1�0NA
❑ 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
[P�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?
TT
Page ] of 3 21412011 Continued

Factli Nuflaber - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(DNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: C
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 99. q3
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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes )R No D 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): � , + �s M5
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reouired Records & Documents
[:]Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [�a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes P 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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakcrs on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ 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 ❑ 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 fust survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No (R NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ®No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes RINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of hicility to betterexplain situations use additional pages. as tiecessa
P,ec&J5 re_j'.e w JJ
5 -,e v V',0---.otA
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: q10-Y33-37d90
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: 14111
21412011

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance • I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
C
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address
Arrival Time: !h Departure Time: County:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: � I ~ VLAXT II 6,+,t�J f Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ` '� Integrator: BMS�1
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: E8e
Latitude: = 0 0 f= u Longitude: = o=
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry C►►apacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ an to Finish 10
La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ an to Feeder
10
Non -Layer
1
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean o
my Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Putlets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
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 NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
O NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
Pa NA
❑ NE
N'NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ Yes
TO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes 1PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
RNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure-5
Structure 6
Identifier: C__
G
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): e2�f
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 riot properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 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 [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes t2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of W' d Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
U.
12. Crop type(s) CMC) 1 G f 12S C, C)l�-r '
r
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J�a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
y'. Tf.
Comm ents (refer to: ueshon# Ex lain an YES.answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments:
4 � ) p �Y pi
Use drawmgs� if facility to better explain situation's. (dse`addttEona] pa gesrasxnecessary,), r FR
h
�'eC �rGCs re Cl i f"'otad.
tZ91 /lot
�
Reviewer/Inspector Name �' `
— 4 r�.�`� *,
Phone: /�`
y .L..
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 1,0
Page 2 of 3 1212*104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 1
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes F-_j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desi gn 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 I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�FNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
El 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
❑ 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
O 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
Vq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

rXT4LIS 2/z7-/00/0
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason far Visit O Routine f�'omplaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �A►r�rivall Time: %Q � t)C p � Departure Time: �/, Lt S' County: S/4 g��.� Region: ��40
Farm Name: P - 7 �e ii 14 " e Owner Email:
Owner Name: Pves l i 4 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: j'/e "-If C It '61 A✓ _ _ Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [—] o [—] ` 0 " Longitude: 0 ° ❑ ' = u
Design
Current
Design Current
Design C•nrrent
Swine
Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
10 Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -La er
I
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
® Farrow to Wean
mdo
2,990
Dry Poultry
❑ Da Cow
El Farrow to Feeder
7 C
% 0 0
El La ers
❑ Non-Dai
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
Brood Cowl
❑❑Beef
Turke s
Outer
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other INumber
of Structures:
Discharges & 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 discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
93 NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ No
El NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
❑ No
[7'NA
El NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No.
®NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
P NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: -1-A 7 "g -7-G 7 `b
-7 ' G
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 2- I 33 3 2 I V
3/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P 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?
Ifany 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
[B NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
P 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
r% NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No T 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) Bc ✓m q 4% l cs4,j
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No [59 NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes ❑ No [N NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No W NA ❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
Comments {refeir to question.#} Explatn any YES answers and/or any recomniendat�onsoia other comments.
a>
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. {use additional pages asinecessary),3�� ;
it a ✓ c �+%Q,' :� .T rtz cr ta�
�"
-j % 7 - ZC,o 6 7 h�i JLi• fe_�J'
tcuz«.fcd Aip vc4. !?b�1ar- nA (;��w.J C-t,4C4 .�- �%rw;d NAY. aaut.�'S
kl.//��IyC9�++� c� wtodle,v�1 �i-�n'r k�dLtiti.'i✓ hC►r:/rS%O�. i►Qi-. C;li�fa..'
/�7a14�
I' v f t-� J f S /'L � '4 �w i M {� { l� ✓ C� Lam, c sr -zoo
Reviewer/Inspector Name i c l �t,1S s; Phone: �Jia• `f3 ��� r/
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 {;onfinued

Facility Number: L7 9 - !'}/ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No [2[ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WDp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No [19 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 ❑ No M NA ❑ NE
23. 1f selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No q NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[A NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[A NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[N NA
ElNE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
P No
M A
❑ 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
[,W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 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
12128104

. . . w
Reels, Rick
From: Barnhardt, Art
Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 12:00 PM
To: Revels, Ricky
Subject: Swine Farm Complaint --Please Assign
Hwy 131, Bladen County P-7 Complex `
Caller: Ann Reneau- 966-5344 (26 Marsh Road/Bladenboro)
Issue: Recently, odor has become much stronger than in years past. -Wondering if something out of ordinary was
causing the change. Would like a call back after investigation.
Stephen A. Barnhardt, L.G.
Aquifer Protection Section Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
Fayetteville Regional Office
art.barnhardt@ncdenr.P,ov
E-mail correspondence to and from this address
may be subject to the North Carolina Public Records
Law and may be disclosed to third parties.
3z .3
N
,7
V)

1
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: IV 'rf 1 Arrival Time: /'eV�, Departure Time: �-� !}'► County: Region: �20
Farm Name: � `—E,: Owner Email:
Owner Name 1 C' Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: — Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: V U 1'►'LQ Lam Integrator:
1 Qr�
Certified Operator: �nSf7n Operator Certification Number: 9957✓"
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = I ❑ u Longitude: ❑ 0 [� 4
Design •urrent
Design Current
©esign Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population
Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Non -Layer I
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Laers
Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -La ers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures: ID
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 -trade?
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 P
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[19NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
IM NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JpNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No P NA ❑ NE
Structure Stnicture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1'�nB p F_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): '331 1 N
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 MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
El Yes
�No
El NA
[I 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
�bNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
fA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable �Cro(p} Window ❑ �Ev}id_ence of�indf D,ri�f�t� l❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop types) C6z TLi�I P XM Oi,g5 S [ Pt s`t 1, 5 . Gr�n�
13. Soil type(s) A—t ry i't 1 L
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
T
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
EP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
C� 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):
r
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: (�~
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: W06K Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Re wired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA El 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 E9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No PNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes &to El NA ❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
[:]Yes
[ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
1!�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[PNo
❑ 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
CoNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
E5No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: y�' r Arrival Time: %0,' Q Departure Time: County: 'gLA-bAff Region:
L�7i_
Farm Name: r f `F— Owner Email:
Owner Name: I�S�TL Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: oy ,, ._ Title: Phone No:
Onsitev-yl—
Representative: --1 L"''�+'Jf _ Integrator:. I
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o ❑ ` ❑" Longitude: = o = ` = "
Design �', CurrentDesigio
Current
!Wvet
Design Current
Swine ��
C�apa pact op ration
3j1: {�'39FR li..
Po_ulhry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
_
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to IF
on -Layer
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
DO® a=1
m� .
ou t ry
❑ D Cow
- Farrow to Feed er
a
❑ La ers
.,N
Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finch
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Gilts
❑Non -La ers
El Beef Feeder
" ❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
Other k
❑ Other+
❑ Turkey Poults
❑Other
Number of SUM res:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
El Yes
L
El NA
El NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
III
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
P,qNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
d NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
FNA
❑ NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
ElYes
�qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

(Facility Number: — Date of Inspection zr1
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes P
No El NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? El Yes ❑ No �&NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Strugre 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Sicture 5 Structure 6
Identifier: r
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
+. 3©"
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes f}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 'ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 N 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 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside off/ Acceptable Crop Window El Evidence of Wind Drift Application Outside of Area
12,
/❑
Crop type(s) Cq s W Ow �S 6IEv44/J_ ..5�1 .
.
13.
Soil types) Vd
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA El NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? El Yes
,, ]9,
IL?'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
OD No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
19 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Use drawtn s of facdi to bette_r�ea `lam n ae savers and/oi an re�commendati,�ns
`� �, y r comments.
,Comments (refer to ueshoa # E�
ty lam`�ituations use additional agesSas necessa . a
Reviewerllnspector Name Phone: 33�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:S"L Date: Z?
Page 2 of 3 12129104 Continued

_ L
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 5� 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 El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
QNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
S No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
R 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?
[I Yes
$3 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
F] 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
g] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12129104

.`
C�0 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number / 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assis=Access
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denie
Date of Visit: a� r� aArrival Time: �� Departure Time: County: 4 Region: �_
Farm Name: r n 1c Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: J?0&t Title:
Onsite Representative:
Phone:
j9 Phone No:
Integrator r t'eS
A5,8=
cdl
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0= I= u Longitude: 0° 0'=
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Population.
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood CowL
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 [,MM"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1� No NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No PNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 93'NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes o ❑NA El NE
12128104 Continued

-'
Facltity Number: I — 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
r
No -NA ❑ NE
StruC,tUTe 1 S tune 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 tructure 6
Identifier: r/ C_ ID
7 rl -
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in). 36 ce Y 9
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the s
observed?
❑ Yes
1P 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
P 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
r No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
;5 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes]
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Cro i ow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
v 1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�No
[INA
ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
FS No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre deterntination?❑ Yes
No
F
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18_ Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ 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):
A6
Reviewer/Inspector Name Kiln Al. 1J. , ¢„�Oh Phone: 33 3'
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: q1Bjt
121281041 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection I y/
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 ElNE
the appropirate box. ElWUp ElChecklists ElDesign ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA El NE
❑ Waste Application El Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis El Waste Transfers ll❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfail ❑ Stacking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[�No
El NA
[I NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other lssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
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
[;iNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
qQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Type of Visit NKam liance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: T W Arrival Time: Departure Time: ® County:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: `1 -'
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e 0 I =" Longitude: = ° =' =
Swine
Design
Capacity
Current
Population
Wet Poultry
Design Current
Capacity Population
Design C►umrent
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
1�
3� 5"
�N
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
05Taffow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
Boars
❑ Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turke s
-
Other
❑ Other
❑Turke Poults
❑ OtherI
Number of'Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
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?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes ER -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
A
El NE
El Yes
Ell_�f No
,Ey
NA
❑ NE
E NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
El NA
❑ NE
El Yes
,�o
O
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection l 4/„tT GSoJ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0 No NANA�❑ NE
Stru re 1tructure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: C
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 9
Observed Freeboard (in): 301, 34
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes -EKo ❑ 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? 3'Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ["To ❑ 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 G-do ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? ff
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
., ., � a
12. Crop type(s) I rn LAIC
13. Soil type(s) _�) u4vt .4 y ,
v
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
r,�NNo
❑ NA
[I NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Yes
ElL
K
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
[:]Yes
No
El NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
off
IJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
JZ/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments {refer to question #): Explain ariyfYEST5bjswers and/or any recommendations or anyo#her commr nts3
Use drawings of_;facility to better explain sitdahonstY(use additional pages as necessary)•,
AIL
Reviewer/inspector Na ��� Phone: g_��
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
�ruxv 4 U] J LL/L6/V4 IL.u►sssnura

