470025_INSPECTIONS_20171231

3 ¢ ri Ip- life-:l�i' i! E• kYY f C� f�l:lYl�laJ it#{�I €a;.YY 9�€� l�lF i€itli�h rf? 3;i, f . 4s t E € E?f��
,� 1�� I�,� (ilNri�� �I1�lE � �� I'1 Division o€ WatewlResources
LIj li ii„r € � € �,`ii� Vf Y.'�
: �fFacill4rf umber €h� IM O Dlvlsion of Soll and °Water; Conservation ,
r€ri�`! i I ” !
€ III A i t
�( yy
�li I I sxJl:r, rI Y _ yl , l �thet -Apen 'V
Type of Visit: • Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:�QR.'. Departure Time: Z; County: Region:
Farm Name: yL&V.'f / r k24 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 4 Ve.5e L Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: "JO.�.p G_CWl"e_-,rD Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: U Integrator: r
Certified Operator:y Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Longitude:
' Deslgn a Current Design Current Design Current
;
€ 3,Y
Pa p t Swine Y 1 .v.... Wet I
PDnI_try, C
P�.a' .
P� attic ,. Capacity,
Pop.C
U,
.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
1
4 °'
Pullets
��
i i ��a�i�� �1l1� s
:.::L
Turkeys
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?
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dai Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes Q1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 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 I of 3 21412015 Continued

acili Number: IDate of Inspection: '
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
�D No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
CRNA
0 NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 27 t 1
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
No
[] NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
l l . Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
© No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidenc of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): (�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E4 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?
❑ YesNo
[:]NA
E]NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
00 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Rc uircd 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? Ifyes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P N
❑ 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 8 No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 9)No
Page 2 of 3
No
C—] NA 0 N
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
2/4/2015 Continued

acili Number: - Date of Inspection: 'Y
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes E0 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA 0 NE
34. Does the facility require are a follow-up visit by the same agency? - ❑ Yes No
l'NA�❑NE
bmments Inferta'' uestian �f.i1�z lainlan Y<+S'an9wers and/ar'a'n additional recammeridatlons or'itn other€comments'
Ilay11Ul1"9HIEHhI1 °Nh Iil';;IkluryCil9•u�F11p! I nu6ii,.!},?I;'iIC1:1C Pi„ n w i, a �P'C1'" 'i i l ` e,a ;,i yj I:,; =l� It , I , a l rE E E
Use drawinks. offecilitv,toWtter explain situations (use additional,t)alE:eslns''necessary)''
Reviewer/Inspector Name: 14r 'Q,./Q Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: /�T— Date: Z//t///
Page 3 of 3 2141 O/5

rfl
4 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: ® C mplian Inspection iew 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: e 0 Com lai Follow-up Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: 0 County: ��_ Region:
Farm Name: ( Owner Email:
Owner Name: Nh &-e- /,44S
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: �Q,tr /'P.y{� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: zC`'t
V
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number: 1 .:g i O R'l
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Non -L
Pullets
Other
Poults
Discharges and Stream Impact
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 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes
❑ No
F%NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�g NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
� No
F] NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

IFacility Number: LJ -7 - z'S I (Date of Inspection: /Qy 3//ll•� I
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ YesNo ❑ 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 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes TP
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 to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? /
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes❑ NA 4NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ YesVE] NA hN
E
Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload E]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 Ev' ence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved ea
1/1
12. rypeO �--1 f
92r
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
E] Yes ❑ No
❑ NA EPNE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ NA NE
❑ 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 1�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 EP NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 15� NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

F'acili Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. ❑ Ye ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Y o ❑ NA NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
NE
❑ NA
NE
❑ NA
[ NE
❑ NA
NE
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ NA
NE
[—]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
[:]Yes
❑No
❑ NA
NE
V
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
SNE
5jYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES.answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional vaaes:'as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: aj C 11_3100
Date:(6 X31 lb
21412015

hl
W Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
jType of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: I® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: p Arrival Time: ' Q Departure Time: s � County:
Farm Name:Fav-i-A Owner Email:
t
Owner Name: ok z,ye _S & Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _ V C O&rr"424''I9 Title:
Onsite Representative: U
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
U
Latitude:
Phone:
Region:
` - r
Integrator:►'rk,�tfi
Certification Number: 9d / 0e
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
]Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharaes 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)?
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop,
Dai Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes K No E] NA [:]NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
NA ❑ NE
®NA ❑NE
[:]Yes ❑ No fP NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

FacIII :plumber: jDate of Inspection: t
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No CRNA ❑ NE
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 1 Structure 2
2.711
Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify 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 T® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) TT''
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 J�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable roq Windowdeuce of Wind Drift ❑Application Out 'de of App ved Area
12. Crop Type(s):4a P-rx—to(d_ j
13. Soil Type(s): J�VC]FJ^Of f— , lVtC QV
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
QqNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[] Yes
T No
❑ NA
[] NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ YesNo
fp
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
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 [�j 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 P No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 01 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2415 Continued