1F' cility Number: 09— 4 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additional Comments and/ar Dri yvmgs , `
❑ Yes
NJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ENO
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes L'?To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KYJo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes RN. ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes it I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes O o El NA El NE
❑ Yes FJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes IJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ird No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CJP ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes lei No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 9 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: % j- Departure Time: County:
Q
Farm Name: + — -7 0 ` e Owner Email:
Region: rpo
Owner Name::, Pe �-_ b+ C' q c e aT- r­i -5 __ Phone: S 1 O S-'7a - SS7 -? /
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: R ar. Q14 �o.re� Integrator:
Certified Operator: 12 & Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 0 = i = Longitude: ❑ ° = I ❑
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 7
FXI Farrow to Feeder Ja y
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ La er
1 ❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design. Current ' I
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
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 [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — ]
Date of Inspection
rite Ilection & 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 ® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure l
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): !g "
/ c1 ` �� �. " J
Observed Freeboard (in): CJ a S "
a `t 4 —,2 7 " Coz f "
& -7 �
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? ® 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 W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) w• .ti�c� c r a zc.� 0.3
13. Soil type(s) .v
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,[:] Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
/S- Re- ►-" o v c. o v e_ r 5 e cam.. a� s oo,.,' e�s ro o s a} i, I e
7- 6Q—L s p 4--3 oAj 16LL6PU3 /7 G Cr2C ip � G /rrrL�rO✓coc
zt - fir# a":.n+�n `n P fx �. .x. 3
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Name n` _r - - ,r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7 �S
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 17 -- lyl Date of Inspection i_ 517/_. _
Re uq ired,Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check []Yes KINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ 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?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
n No
ElNA
❑ NE
Other lssues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
(9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
t�lPlain�-c reaarr9,.+ c.�-�cr Corr�c��ov.) wry r,.�.s.�Ql �_
PwJ i, 00 J E C ..{ 317 % c.s p r 6 I r a .ti > e- O j_ 1 l
c c,. ,- w e-" +- a. 3 .
50,,.E ,P,,\1s b�j 1.0 ib
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation !
for Visit • Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: ; d
O Not rational Q Below Threshold
Ml�ermitted EKertified © Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _.
Farm Name: . P... A " �r _ County: .- "6
q -
Owner Name a rfs Phone No. _____- 1 [7 - S`i� - S Zr7 f .- -
Mafling Address: _ _ _ P • o. Bo�C` _--:!Ug ---- N
Facility Contact: .� ... S.�I� �. Title:.. Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _ 1ew�r� �wre�uv-- Integrator.
Certified Operator...,,.,,.,,.-.- 1afflft�gT . .. R Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
twine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • & is Longitude • 4 ILK
Dyiscliames & Stream Impa
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes E<o
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Imo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaumin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑pdo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes EWo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes B-N6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes 9,No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: 6_ .. G
Freeboard (inches): 3 y ' 18
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — y Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes Q'0
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes �Io
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes R<0
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste strucarres require maintenance/innprovement? ❑ Yes 0-o
9. Do any stuctures tack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minirnurn liquid level ❑ Yes B-No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need miaintenanm/improvement? ❑ Yes 2ITo
11. is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [Wo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type ider.6 ra:�� sano/� fs-Isar.
11 Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWhe)? ❑ Yes M-Pro'
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑R6
16. Is their, a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Leo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes [ENO
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes RNO
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 L -KO
Air Quality representative immediately.
_....�,�. ,_.�-.•tax'-,---•'�' -=- -�.:�• ,--_'-'�.'*—�-'-�,�-,..,��+ss- ^;s•��.n �-v"=�r�-_�r.�. �..•—s-- _� ---�
tS �I l�tr tD = % YFS`8VF5 9IId/or any tiI 8IIpi 0 _ �. 5
s►tu t (rp pa as aPoP g 4, arY? eld CaPY D Notes
IQc.'coro�J rtv.•�w� ! �'3v" V y,
Reviewer r Name i r b
i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -- 3 -Off
12112103 Centkued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes all o
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 52-NO'
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes B-110
❑ 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 [Ko
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes []1!o
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes Of4o
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfuispection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 014o
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes O-No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ['io
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDBS Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) EI-Yes ❑ No
3I. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ yes &KO
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes am
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes a o'
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes &Ko
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

O Rodtine O Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of inspection
Time of Inspection 1 Y-O Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: c�Z�hEd' Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: , . _ f — 7,5
Owner Name: PQi'� ,�'"s PhoneNo:.
Mailing Address:._ d' o`X el C/.,✓�n.4U /l/�
OnsiteRepresentative: Integrator.
•E• -
Certified Operator. C i �_ /✓/�" S �` Operator Certification Number.
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude �• �• ��
C] Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
�.'-��
Swine
Number �
ElWean to Feeder o
,
❑ Feeder to Finish Beef
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder Z
Farrow to Finish ❑ Other Type of Livestock
_re
� _.:`r �`��"�� �w � ���x�oee�. �`.S' 4W�`���F.. �r.. �',`r�v� -� �•�'.� a�.ow,:; „y -. ,i�S - ra•�
Number of Lagoons`/ Haldiagondse 0 Subsurface Drains Present �'
I0 Spray Field Area
'79�rra;�ar�•_#. �« . gem, £�. �,. xr�n ._ � _
General
1. Are them any buffers that need mainteasaceltmpravennast? ❑ Yes 19 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes IgNo
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 13 No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes B No
c. If discharge is obsaved, what is the estimated flow in gaftin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes MNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes QjNo
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 19 No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes JM No
maiatenancelmrproaement?
ConhRued on bock

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures -{Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds}
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/ rrgmr ement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste Aotslication
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
_(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type AS A - Z .P
ir
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment"?
For Certified Facfiities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No •
❑ Yes
X3 No
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Yes ® No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes 23 No
❑ Yes J9 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Q No
P Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes allo
❑ Yes ,® No
❑ Yes P1 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes JgNo
RYes ❑ No
❑ Yes - 10 No
❑ Yes ONo
Comments (refer to question:#) Explain F y YES answers and/ar8ny recammenlotions"or an}i other}corr�neufs�� � �;
Use drawmgs;af facility to beitereaplam smrstions (use additional pages
4
Reviewer/Inspector Name � AYKW
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Jy�
Date:
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assns►nent Unit 11114/96

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Randy Barefoot
Prestage Farms, Inc.
P.O. Box 438
Clinton, NC 28329
Dear Mr. Barefoot:
ITLT?WAJ
0 0
A&4;l2i
[DEHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspection
Prestage Farms Swine Farms
Registration No. 09-141, 09-142,
09-143, 09-144, 09-145
Bladen County
On April 10, IW7, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facilities. Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office based on the
information provided and observations made during the inspection that the facilities were in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part.0217 at the time of the inspection. Please refer to the
comments section on the near of the inspection form for information regarding your facilities.
Please be aware that all swine facilities with a liquid waste collection system designed for
a minimum of 250 hogs must have a certified waste management plan on or before December
31, 1997. The district NRCS office, Agriculture Extension office, or the Division of Soil
and Water have specialist available to assist you with upgrading of existing facilities and
certification.
If You have any questions concerning this smatter, please call Robert Heath at (910) 48&
1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
Sam Warren - Robeson Co. NRCS
Wachovia Building. su>te 714. Faysffe Ni� C An Equal OpportFAX 910 486 0707
North Carolina 28301-5043 unity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-48&1541 50% recycled/1096 post -consumer paper

10 Routine 0 CcLmylafnt 0 FoBo=M of DWQ Inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC rewlew 0 Other
Daft of Impecdan. 77/417 nf?
, FacffltyNnmber
F F� Time of inspection 2 = too Use 24 hr. time
Fum Stmc Toad 71me (in boon) Spent mm*vLw
or Inspecdon (Includes trayd and procenbW
Farm Name. -7 camtr-
(Pno-) -ryz - S-771
OwnwNmnm- Pbme No:
MaUing
Onsite
Cerdfied Opelftr. feAVAIM14re"XX �l" Opautar CoOkation Nmnber.
Location of Firm:
Longitude
Not Operational j Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
*gs
-N
�s k
wean
an to Feeder Dairy
Feeder to Finish N5r
E 41M
Mw-
F lkkrr-
W Wean
Fmw 2 1. . . mm
jW W Finilb 13 Other 7jn
a^s.
1. An there nay buffem that need M-
r -I Yes JS No
2- Is any &dwp observed from any put of the *Pcmd=? 13 Yes KNO
aL If discharge is observed, was the amraymme namimade? E3 Yes 13 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it rent Smf= Watm? (if M notify DWQ) D Yes A No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the trAmzttd flow in pftin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (ifyes, notify DWQ) 13 Yes OLNo
3- Is there rAdame of pan &scbup from my part of6c W=dm? D Yes IX No
4. Was there my adverse impacts to the waters of the SUft other theses from a discimp? 13 Yes ENO
5- Does any pan of the waste management Mmn (other than UgoonsUlding ponds) requQe E3 Yes 10 No

C L facility not in complianoe with nay applicable whack , im ice?
M Yes ® No ' -
7. Did the facility !aril to have a eetti{hed operator in regxmz%k dwV Cif h apexfion aver l/l M?
& Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be p mpcdy closed?
Stroctures !'Lagoons andlar Holding XgUM
9. L moral Redo rd less than adegnaie?
Ft A aaad {1}x Lagoon, l Lagoa 2 Lagoon 3
Z040
_ 12
10. Is seepage observed from any of the ace?
11. Is erosion, or nay otha threats to fhe integrity of any of the cogs observed?
12. Do any of the struts need me
(1f any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify am and stop pumping levels?
Waste A lication
14. Is then physical evidence of over application?
Of in excess of WMP, or runoff eateri ag waters of the state, notify DWQ)
m Crop
16. Do the active crops differ with thou desigoatcd in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
19. Does the ewer crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
Certified Fatalities Only
20. Does the hzili'ty fail to have a copy of the Animal waste Manngesaad Plan teadDy available?
13 Yea ja No
n Yes 12 No
0 Yea ® No
Lagoon 4
13 Yes JjNo
E3 Yes 19No
E3 Yea )p No
D Yea ® No
13 Yea 10 No -
NJ Yes Q No
E3 Yea MN*
E3 Yes JO No
❑ Yes 11 No
❑ Yes ® No
Zl. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Pin in any way? 13 Yes 13 No
21 Does rem keeping need W;nov=w=? RYes E3 No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency! 13Ycs - lMNo
24. Did Reviewerftspector fail to discuss reWewinspectioeh with owner or operum in clmp? E3 Yes ® No
Comahtats'(refa.Lo question#}' Explain any YES aad/draay recotnri�atidatsoa9 Draw at>:a t
Use diawings'�f. fach�ity to beater p�plam sitriatia:is. arse ai ona] Pages aecessiv
.i�Z.
i✓D % �f' RE
Reviewer/loip"wrName � �„-:__
Revi*-er&Vwtor s att re; G�,✓� Due.
w.. � ■w�r���w,.w�rrn�w�,w��, new^ww�r�
CC Division or Water Ouaffrv. Werer Ouatibnr Ce"Aft . Fewil w 7t "

Facility Number. ag -_L)
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: Z-
Time: l
General Information:
Farm Name: County: L __
Owner Name:__. �CeS` rr,.ruw� Phone No:_ S"U - 5 7'7
On Site Representative: ia�CAn v, Integrator: r
Mailing Address: Q, 0, (,�o'x 438 lkw-j y.�/ -&-,A-
Physical Address/Location: 3 -r,-,Ae s
Latitude: I-J Longitude: I I
Qperation Description: (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swive, No. of Animals Tjpe of Poulty No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
$}Sow 4 f_�� 0 Layer 0 Dairy
Q Nursery ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Beef
❑ Feeder
OtherType of livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons:_ (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility ns ecti n-
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than l.foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?: Yes ❑ Nda
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
❑ Man-made ❑ Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
{ list the crops which need impmvement)
Crop type:— C c g Acreage:
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? - -
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
Yes ❑ No 63
Yes ❑ No W
Yes ❑ No ia
Yes ❑ No 0
Yes ❑ No
Yes Cd No (@ -
Yes ❑ No
Yes El No
Yes ❑ No rya
AOI — January 17,1996

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement?
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Does record keeping need improvement?
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site?
Explain any Yes answers:
Yes ❑
No 0-
Yes ❑
Now
Yes ❑
No Z
Yes a
NoZr
Signature: Date: Cmi (lq
cc.. Facility Assesmsent Unit Use Attachments if Needed
Drawings or Observations:
�r"cu.rc�-- -3 , S
.".{: 1.. _-. ., __. •,- ..i ��•.- --lam 'Ti• 'ti �"t>, _. }_ __ •�_.. .. .
AOI — January 17,19%

Site Requires Immediate Attention: IV O
Facility No. 8 Z - 5 ! D
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7 - 11 , 1995
Time: 1 ` o' 4-9-
Farm Name/Owner, P 7 / f r e s Aac e_ r v-, s, .Tiv L
Mailing Address: PD 0 4L3 $ Gl„v „J- At C zg 3 zs
County: Slade.y
-Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: _ 9/0 Z S 9 Z - .S 7 -71
Physical Address/Location: 9w.% __J1 �' u- s,A ass J3 j3 , aN is In l Pam, , o tt'j
I s /o c Ac-cl ors
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: , Number of Animals on Site: _ 2 - j^arroW
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 0 Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) (lipor No Actual Freeboard: 5 Ft. O Inches
Was any seepage observed from the la n(s)? Yes oV9 Was any erosion observed? Yes o�
Is adequate land available for spray? or No Is the cover crop adequate? <1&�6r No
Crop(s) being utilized: Cho
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? 6W or No
lOD Feet from Wells? or
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes o
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes o6p
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or&P If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)?dpr No
Additional Comments:
Ckar (e.. s A i ve_rc z
Inspector Name
Q
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: N c)
Facility No. Sz -- S/o
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
Fa v rb 'J DATE: — �� l� 1995
n Time:
Farm Name/Owner: _
Mailing Address: _PQ� <{3�S _ C/;.v�.✓ _ _ _ 3--9 - -
C z8 z
County: 5/41,. ,--
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: _ _ _ _ Phone:_ K914 1 S9 z - S -7 -7/ -
Physical Address/Location:_
Type of Operation. Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Z -0-- - Number of Animals on Site: ' w b -L L4
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon ha sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately l Foot + 7 inches) es or No Actual Freeboard: Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or 10 Was any erosion served? Yes orep
Is adequate land available for spray? Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate. YA or No
Crop(s) being utilized: 1'
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from DweIlin 9 C esDr
100 Feet from Wells? As)or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue -Line Stream? Yes or�N�
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line:
No
Yes or W
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes o No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes r No
Additional Comments:
JUL s 1 1925
ENV. MANAGEMENT
,Q 1 FAYETTEVILLE RE-G. 01ITTE
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

1
WORTH CAROLDM DSPARTMM T OF ENVnWN1Z['i' T, SSALTN' b NATMUL RESOaM=
DIVISION OF E MON3ifM
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal operation Compliance Inspection Form
'Y �� ��,... -.• ..+v'^��%��' .y1i4�.rSi' V
.- FMf/T'".�. �_ ,•k�:-i�af.....w.
T'Y�+M^'-�.'+5u'�'. J: 5
5�.•�. ��:�y�+a -"':
D� K""+�'fia
.�:.+:.�,:Y.,Y�.w �-w�y1 ':.. ...:«...x,.c•!�.-•"-:'..i'.,x "":' da` '.:�
; 7U.,ii �7,"'�
-:^'ds�k.`•�Ciii� i j .'d��R .vw
QED' wax 0-1in4vn C 7S3
4ID-5cl:2--57-71-
All questions answered negatively Will be discussed in sufficient detail in
the-Co=ents section to enable the deemed Permittee to perform the appropriate
corrections;
SECTION I
Animal _Operation Tvae: F WJ f ?
Horses, cattle, swin , poultry, or sheep
SECTION Ir
T i N j COMENTS
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? (Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000),.and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
systam) 3
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period?
4. Does this facility have a CERTTFiED ANIMAL
WASTE WMGEMff PLAW
5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility tweet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
JUL 31
ENV MANAGES"GENT
EA E eTEVILLE REG CFFtr

SECTION III
Field Site Management
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Nap 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
fLxRT7PiCATIQ PLAPP
5. is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
G, noes the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(BMP) of the approved Q TMCATiON?
7. Does animal Waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately )
8. Is the general condition of this CAFQ facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SHG'TiON Iy
Comments
I�
5

UTTLE
NCLSrA RV
LAKE
2V
CY!
39
;ors vo
SIC
ATERs
LAKE
LLA.)rE .17
Z
0
J,
tNR
'EUZAs WN
Ui
0
Ir
21
01 L32
Lui_
S21
N,
12
DIRECTIONS TO P-7A - D (TARHIEEL) COMPLEX
IREC
From Clinton take 701 to Elizabethtown. Turn right onto 87
N; go to Tarheel. Turn left at Scotchman store onto 1315-
Go 33 miles; Farm is on right.
From Elizabethtown take 87/41 N until they split. Continue
on 41 to intersection of 131. Turn right on 131 and go ap-
proximately 4 miles (just past Bryant's Mill Pond. Farm
complex is on left.

REG:_--y"_'=-'N FORM FCR A-,N! �.AiFEEnLOT C?=-_ '^NS
Department of nvIronment, Health and Natural Rescu==es
D_vis-an c' :Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
L� he animal waste manalzeme_nz, sys em ;or ycur -eed ct oze=a?-;cn is
desi-ned to serve mere t har: or ecual to 100 head o= cattle, 75
horses, 250 swine, 1,000 S eep, or 30,000 bi-rds that are se, red by
a l_cu_d waste system, then th _s -fc- n maust he L___ed out and mailed
:.v Decerr.�aer 3=, 1993 pursuant ? 5A NCAC 2 .0217 (c) cr_er to be
cee:nec pew_ . tec by czm . = ? ease pr_..t c l ear _y .
,arm Name -i
Ma=l_ --- c Add reSs:
CCun ' .
Owner (s) Namme :
.Manace; (s) Name:
_essee Name:
= ar:.1 iocat_on (tee �as7�sc�eci'_c as toss_b_lle: �oad na , 's!, dl-ection,
TC 4 I -post, etc ) [T`V[`-'1 �-Z•p�� fy —��� 7 ^t r ��ri��
_at__ude/Lonc__,:de iw known:
Desicn capacity of animal wra-ste manacement system (Number and type
ccn__ned a. ._ -al (5)) [Q�L} 50:0— 1-+`roF'-P-J z Ph
Averace animal population on the -ar:n (Number and tvpe of animal (s)
raised) 5
Year
Production Began: �1� ASCS '-Tact
No.: %�, Y g,
_
o= Waste Management System Used: L
�� 1 REldl'Q
Acres Available .or Land Application. of Waste: O
Owner (s) Sign atu,e (s) .

0 Aoritine O Com faint O Follow-up of DWQ ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC reviLiv O Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection
p / 5'3
Time of Inspection L /d= z o I Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: c.E� �i�F� ..... .._ . Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview Z
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
FarmName: �� ...,,....,., .,, .,.., ,,....._.... County: -
Owner Name: _ � �yl -��`'� • Phone No: Z10 -rEV ` ,5771
Mailing Address: 17 O. ,aa,�- 5'3��GJii-✓�� .Z z
Onsite Representative: ----- _%eAig,.eEa� Integrator: /P•�59�
Certified Operator:. /� a"��'��Gam' Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
C] Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
x �..4 � �jy` ,k' r.,si r ra + T ' bxn wx-
uSWint Number r$ttle
;ter dY-g �. ! a Number .r.4� >Tuber „
x
❑ wean to Feeder 4 ^ ❑ Dairy
0 Feeder to Finish ❑Non- ❑ Beef
�F
Farrow to wean �� _ ��g� a ,�-, �� �� � �
Farrow to Feeder''
Farrow to Finish ❑ Other Type of LIVeStoCIC a
Number of Lagoons l,Holding Poads; !� Subsurface Drains Present
.,r
" Are Lagoon a :. Spray Field Area .
!`
General
1. Are these any buffers "need miaintenanocJu vmvemeat? ❑ Yes Z2 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes MfNo
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes M No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Sul= Water'! (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes I@ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galtmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 99 No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ;gNo
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ($j No
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonsibolding ponds) require ❑ Yes ❑ No
maint man ce/improvement?
Continued on back

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds an site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Laeoons and/or Holding Pondsl
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
3 i //
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/mWovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public bealtb or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste Apalication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
.(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ... &.��4
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
19. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Faciligg Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes IM No
❑ Yes JR No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes JRNo
❑ Yes ;U No
❑ Yes 09 No
�J Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ®.No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes UNo
❑ Yes ® No
JR Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;0 No
❑ Yes ;RNo
Cornments"(refsr to guestuon ) �,ExplainYany YES answers andlaraaty reconuneridatlons"or ou r Ether com¢naitsS
- - Yv
I35edrawmgs:of faCllity tD better exglaut SIh]Stlons fuse addtbanalpages as aec�.:`�'� a ` ✓� a ; `
_.
// 99
�.< OU�it�.�(/ iS Na'� i� �,sr�f� �N,✓.o�r'F/�r��7�A.✓.. /v6E��n
e Cf .
Cell-
Q
Reviewer/Inspector
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit l 1/14/96

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
W. Randy Barefoot
Prestage Farms, Inc.
P.O. Boa 438
Clinton, NC 28329
M?WA
IIW
[DEEHAMMMEMMEML
R
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspection
Prrestage Farms Swine Farms
Registration No. 09-141, 09-142,
09-143, 09-144, 09-145
Bladen County
. On April 10, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facilities. Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office based on the
information provided and observations made during the inspection that the facilities were in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part.0217 at the time of the inspection. Please refer to the
comments section on the rear of the inspection form for information regarding your facilities.
Please be aware that all swine facilities with a liquid waste collection system designed for
a minimum of 250 Bogs must have a certified waste management plan on or before December
31, 1997. The district NRCS office, Agriculture Extension office, or the Division of Soil
and Water have specialist available to assist you with upgrading of existing facilities and
certification.
If You have any questions concerning this matter, please call Robert Heath at (910) 486-
1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
Sam Warren - Robeson Co. NRCS
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville N�4 FAX 91DA86-0707
North Carolina 28301-5043 C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action EmpioYer
Voice 910-486-1541 5096 recycled/10% post -consumer paper

10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 FoUo=m of DWQ Inmection 0 Follow-uB of DSWC review 0 Other
Fadlity Number Date ofhqmom
Time Of 10FINCtion f4= za Use U hr. time
Farm Status: ToW Time On boars) Spent mMevkw
lor Lnpecftn (includes travel and processing)
Pbone NO: xgy-gz7j�
Mailing Address:
Ondft
CaMed Operator: Ohm- Catfica0mNumber:
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
03 Not 2Mrational Date Last Operated:
Type or Operation and Design Capacity
IN
P y .
;Zt 7W � . v- I
*tot&
Wean to Feeder IN:
Feeder to Finish N Beef
Fmow to MLcM_
Farmw to ErAk ql��W -,�7 � 46�. .4�0,00
Fmmw to Finish A 13 Od= Type of Uvemck
7777.77,
.77
N:
Pil"POWN-ft,
fr Subsurface Drains Present of -Lft*6ns; IMoldin Nub _g
Lagoon Area i- Spray Field Area
1. Are dun any buffers that need maintmen- E3 Yes 92 No
2- Is any &sdwp observed fi= any part of the 0PCTIfi=? E3 Yes M[No
a. If discharge is observed, was the emrArymme man-made? 13 Yes JMNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it mad Swfux water? (If YM notify DWQ) E3 Yes 29 No
r— If discharge is observed, what is the eaftnated flow in SaLfmk?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) D Yes 19NO
3. h dmv evideaft of past discharge from gay part ofte opcmd=7 13 Yes IgNo
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? 13 Yes M No
S. Does say past of the waste management system (other than bgDamsUlding ponds) requirie C) Yes [3 No
. I miaw

6. b amity not in complien i e Wi0r nay applicable a dw* criteria?
7. Did the $cility fog to bom a certified vpeea w in seepamdblc char: Cif mspection after 1/1 "?
L Are 6= lagoons or storage panda on Ate whM need to be p toperly closed?
Structures ii amns and/or AoldIn P I
9 Is stnsuual ftedxwd ]as dmri adequate?
Fiadxwd (8). 1. 0M 1
10. Is seepage observed from any of the smu2ma7
lagoon 2
Yes I'No
13 Yes Ig No
Q Yes IN No
13 Yes 12 No
Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
11. Ia aysiM OF any other 11 M to the integrity of nay of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public bealtb or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the d nwttu= lack adguste mukers to identify start and stop pumping ieveW
Waste Apalieation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
.(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering wars of the State, notify DWQ)
15. CMP taw
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Don the facility have a lack of adeque ac=V for lead application?
18. Don the cover emp need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities lulu
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the A"hMT Waste Management Pisa seamy ava0able?
21. Does the facility fag to ccxmpiy with the Aninml Waste Mariagennut Plan in nay way?
21 Does rrcord beeping need improvement?
23. Does facility req= a foLow-up vibe by same agency?
24. Did Reviewcdh Spector fail to discuss reviewrmgxction with owner ar aperaw in charge?
El Yes ® No
0 Yes IR No
13 Yes No
❑ Yes No
13 Yes 8 No
�j Yes O No
C1 Yes QNo
13 Yea KNo
13 Yes Wo
M Yes j'No
D Yes ®No
JMYes E3 No
13 Yes )a No
D Yes JRNo
Comments. (refer to quest'Err #)• � Explain � YES azisweis andio�i jrry:momsnmdarzons or ► otiia oaram�o ts.`
Uic�drawmgs of fsciiy to tietter explain attttatiasiiis+e ado sages unele.`•"`=� "" s .�
v.rr,�.s WOVI �'ter// .
IA. cartes+ or
.21- �i/s F<� 1Af^'
Reviewer/luspector Nude
Revtwer/Iiisp %r Signature. Date:
er- Division of d idler Qualay, Water Quality Seo6x Far Aw Anenwwear Unit

Faciliry Number:__
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date:P-/�
Time: D
General Information:
Farm Name: County:_
Owner Name: atE__ s� ,Phone No:
On Site Representative: Ca(c S,"V' Integrator:. '? e s �
Mailing
Physical
Latitude: I 1 Longitude: 1 I
Operation Description: (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Cattle No_ of Animals
Wow tvZ`j ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
0 Nursery 0 Non -Layer 0 Beef
Feeder
OtherType of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons: I - (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1 foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
Q Man-made ❑ Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
( list the craps which need improvement)
Crop type: Acreage:
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? -
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
AOI -- Jannary 17,1996
Yes ❑
Nq�Q-
Yes ❑
NoJ
Yes ❑
No.8-
Yes ❑
No Ek
Yes ❑
No a
Yes ❑
Noa
Yes ❑
NoAA.
r Yes-❑
"_�,No
Yes ❑
No
Yes ❑
No f�1

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement?
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Does record keeping need improvement?
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site?
Explain any Yes answers:,
Yes ❑
NoAa
Yes ❑
No Q
Yes ❑
No Q
Yes ❑
No Q
Signature: _ _ Date: l
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed
Drawings or Observations:
- t...-�¢r:. ', 4 _ � .--_- - ..-' _ -. .___ -_,- i'-.. str.Y •r+ . .�x-rti -:=z-:-a.a -. �. .:�� �•'_.`_{:•.ti �"rw:,J..`=r'.''T. r...s, .4._..... ry a_T; z...-..w.:..
I Ilk
AOI — January 17,1996

Site Requires Immediate Attention: NO
Facility No. SZ - S/ Z
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address:`j
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANRAAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7 - ! 9 , 1995
Time: -1 ` - : 3 S
;D-- 7 C j P,
38
County:81,?dev
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: , 0 .Sy' Z- - S 77/
Physical AddressfLocation: - Nay 131 . ,S-t ass 9tVa,,v4`s /M/// A&,t ��.• i`s
l calecl o w 1G
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: _ /zq-9
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) (Yjj�br No Actual Freeboard: 5 Ft. d Inches
Was any seepage observed from the I oon(s)? Yes of,
Was any erosion observed? Yes o<P
Is adequate land available for spray? a or No Is the cover crop adequate? (yi;)or No
Crop(s) being utilized:s�a
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? r No
100 Feet from Wells? or
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes No
Is animal waste discharged into water estate by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes o N If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? <fj_�6r No
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: A 16
Facility No. Si -Isi Z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7 _1_? 1995
Time:
- 7 (? / ,,0vc s'kc5_e_
Farm Name/Owner: gyp rp +s { /
Mailing Address: PO 4� 6?r 4C 3 S__ e 1;v,,y /e z 9 3 z S
County: f
Integrator: Phone: 7, /c77 S9Z - S7 - /
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location:_
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle _ 2==9E -
Design Capacity: 2.d __ Number of Animals on Site: 2 w G_ 24f 12 4�P
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude:— ° "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) ems, or No
Was any seepage observed from the ]agoon(s)?
Is adequate land available for spry ? es or No
Crop(s) being utilized: _ c_o � 5 _
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings�esor No
Actual Freeboard:^�- Ft. Inches
Yes or IRWas any erosion observed? Yes or
Is the cover crop adequate? es pr No
100 Feet from Wells? LY r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes oro9r
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or<
Is animal waste discharged into water of a state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Ye or No
Additional Comments:
_Wg
--ck.VICs _ �_ I re t _ Qw
Inspector Name Signature
.cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

WORTS CAROLDM D8PAR1MMC OF MWIROMMIT, BEATTR b NATURAL RACES
DMSION OP 12MMOME NiTAL
FayetteVille Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Fora
Y Y�,�x,. �,.sY'�..:�Q:}`y.::-a._a�w+•s /f,e+!<^��*,. -� �y:.sn w:
aY`,»;�..,..�.ipb��y�v�.r�r-e+!'a�lvi`1��J,^¢.s+i.:.:..o qn. may...'.-��v�.o:� M v.. -
- - - ^�_ t �•• .i: :,.._....:.;T......s »^:•yaa+ „N-�;<,:. :.,"�.;:nvT..,�.+;�
P'.T� m"�y l'i/7J.1+3-L�li `.f{i/Yi1.Gw7�i "mow �"_�:��''i�" �.
.F.c -. <n«-�-:w .� �.c,�.•..w.... �� :.. �•.
.mY< <{'r��� �ViLl.i1,�:UZ�L' .�1�� ,.kr•.
P•D. 6v� 43g C���n, �C �3�
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 I
Animal Operation Type: FOMZ 6nl q
Horses, cattle, wine, poultry, or sheep
SE ION II
M© • i �a
1. Does the number and type of animal meat or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? [Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000),.and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system)) .
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period? -
4. Does this facility have a CMTTYM ANIXRL
NA578 XANAGP.EHT RNW1 . S. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
4

r ,
SOON IIi
i ite 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 USG5 dap
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
CERTIPIChTION PLAN?
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
(SMP) of the approved MTiFIg&TIO
7. Does animal Waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? Hoer much? (Approximately )
B. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SBGTiON Iv
Comments
I�

Department of Environment, :ealth and�Natu_al Resources
Division o= Z'nvi_cnmental Management
Water Quali_v Section
_, tte an4-al :paste management system for your feedlot ope_a_icn
is
es=cned to serve more t .an or
eaual to 100 head
o= cattle,
75
hoses, 250 swine, 1,000 sieen, or 30,000 bl_ds t_`_at
are served
by
a lyCuid waste system, t nen t is
fcrm must a f__led
out and mailed
_
by Dece:^._', e= ?' _cc� pursuant _
_ A NCr,C 2 .0�,7 (c)
in order to
be
deemed ^emitted by DrM. =?ease
pr_nt c'_ear'v.
a_::� Name r - I
Mai.lAddress .
Cdun- .
Owner (s) Name:
manager(s) Name:
Iessee Name:
ar-: 7.ocat4on (Be as specific as possible • road names + direction,
mile=cst, etc. } V_90NA C-t�IZ�i� t� esr.� 1 � S-7 1 q I U�I L
:,at_�ude�_ongit�de if mown: �15? - 039—�3 `C24
Desi= canacity o= animal wast management system (Number nd type
an _ma_ (s) }�snr,-o.fio_ze,lcn�
Average animal populaL_on on the farm (Number and type of animals)
aised) � � �S_ Ls�-
.ea=
Production Began: '7� ASCS Tract
No.
Type
of Waste Management System Used:�6,C�71�
I��h(►��_
..
Acres Available for Land Application of Waste: US
Owner (s) S J gnat:._ a (s)

UrME
SPNG RY
a lift 4A ArE
lam
BAKERS LAKE WARN
'An
LIU
or
-Q UU
LW
LW
2' G. BIC
v*A* otti,
MIA
:2_1A
UIP.
0
Un
au
Lip
L4
_HL
Aft 5L
-at
10uv
N a
OPY4.VT3:
U21.
�iu Am
C) 10
It
Zr 'EUZABUHTOwN
LU
_,W1VS
ZAN
0 4LU
POND
n
!Aff
Im Lai
im
DIRECTIONS TO P-7A - D (TARHEEL) COMPLEX
From Clinton take 701 to Elizabethtown- Turn right onto 87
N; go to Tarheel. Turn left at Scotchman store onto 131 S.
Go 33 miles; farm is on right.
From Elizabethtown take 87/41 N until they split. Continue
on 41 to intersection of 131. Turn right on 131 and go ap-
proximately 4 miles (just past Bryant's Ntill Pond. Farm
Jcomplex is on left.

, _ _._----- ."_'---- --------
0
149 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number
/ y
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status:
'
y
Total Time (in boors) Spent onReview Z
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name:
D
County:
Owner Name:
Phone No:
Mailing Address:
�` �,cii�.o
/.2� �2 7
-
L4=,� �'
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
� I
Certified Operator.. - R� 1���'^� Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude Q' Qa OK
10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Swine ��.NumberN.0ih . Ntber.. Catdee �3�Iumbera
Wean to Feeder ❑
Feeder to Finish r ❑ Non ❑ I3oef
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish k ❑ Other Type of Livestock .�iP
"g
�:. .� I� .x�• � �T�',���^Pl� ,�"<;,y„- �� .;err �, +�. 3�.,: ��,.... .-s.-..�,�� �..e:��
❑ Subsurface Drains Present
Number of I:agoons 1, oldiaag Ponds 1 "��;
Lagoon Area; pray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenanccormprovanent? ❑ Yes 0 No
2 Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it n=b Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 13 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaLtmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes M No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes ® No
maintenance improvement?
!'nntinued an back

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds an site which need to be properly closed?
Structures !Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds!
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
� y
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
l 1. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental thremt, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
Of in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
is. Crop typeQ�Q
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
19. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
Far Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes P No -
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I1 No
Lagoon 4
ZY ❑NW?)
❑ Yes ® No
'- " ❑ Yes ,E] No
❑ Yes eO No
❑ Yes ® No -
El Yes
® No
W Yes
❑ No ?�
❑ Yes
5d No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Da Yes ❑ No
P Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )@ No
Cottuntntsf{refer to ceshon #} 6v��ExglamYarry y1'ES answtrs°and/or arty 4'1 recammcndahonswor other commeatsz "°
Y,additi[7�any
. fag i—fit^- i°
;Use drawmgs bf facrlrty to better ea�la�n srtirations (use}onal pages as necessery� �� n � w E
..
� �,p�Cac� �%.. E � %/S :Sus�� � e ��i.�E
%0 G�E� fl.�•p 'o.� �/�
4
7 4// i�.✓�f� �,.
r
ale
If ete
Reviewer/Inspector Name t4UPPQ
ReAwerAnspedor Signature: , �
��
Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Secdon, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

i
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Govemor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Randy Barefoot
Presstage Farms, Inc.
P.O. Box 438
Clinton, NC 28329
Dear Mr. Barefoot:
A4
IDEHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspccbon
Prestage Farms Swine Farms
Registration No. 09-141, 09-142,
09-143, 09-144, 09-145
Braden County
On April 10, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facilities. Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office based on the
information provided and observations made during the inspection that the facilities were in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part.0217 at the time of the inspection. Please refer to the
comments section on the near of the inspection form for information regarding your facilities.
Please be aware that all swine facilities with a liquid waste collection system designed for
a minimum of 250 hogs must have a certified waste management plan on or before December
31, 1997. The district NRCS office, Agriculture Extension office, or the Division of Soil
and Water have specialist available to assist you with upgrading of existing facilities and
certification.
If You have any questions concerning this math, please call Robert Heath at (910) 486-
1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
Sam Warren - Robeson Co. NRCS
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, FayettevAie Nif
�83FAX [phone]
North Carolina 201-5043An Equal OpportuNty AffirmaNe Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 1 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

10 Rotitine O Complaint O Follow-up of DW inspection O Follow-upof DSWC review O Other
Date of n -P —??
Facility Nnmbrt Time of Inspecdon :.tea Use 24 hr. three
Farm Stains: r +`r Total 71me (in boor) Spent onRe� m
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farr Nance:.'- 7 D .� _ __.._. connn►:
of er Iwm � -s rho No: &&O S ,? r
AWIng Address: . ? Pf a �,, - ��� _T _ .2lp3z-7 -
oasite Represemtat#ve: &.,,v/
Cermed pp��; ,o.✓s� lv.•,.� Open Cat cation Number.
Location of Farm:
Latkude � Longitude
LE3 Not Operational ZI Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
S-�NambaPonitry x �.rNamber r `'*TsmbQ'
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish f ¢ a Non- u Beef
EAEw W f�ga; 3u.} - ) Ly�yY'C'i�a1" 'N S'"' w. , - (.4'fiy.}R 1.rra,+r�'Y«F
Faffow to Finish- 24 D Othu Type of L.ivemr3c�
��':"H�,-;� �..x=:'� -_`ems=.r'. F��,��,;��jt y �s �.L:..µ`�+r.•�t�.,,g,�}-E>as,��".�� .��.-��,':�+��> r. �.«,:�� � .: riY &.:?T euT:_ .S a ?F�`,-�.''�kP'.,`'� �.a-.
v � .Number of Lagoonit-BoldingPaads' S •�= Subsurface Drains Present ;4
�.• u � � ,� _ �`.:^�
Lagoon Area Spray Field Area
I. An these my btfffeas that need mains aaaaJtmpivveme�'t
2 Is my discharge observed from any part of the %minion?
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man made?
b. If discharge is observ4 did it reach Surface Water'! (if yes. notify DWQ)
e. If discharge is observed, what is the esthomed flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the opmxdon?
D Yes ® No
D Yes 0 No
D Yea 23 No
D Yes 12 No
D Yes EQ No
D Yes 10 No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
S. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoon holding ponds) require
D Yes 13 No
D Yes ® No

6. h bdity not in compliance with any applicable a ow& crblds?
7. Did the fiallity frn7 to 1n a certified operator is revamm'ble ebap Cif inVearan afta IAN7)?
& A f there lagom or storage ponds on site wbirb need to be p wperly closed?
ctures 0AWns an tilt nods
9. L strucanal fi=bowd less than adequate?
Fi dxmd (lac-.1.29001k 1 T.agoon 2 Lagoon 3
J2
10. Is sraepage observod from any of the strt?
11. Is erosion, or nay other threats to the fidegriry of nay of the sees obsavod?
12. Do any of the Wuctw= need '
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the duration Poses an
immediate pnbHc health or environmeotal threat, no" DWQ)
13. Do any of the swctures lark adquate market to identify alert aid stop pumping Web?
c MAWIlutiorn
14. k there physical evidence of over applhm ian?
.(1f in zxcen of WIViP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type
lb. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate am -cap for land application?
1 S. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is 6= a lack of available irrigation equipment?
Eqj Certified FacUities OqI
20. Does the ihcdity fail to bane a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the faedity fail to comply with the Animal waste Management Plan in nay way?
22. Does record keeping need h%mYvem at?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewerllnspecmr fail to diwuu revicwfmspectioa with owner or operwar in d=W?
rats"(ir to`questian �� ,_Esplaiu;itrry YES a�s�►exs �ad/or aay:�tzcominm8atioa
kWingS ef.&CMt to better expiaia situatioroa: (use addfiona2 pages as
�] Yes jo No
D Yea 10 No
13 Yes la No
E3 Yes 99 No
Lag000 4
®Y Q NW ?)
❑ Yes E9 No
.13 Yes ,® No
p Yes ,WNo
13 Yes ® No-
E3 Yes ® No
IM Yes E3 No ?�
13 Yes 10 No
E3 Yea ja No
13 Yes ® No
E3 Yes ® No
10 Yes E3 No
P Yes © No
E3 Yes JO No
Reviewer4nspecW Namt
RevlwerAwpettorSignature. Dam: AI1o' 1
ca M& on of Water &a tey, Wotsr QsraW Sesser, FariUV Aa dwmenr Uair

Facility Number:�
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: Z 9 b
Time: 1;
General Information:
Farm Name: F9 - 17. County:
Owner Name: 7(--I-,SA2 "n s _ Phone No:
On Site Representative: Integrator: —Pt�e s-,e—
Mailing Address: _4 - D. col H )J _
Physical Address/Location:_ 3 .rns __ Ste~__
1. Latitude: I I Longitude: I !
Operation Description: (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals Type of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
Sow 6-2-4- ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
0 Nursery a Non -Layer ❑ Beef
❑ Feeder
OtherTjpe of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons:�(include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1 foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?: Yes ❑
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
0 Man-made Q Not Man-made
Co ver Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
( list the crops which need i rovement)
Crop type; (2.0
A & Acreage:
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? -
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
AOI — January 17,1996
Yes ❑
Yes ❑
NoV
No �4
No a
Yes ❑ No &
Yes ❑ Noe
Yes ❑ No a
Yes ❑ Now _
Yes ❑
Yes ❑ No M
Yes ❑ No �a

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes ❑ No ZO
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ No
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No I�ir
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes ❑, Noa
Explain any Yes answers:
cc. Facility Assessment Unit
Drawings -or Observations:
C" OCnr rr
— � -
AOI — January 17,1996
Date:
Use Attachments if Needed
' � -,J ;i:. ^♦i�.^r.!; ., _,. •'). �'1T...f :.�'T_i_ 'rF: --z.:....�.=��1 �.:�"_F=7'x7n.� r. ��- - ..,.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: /%(4
Facility No. 7 Z - S" 4
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
'Farm Name/Owner:_/111
Mailing Address:
DATE: 7 - l °1 , 1995
Time: / `f .,3 D
A10-
/4 1,A4 S
Z'nrc_ .
County:,. _ _ 01ad e-n/
Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: 9/4) S T z - 5' 7 7
Physical Address/Location:. HwV l3/ b,,�s t pe.Ss L3;-Xa�r+,S 1w, l /,ate, Fdr.rr i s
/o ccz4ej o m
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: & z q
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: ° —
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficien
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) I
Was any seepage observed from the
Is adequate land available for spray?
Crop(s) being utilized: (?, 0�?_S A
5"br No
t
freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
Actual Freeboard: 4 Ft. 4 Inches
i(s)? Yes or(NpvWas any erosion ob ed? Yes olljo
or No Is the cover crop adequate? r No
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s�or No
100 Feet from Wells?or o
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes okW
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes ol�g
Is animal waste discharged into water of state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes orIf Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management reco di (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? /r No
re e w K6 Additional Comments: /- Faro v j , l- N , LA- S c S
Ckar-,es AlV reZ
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: - ,LJJ
Facility No. S Z - S/ /
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: , 1995
rr4cJ :� � JO Time:
c
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address: AO 13 o ,,r_ 4c3 9 e z 9 3 z 8
County: /,3/�d4�,
Integrator:
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
S9Z — S77 /
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity:. - 1. �_ac_ Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE_ DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: O Longitude: 0i
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) &24Pyr No Actual Freeboard: `f Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the a n(s)? Yes or<Q Was any erosion ob eV Yes or4
`Is adequate land available for sp y? Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate? es r No r
Crop(s) being utilized: C z;u
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin 9 or No
100 Feet from Wells? or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS B1ue.Line Stream? Yes or(IR
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes orb
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or& If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, -land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with c9ver crop)? ess r No
Additional Comments:_ -1rr- t _ pi- hoR'�` _ -
4.-
C. hay) o f jT 1 act r e Z
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

WORTH CAROLING DEPARTNMT OF ENV-ZROMCMT, HEALTH 6 KATURAL RESOMLC LS
DIVISION OF EETMONMENTAL MANAGEKERT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance inspection Form
:�.r.wA�tp'n •.:ii _ �•v�rF.`u• ... ' t —
•^:•�:..-I..��.�,B��L: �.• K.... q M�'r `�"'".. .Y^"� � � � ....•-:
f17�/��/�...m
`i►AiFii�+-�TiJ1� : ;:r
rF�7itcS i'Y11aP�1
- -7 D Proms c) Parm s n c
... ..w
v {�x�v t�^ '." ...�� y`w�n�; M.-.,� .; a ......-:..: �p
� ... •... A..s..,'Fun'..'� jai
-.. _.F.. .a:✓r.c�"",..,,'nf6A: •-/!
r w P
R4, Box 432 L°lir*r' NLG 28318
)D-5g2-_.5_'771
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 I
Animal Operation Ty e• Fbrrowl ng
Horses, cattle,, Wine poultry, or sheep
EGTION IT
t. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? (Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000),.and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
systwa) ] .
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation RECISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period? -
4. Does this facility have a CERTIFIEn AHI39'►L
WASTg„MANAGEl91T PLAPP
5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility tweet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
u 1995
y 1 N i COMMENTS
S

� k
sECTION III
Fielig ite Maria emmt
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 It. of a USGS
May Blue Line Stream?
Z. Is animal waste land applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a USGS laap
Slue 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
CERTIFICATION PLAN?
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by men -made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
b. noes the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management practices
(B") of the approved �F :ATION'?
7_ Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately )
S. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SECTION TV
Comments
ism
I..

`
,` Ltl. l4 r .ysa (,irir.£us
'IAICE\
N
BAKERS Uxe uxs vu
\ '+ CYr
IN
An
lyr :r `
Oft J
LU
may,,,,, is as yl
vTM
.9 sa
S.1LT£RS0
uKe
— s ai
':i. '�) � � • \ '� ,f;. � 'Pr me � w 1S
.p
Un
UWL
go
.v z.
•° - .-_w . , i LM -'}' ••::ice' a ,7a, , Un .�
EGZABEniTGW 4
- ''Uft
• _ • - artowxs
am
'im
..4 r
gPOND ♦ Ut L
im
7f ?
Un
M. ,
' •1 '
iaL
`� ""• _ v DIRECTIONS TO P-7A - D (TARHEEL) COMPLEX
From Clinton take 701 to Elizabethtown- Turn right onto 87
f ` N; go to Tarheel. Turn left at Scotchman store onto 131 S.
f� Go 3.3 mules; farm is on right.
From Elizabethtown take 87/41 N until they split. Continue
on 41 to intersection of 131. Turn right on 131 and go ap-
proximately 4 miles (just past Bryant's TOM fond. Farm
�„ - ,•, „� `I complex is on left.

FORM FcR AN:Y--A-L --_-nroT n? =ONS
Department of-nvironment, zealt and Natural Resources
Division o= env ronmental Managemen-
Water Quaii-y Section
_.. the anima'_ waste management system for your feedlot cpe_a__cn
is
,designee to serve more aan or
ecual -0 100 heac
of cattle,
75
horses, 250 swine, s, 000 sdeen,
or 110, 000 birds =:.at
are served
by
a �_C.:: d waste system, :."ten _s
=C= Must =e Z=__-C
CUZ and =aLled
ry Dece:n:^e= 31, 11-153 pursuant _.,
_=A NCriC 2=.021-7 (c)
_n order to
be
eemec pe=_tted by DEM. Please Prinz clear'_v.
=arm Name: I
*�ai_�^c Address.
Owner (s) Na ie .
Manacer (S) Name:
�essee Name:
= m Locacion (Be as smeci c as pessible• road names, direction,
miI-post, e:c.) -M C-L17� K+x� ]��l �K� $7-y1 Vim!L
.at_-ude/L^,ngi_ade :r known: —�3 `� -0�`V
7Desicn canac"itv of animal /wast management system (Numa-er!}and type
„ y C:�n; _ned ai'._'1a= (S)) 42, � Sower f ar-��t.: fi� reQ��z fia
nverace animal population cn the farm (Number and type of animal (s)
rased)
`_'ear
Production Began: 9� 9/ - ASCS Tract
No.:
1 q-s 7
Type
of waste Management System Used: L AA
L�
&C_Lfo-�3
,i�
Acres Available for sand Application of waste:_ -gJr
Owner (s) Signature (s) :
\t

v Roritine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow --up of DSNVC review O Other
Date of inspection
F— Facility Number o /YS~
Tiunre of Inspection Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: ��� Total Time (in boors) Spent onReview
or inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: -7 County:_,
Owner Name: —L� E�.p R "`s Phone No: 9/ �� s 92- s7 7 _..
Mailing Address•
Onsite Representative: 2za:�'��- 4EZ&C r! o� -- Integrator;
Certified Operator. 24 ;1...9,9 Operator Certification Number.
Location of Farm;
Latitude Longitude �• �� ��
13 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
u .r: .
'f.,vgc sF -� ay^,,,'.,.,p t •g''+�-rmr+'.'? '"Sr-.i-^` rC
Swrue �; � ¢Number � oultr3!'w.:� -�, Number' Cattle - 51 �Nnmber x
El Wean to Feeder
Z.V. Dairy
Feeder to Finish zver
Farrow to Weana r� 'r= �. �
r12 Farrow to Feeder _.
harrow to Finish ❑Other Type of Livestock, "ram
❑Non-
�❑Beef
,�
�Nnmber of<Lagoons 1,Holding Ponds Subsurface Drains Present�,��`
Lagoon Area j, Spray Field Area
General
rc the
re any buffers that need maintenaacermapravement? [I Yes 0 No
2. Is any discharge obsaved from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 19 No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ,® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galtmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) [I Yes ® No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge fiom any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 29 No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/bolding ponds) require ❑ Yes IM No
maintenancefimprnvement?
C'nrtliareed an Luck

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to ban a certified operator in responsible cbwp (if inspection after 1/1/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): �` Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancerimprovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste- Aptcation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
Of in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type �j,�,c n K (�l�r A; k
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities 061
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
nrninPnle irYftr.tn''rtn�ctiris �fl•'�!.Fii�1s:..yenv Y C CME" cenv .�rn,r.rnrnr1etinrie`rir.��iv.-n
❑ Yes 14 No -
❑ Yes IS No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes 13No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes IZ No.
Yes No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes IffNo
❑ Yes E3No
❑ Yes CO No
❑ Yes IN No
IR Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;0 No
❑ Yes ,I No
Cj.C41 e� ✓ �c. /i lJ/� ��//a `"
.des% .,e•//�o `��✓ j ,P'�'` '"
Reviewer/Itispector Name'�te': Reviwer/Inspector Signature: Date:
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

-
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. Randy Barefoot
Prestage Farms, Inc.
P.O. Box 438
Clinton, NC 28329
Dear Mr. Barefoot:
Afflo-RAMA
�EHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 11, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspection
Prestage Farms Swine Farms
Registration No. 09441, 09-142,
09-143, 09-144, 09-145
Blades County
On April 10, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facilities. Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office based on the
information provided and observations made during the inspection that the facilities were in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part.0217 at the time of the inspection. Please refer to the
comments section on the rear of the imspec con form for information regarding your facilities.
Please be aware that all swine facilities with a liquid waste collection system designed for
a minimum of 250 hogs must have a certified waste management plan on or before December
31, 1997. The district NRCS office, Agriculture E.ztension office, or the Division of Soil
and Water have specialist available to assist you with upgrading of existing facilities and
certification.
If You have any questions concerning this matter, please call Robert Heath at (910) 48&
1541.
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
Sam Warren - Robeson Co. MRCS
Sincerely,
;66VIIK'
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
Wachovto Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville Ni FAX [phone]
� North Carolina 28301-5043 C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Radtine O Com hdat O Follow-u of DW ection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Fadi ty Number Oats of Iaspectiap -/0,9
Time of Inspection Use 24 hr. time
Farm Stie= e F.eAX-1 I Total Time (in boors) Spent enReview Y
or Ilan (includes travel and processing)
Fhrm PUme: 1�-7� _ . - _ Cot:ney:
Owner Name: t?z Es .rfr •� Pbone No: i 9Ie} SY—;'- .r7 771
OnsiteRepresentatim .. ., Iatsgrmor:_ d - �•+r -.f„_
Cerdfied Operator; Rep �� / Opernor Certi6cadon Number:
Location of Farm:
LatKnde Longitude M
Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
_Swrine�Nu _ .� l try Ntitmbe��jCitee
eaa to Feeder """
Feeder to Finish Non- 13eef
w to Wean s'
w Wsh , E3 Other lj►pe of iivestaci�
t^.;�..�...'Z...s:�ri
•S. C s • L
'� Humbert of Lagoons ldd�ng poa�s Su bsurface Drams Present _`
4,4
Lagoon Am Sp Fidd Area
2. Are there any buffcis that need mains enanceiimprovmnat? E3 Yes 8 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the ? r-I Yes No
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? © Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWI) D Yes ,® No
e. If discharge is observed, what is tie estimated flow in pftin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
3. Is &= evidence of part discharge f mm any part of the operatitm? E3 Yes B No
4. Was there any adverse imps to the wants of the State other than from a &whwge? E3 Yes No
S. Does any part of the warn management sysaem (other tiara lagooasUlding ponds) require Yes No

6, U. bcaity not in ccmpIianoe with any applimme, acamck Criteria?
13 Yes
No -
7. Did the facility 5a to have a certified operator in rapxmdble urge Cif iaapection ala 1/1/n?
13 Yea
JHNo
8. Are theta lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be Closed?
13 Yes
®No
ctu us and/ Ida
9. h struc:tsnal fiaeboard leas than adep te?
13 Yes
O No
FmdKm+d (fix Lagoon Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the ?
13 Yea
MNo
11. h erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the aura observod?
13 Yes
Il No
12. Do any of the structum need
E3 Yes
AM
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the dtuadon poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the stzumm lack adquate markers to identify start and :top pumping levels?
❑ Yes
E No
Waste Application
14. h there physical evidence of over application?
13 Yes
Q No
.(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15- Crop type -
16. Do the active asps differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
Yes No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
E3 Yes
19 No
IB. Does the cover crop need improve0ftV
D Yes
IffNo
19. 1s there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
13 Yes
113 No
Far Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Piaa ready available?
O Yes
® No
21. Does the facility fa0 to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
0 Yes
IN No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
19 Yes
❑ No
23. Does facility require a fallow up visit by same ageacy/1
0 Yes
,® No
24. Did ReviewerMspector fail to discuss reviewlmspmetion with owner or operator in charge?
E3 Yes
JM No
Comments, (refer to`question #�; Explain any YES answers and/or any tadatioas or ai jr,othei'- eats,` . , ;
Use drawings -of facility�to better explaraaituratioac Anse additrorisl gea
zZ a
.
a
Reviewer/1aspectorName 21i,
ReviKerAnspector Signature: .., .rT �... Due: /d `�P7
= Division of l i'anr Quality, Waw Q,rolity Suer, Fecffl& 4zu= sent Unir u i / r d/96

Facility Number: -1
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: y�
Time: 1 - 3
General Information:
Farm Name: County: /ct
Owner Name:��s- �c,.svwt 9 Phone No: 5'
On Site Representative: C 6 w Integrator: f--e Sf
Mailing
Physical
Latitude:_ Longitude:
Operation Descriptions (based on design characteristics)
Type of Swine No. of Animals . Type of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Cattle No. of Animals
Q2 Sow Z o ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
O Nursery O Non -Layer El Beef
Feeder '
OtherType of Livestock Number of Animals:
Nlimber of Lagoons: t (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
]Eacilky Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1-foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the. lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
Q Man-made ❑ Not Man-made
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
{ list the crops which need improvement)
Crop type: Acreage:
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? -
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
AOI -- January 17,19%
Yes C3 No G6
Yes ❑ No 5
Yes C3 Now
Yes U No iR�
Yes 13 No U
Yes U NOD
Yes ❑ No E .
Yes C3 .-,No 21- .
Yes 0 No P
Yes 0 No W

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes ❑ No�&
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ Now
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No 8-
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes ❑ No U,
Explain any Yes answers:
Signature: Date: allL 6
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed
Drawings or Observations:
__.. ____ t.nnrrr ^�, --iw- .s's �--:"-n--.s.Ri s�lt� ni.e�.•T!L`��rtnr�c+-. ;!-kr„-.al'r�'.e F_'� •.-. .. -
AOI — January 17,1"6

Site Requires Immediate Attention: IV
Facility No. No D c M
Fac; /: 47-
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT Fou,./d .
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: -7 — / 9 , 1995
Time: / `4 : 4- S
Farm NamelOwner: 7 6 Ar t-s -Aa 5 t-
Mailing Address: PO 13ax, 4z3 S C/iAf-XW _ Al CL--__Z 9 3 2S
County:^ )3lade-Al
-Integrator: Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: 5 7
Physical Address/Location:f/wu / 3 / s_ -� 0.a SL B vya.14's !r?�
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: / �50 "+'°� Number of Animals on Site: _ / zSp L� r- 41! --
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude:
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon ha sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches Y or No Actual Freeboard: Cv Ft. O Inches
Was any seepage observed from the goon(s)? Yes otjl�*as any erosion observed? Yes o<g)
Is adequate land available for spray? Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings') r
100 Feet from Wells? r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes oK9P
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line:
No
Yes ogip
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes o(NP If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management record
(volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? r No
Additional Comments:
CU ayI-e-s Al Ve_-e-Z
Inspector Name
Signature
:cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention: No
Facility No. v
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT NO I>Fv.
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD; t: 5
rzkJ DATE: 7 H , 1995
Time:
P JArC
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address:, PO �L,>< 438 NC z83as
County: it�/¢ de .✓
Integrator:
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location:
Phone:
S9z—S"77/
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 3. b _ ac r c.__ Number of Animals on Site: _ /? S-a
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) e�r No Actual Freeboard:_(;_Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the
Is adequate land available for spray?
Crop(s) being utilized:_ C or 5�
P Yes or 1� Was any erosion ob rved? Yes or b
No Is the cover crop adequate? es)or No
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? (es)or No
es 100 Feet from Wells? Yr No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue -Line Stream? Yes or to
Is animal waste Iand applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue`Eiine: Yes or(9
Is animal waste discharged into water of !!R state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes orLNo If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? �r No
Additional Comments:
C_ A-, " � s /7 � Uri V l'
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

MMTH C hROL334A D>3PARTMMgT OF ENVIRO, EIiALTH a NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVTSION OF ENVIRONMMiTAL MANAGEMENT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance inspection Form
M,w.,...,...cxc..,......-..•.'.." .:. +�..,. .vca,,,,��,a .^w ��'
� �.F6Rals
ar.«.:"`.:.T..:4�::r,,".`�'�t^'�,?'�`Fgf v:�p_^'y.
11A' '°'3
"'„�. •." -- xa• ':s i'
i{P�i7.d/ iJlfltLF4 .•S.r";��.�:`.'..'l ; w
'��+R�irL4i ^iI�1L
vL.�.-.'Y KLi�.i., AiiZSDFR�
P 7 E P r2.5 ei Fux,7, s, In c,.
-�,o,,.�...�:Y '..w..a �Ci++.:.' _. '•:Ky KN`•1.-' ru` .x`*r`vi
"L yy��yy--�� - ��������yy�� vµx. K-bkR
^,.u-t;::::.•w.� G—*6J„Ri1.G S. w
1`r .ar�.rt _ .Ii°'..a✓w't?S't��'�-�"••.'. .•�-�ti�� �: mow:-.-..... p`
_ o
1i,k�
�_.r t f1viLITY-'..1 s++�Gi c31Mr+ 1�AF�
h>w..sw: .... J7f1J—�-+i-i '?°. F...�eiF t'•.
s.aw .....:. r ,.._...
a .�
P, B&X 4 C
5r111
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 I
Animal Oparation
Horses, cattl �Swin
&=ON II
r6fyavi n3
poultry, or sheep
Y I N I COMMENTS
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? (Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system)] -
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period?
4. Does this facility have a CERTIYM AN=lsliL
WASTE MAMGZKENT P%7►V
5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
setback Criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?

SB=ION =1
Y N COMME"s
ftg1d_5ite Management
1. Is animal Waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USC5
Map Slue Line Stream?
2. Is animal waste land applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a vSGS Map
Blue Line Stream?
3. Does this facility have adequate acreage
an which to apply the waste?
4. Does the land application'site have a
cover crop in accordance'with the
MTMCATION_ga ?
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
f. noes the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(P? of the approved C'ERZ CATION?
7_ Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? {Approximately )
8. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SECTION IV
Comment s

T. %
UrrLE
RY
LAKE
ADAyoi
BAKERS ZAKE LAKS ul-,
o I � cyt
Un
lik IN.
WE
LIn
BIC
MN
Ulm!
iAs
0 im
171
im L2& URISALMRS
4.A4 KE
.1a
Un Mk
uU
0
14
EUZAS TOWN
LU
wivs
"X0
0
0
POND U
1.
at 0
A ILLL" 222
Ck
tw
ILDL
DIRECTIONS TO P-7A - D (TAFHEEL) COMPLEX
4:
From Clinton take 701 to Elizabethtown. Turn right onto 87
N; go to Tarbeel. Turn left at Scotchman store onto 131 S.
Go 33 miles; farm is on right.
From Elizabethtown take 87/41 N until they split. Continue
on 41 to intersection of 131. Turn right on 131 and go ap-
proximately 4 miles (just past Bryant's Mill Pond. Farm
complex is on left-

R=GISTRAT:ON FORM _,tea r1N3`''.R --MLOT e_--sT=ONS
Departmenc of Environment, Health and Natural Resources
Division of Environmental Management
Water Quality Section
if the animal waste management system for your feedimt operation is
designed to serve more than or equal to 100 head of cattle, 75
horses, 250 swine, 1.000 sheep, or 30.000 birds t a_ are served by
a liquid waste system, then this form must be filled out and mailed
by December 31, 1993 pursuant _.. AA L1CAC 2H.0217 (c) in order to be
deemed permitted by DSO!. Tease print clearly.
Farm :! Name:
Mailing Address:
Cou-.t'
Owner (s) Name: ONFV!
Manager (s) Name:
Lessee Name:
Farm Location (Be as specific as possible road names,-ectio�n�-
:fl' lepost, etc.) {� iaTcr~ 1 p �_ � (I ()!" d �L
Latitude t Longi t ude if known: 5� 3�3 [ � j a~ o b
Design capacity of animal waste management system (Number d type
cf ccn_zed a=:;=al (s) /,160 -td
average animal population on the farm (Number and type of animal (s)
ailed) SUM r15
Year Production. Began: �c7� ASCS Tract No. /5z3
Type of Waste Management System used:
Acres Available for Land Application of waste: 89ISS
Owner (s) Si5nat _e (s)
�A� �i c o�OATS:

Site Requires Immediate Attention: 9d
Facility No. S Z- 5 o 9
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
�1Yro,j DATE: , 1995
A Time: J
Farm Name/Owner: p ru"`tS / N -T7'`
Mailing Address: _ P D. /3Y� 5l3 S C /_ .:✓4Aj 6(C Z 9'3 Z_ $
County: la d, r/
Integrator:_ - Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: 9i S 9 z - s- 77 /
Physical Address/Location: - _ - - -- - - - - -
Type of Operation: Swine -� Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 2 0 Number of Animals on Site: �A w' -74
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 0Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon h sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Ge or No Actual Freeboard: 3 Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes oNo Was any erosion observed? Yes or& -
Is adequate land available for spray?'? Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized: Volt s &'_ be,g j, .-
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria?
200 Feet from Dwellings? <fefbr No
100 Feet from Wells? Jes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue -Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste land applied .or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or-IIF01
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? `es or No
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

s+ s
NORTH CAROLII9A 0"ARTMENT OF , HEALTH & HATMAL RNsoaRCES
DIVISION OP EMMONMENTAL KAHMMENT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Form
"`.sue -` y MY��„ �' •• - :v ..��'v✓. Y• ' fx�+✓+%r.+cYz.' �^l.... J'
'`
- �.rdx.�vC..twp
0rN.;...+rr�.......S.+l.:.a.�.�rv•
.:.mr •. :u.:;�r�x
. x„w l4AII.ING 3IUDR8S5..:.Y�1��;
€? 0. j30X 439 (' i n 0 n N 2Q328
Q 10 ­5ci[-1-57i 1
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 I
Animal operation TyM: ramwi nq
Horses, cattle, wine poultry, or sheep
=TOR IT
Y i N I COXMZNTS
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? [Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system)]
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation M STRATIOM
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period? -
4. Does this facility have a CSRTnPrM ANI3lhL
WASTE XAKAGEI M PLALV
5. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage With
specific cover crop)?
5. Does this facility meet the 5CS minimum
setback c=itexia for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
nECERD
JUL 31 1Y55
ENV. MANAGEMENT
FAYETTEVILLE REG. OFFICE

s =ION IxI
J!ield Sita Mana ftmMt
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Map Slue Line Stream?
2. Is anal waste lazed applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a QSGS Map
Blue Lin 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
CERTIFICATION W.W.
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man -shade 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 QTTiF1r_AT1W.
7. Does animal Waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately )
S. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SMION IY

AfGLrTARY
U im LAOS
lam I *dGAMLWAM
L.ANS
c Y!
Un
P
AM
lo
WN
3.4
4-
N_ und. mill,
2, 47. BIG
0 !in
tm,
UU
hi
.1 11111 SA VTRS
Lan WrE
lift
3L
f ION
s~ OL
or
uU
Mill
IM
am
0 ..* - i- .
= 14
UZABETHT40
Ui
L LOCK
0
ir
POND ILUA
21n __La
0
U11
DIRECTIONS TO P-7A - D (TARHIEEL) COMPLEX
From Clinton take 7GI to Elizabethtown. Turn right onto 87
N; go to Tarheel. Turn left at Scotchman Store onto 131 S.
Go 33 miles; farm is on right
From Elizabethtown take 87/41 N until they split. Continue
on 41 to intersection of 131. Turn right on 131 and go ap-
proximately 4 miles (just past Bryant's Mill Pond. Farm
t J complex is on left.

r I.
Oeparzzent o- Environment, eaith and Natura_ Resources
_vision of .,nvir-_rrenzal Manacemenz
Water QLa,;_y Section
__ t..e animal waste management system fo voL'r feedlot opera_-o1: is
c_ s .V ec to serge more t:�an cr ect:al _0 100 read of cat__e, 75
horses, 250 swine, 1,000 s:~:ee=, or 30,000 birds 4_`_ac are served by
a ^i.:�.. Wash =J5t�?A, .en �..ys ';,ram mn sz re =_,:' ed cut and ma-4-led
d:y Oecemer 3_, _993 �u sua. =A NCAC 2=.0:_7 (c) _n o_ e_ to be
deemed' perm: ,, ted by O v. "_ease Yr_: t c ° ear_y .
=_rm Name. i
Ma___nc Address:
CaL, t Phone, No �j/9 59-1- �l
Okne_ (s) Namme :
Manacer (s) Name _ ---- --
7L'.essee Name:
ar.n i.ocat' on (Be as scec"; _ as possible: zoad name*, direction,
mepost, etc )y5R_ 1Td�JN '�R1CC— '�611_ N. Uffla L-
gat;th.:CelLonc�t�^e z� )mown _��}1�5 ...i.'.�3 1 -1�! ��'
es_cr. canaci_y of anima! Waste manacement_system (Number and type
CCn_"_ned a _ma_ (s)_reQJJZZ <
Ave= ace animal r_opu.lat_on on tae farm (Number and t-.-ze o: animal (s)
raised) _ F A5
Year Production Began: 5/ 1C ASCS Tract. No.
:ype o' Waste Manaceme_nt System Used:
Acres Available for Land Applicazion of Waste: rs
Owner (s) Scnazure (s) .
� � 1