Factlitv- Number: —1 - r7 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
KA 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.
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
No
❑ NA
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
i7seil>awinPsofi�facilitv�tob,etter_explafnsltuations(use;ad,ditianahpaesbasine°cessary)
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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
[UNo
E] NA
C3 NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
[]NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ YesNo
2
[3NA
E]NE
-
comments {refer to questian ) Ezpialn any.YFS answerssandlair any addltionalrecommendations or'uny other comeitents; �+ :i
i7seil>awinPsofi�facilitv�tob,etter_explafnsltuations(use;ad,ditianahpaesbasine°cessary)
RLP
C 1 Rio-6zy-y�vr
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q16 -L 3;? -33w
Date: it L'I/Lb
2/4/2015

(Type of Visit: IWCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
IJ Reason for Visit: OFRoutine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visite LIQ L�_t1 IL Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: "# bk--e, Region: i
Farm Name: Kk1p �0-v/Yl
Owner Name: � E U vpsf oc� LL C_
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: p 1p �j U n^ pl0 Title: Hama w- Phone:
Onsite Representative: v Integrator:
L.
Certified Operator: U-D3e- Gwo � Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: 37me I, Gup/rmj p Certification Number: 99 sn
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
❑ No
Design
Current
Design Current
[3 No
Swine Capacity Po
ult.
IKE.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder 71 tj qNon-La
er
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dai Fleifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Da Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, P,oultr,
Ca aeit
Po
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
113cef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
TurkeyPoults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of 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
[:]Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

WS
Facili Number: -) S Date of inspection: ja
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
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
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
fA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[:]Yes
CKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Co No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
the appropriate box.
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
151 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
50 No
❑ NA
Waste Application
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
(2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
FINA
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 5 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evi fdrence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Cab -16I 17ehyUt�® Idy ...50,711 afg,y) 1. SOT S
VyWf-
13. Soil Type(s): }Jb I k M C Ci<9 / J l as
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
Co No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
fA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fait 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
52 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
50 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
IR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
FINA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili % Number: -
Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Za No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes CR No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ NA [] NE
❑ NA [] NE
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Z[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [ R NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes CR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CRNo
❑ Yes �No
[:]Yes CZ No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or',`any other comments x
use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). ;y
M &e, lvdul l needs 11me , a�'0U*
'SV(V7
as d a e- b -* rvakek � wean , Tie_ QDld s vNQ bows
e _MP
ITals'�vd ala- 1114d, -t�a�&*, V O I Lmf,� P
cl ftoc+
dfawn Ve
b �-ecf�ni �a I s crW �-t—, Whla •, PQM UqA
�e oAaoo +ra, ehft� �o� crf
a�a _ C ie �C" i s IVI i n -Ne mai A rr°,
j q.�e, cW jg,*ee ,9�
yvell-1 dycm Covel-
Reviewer/Inspector Name: S i f
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: %QzT'�3
Date:
2/412011

Facility No.a�,Farm Name !"k Imo' Date alhJ13
_
Permit COC OICi NPDES (Rainbreaker PLAT
3Ld,VfI 7
� 300
Annual Cert Daily Pipe)
Lagoon Name S forspillway 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Design Freeboard 1 Last Recorded in)�-
Observed freeboard
Sludge Survey Date O13
Sludge Depth(ft)
Liquid Trt. zone ft
Ratio Sludge to Treatment Volume if> 0.45
Date out of compliance/ POA?
Design Diam, ft��--��--
Soil Test Date Y&&4mt
pH Fields
Lime Needed
Lime Applied
Cu -1 Zn -1
Needs S (S -I<25)
Crop Yield
Wettable Acres
WUP
Weekly Freeboard
1 in Inspections
120 min Insp.
Transfer Sheets
RAIN GAUGE
Dead box or incinerator
Mortality Records
Check Lists
Storm Water
-151 bl GtM'1-Jv/vWj
Verify PHONE NUMBERS and
affiliations
Date last WUP FRO
FRO or f=arm Records
Date last WUP at farm
Lagoon #
App. Hardware
Top Dike
Stop Pump
Start Pump
Conversion- Cu-! 3000= 108 lb/ac; Zn -I 3000= 213 lb/ac
iffWSQKSAW-
. 3�

Z Zr
__Y�q
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 Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access/��,
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ; �. Departure Time: County: %��IrC� Region: FVZO
Farm Name: FQi✓rn Owner Email:
Owner Name: �G ` r �it.rr�., Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: TTY & ►kS Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: 14ls-aPki�cv
VI
Certification Number: ZZ3
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
I n Q
Non -Layer
Ur
La
Pullets
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cowl I
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑YesLF
] No
NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

acili ,Number: f5ate of Inspection: jz,11q It
Z
[P No
7�
[] NA
Waste Collection & Treatment
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure6
❑ NA
Identifier:
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
Spillway?:
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
Observed Freeboard (in): 3111
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
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?
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
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 r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes M 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): G+ C&g&)" ,It Cif
13. Soil Type(s): C' Cc,
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes M No [3NA [3NE
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
[P No
7�
[] NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. -
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
J�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
5P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2011 Continued

acilit k Number: 'i- IDate 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
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?
T
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
RM No ❑ NA E] NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
T
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
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 facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)..,.
,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone
r R L
214/2011

• Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
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 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:(p� �Z31 l 1 Arrival Time: w+ Departure Time: MMLICounty: f
Farm Name: M c�r� d e f;Lr IM Owner Email:
Owner Name: M'Dkt' Li vP<4vck_ f vm.LLc Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �P �'y-y dQ Qi l n S Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: K Integrator: _MwV'plw—P-- w �, LLC
- I
Certified Operator: ak
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
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
ury round
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
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)
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dai Heifer
Dry Cow
.Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes F No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
�NA ❑NE
®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 J] NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes '0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in);
Observed Freeboard (in):
a`X�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Structure 5
[�tKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ �NoNA [DNE
Structure 6
❑ Yes Nn No
7
❑ Yes T No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste 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 IF No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
`ice No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
1;4 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 5a 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 [XNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes Q] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
[:]Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 2/412011 Continued

Facili Number: 14- Date of inspection-
24.
ns ection-24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ YesNo [DNA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit condjtions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No C]NA ❑ NE .
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey []Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes )n 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?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
1;4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes `P No
❑ Yes [P No
❑NA F] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments - VO",F " 4
Use'drawinps of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
.. oberf M04We_ ... __
" dA,t,l A4(4
Phone: q I a—�33-33W
Date: (,o
.214/2011

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 Assistance
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10 10 Arrival Time: Departure'rime: County:
Farm Name:} j i^^ Owner Email:
Owner Name: rl Ll yc,�4 & iF�t'i'► . Phone:
Mailing Address.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: r, GSA;'ns Title:
U
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
N
CDA
Region: F-7'
Phone No:
,�}
Integrator: '' 14
Operator Certification [Number: 1z -2
Back-up Certification Number;
Latitude: =0 =1 Longitude: =0=4
a
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer I �779
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑
Layers
❑
Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pou Its
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: M1
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
(�[] NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[%TA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection IQJ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): d
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
[I Yes Lim No ❑ NA ElNE
❑ Yes ❑ No [P NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes [P No [I NA El NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [P 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l l .
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[jR No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable CropDrift1 C3. Application Outside of Area
cceptableCrop Window Evidence of Wind
_
��t�l2. Croptype(s) 9,2b�
slCT
13.
Soil type(s) _Ctt✓�l c- s &Cwt — ..
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
V9 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
[R No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
[R)No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any rccommendatigns or anypthcr,,°comm@pts ,
Use drawings of facility'to better explain situations: (use additionalpages as'neeessary).4r}
iwa..��rM�]
R ,t4i ,.Phone:
91"33-33100 ector Name
eviDate: Signature:
0 D
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

1
Facility Number: Date of Inspectionf0 I
Required Records & Dncuments
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21, Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes AS No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[9 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
91 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
IR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
)2 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
MNo
❑ 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
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings.
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

- Division of Water Quality
Facility Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
___ _. _ 1. _—_ -- O Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason far Visit *Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:`?Arrivall Time: Departure Time: ;r70 County:
Farm Name: MGAridt I twm Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ - b __L►� vest M [LC Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
1
T+nrility f nnts�rt• :sir l OctQ 1 nS Titin- Phnnp Nn -
Region: Pko
Onsite Representative: Integrator: MwpkA., owti � Q
Certified Operator: w Operator Certification Number: �A B
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
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: =0 =1
= Longitude: =0=1 °=1
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ on -Layer
Other
❑ Other �- 1
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑
Turkeys
❑ Turkeyl'oults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: FT -11
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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[INA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�NA
❑ NE
L NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IRNo
❑ NA
[IN E
12/28/04 Continued

` Facility Number: —�
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ( NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �1 u
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 JF1 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
[I Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
9] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement'?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
65 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Windows ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outsid-e_oflArea
12. Crop type(s) �p l e l Ci 'I?e �. 5N. � I1�rrS
,
, �`tD1�►
I
13. Soiltype(s) lY �lc , AC-G
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
V 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?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
'M 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):
L
er/Inspector Name b Phone: / 73"erllnspector Signature: Date:
12/28/04 Continued

. . I
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 7 p
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes )� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design El maps ❑ Other me�
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,,qNo ❑ 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
%2 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes�
No
❑ NA
ElNE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
O 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
R1 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
Ej 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
1�8 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
A'dditional'Coirtmerits and/or Drawings: °
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

0 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
(Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Ij Reason for Visit IRRoutine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: o �] Arrival Time: O Q 9 Departure Time: ,f Q County: H,9x Region: CZ
Farm Name:ydA Fwm _.. _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: 17D L.J 1LAQ
�40C
1&tmj La-- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Fstrility rantstrt! 1P rr J QQ I ns Title: Phnne No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: h
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: 2--;L9Z,7
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: [� o =6
=to Longitude: = o = g = 1
1
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non-Layers-
El
on-La ers❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey 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?
Design ` Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifej
❑ Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl I
Number of Structures:10
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 tpNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
INA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
19 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
F3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/2"4 Continued

1
Facility Number: — a Date of InspectionI 1
Waste Collection & Treatment
'0
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 )MNA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 27 1(
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
P No ❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
® 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) gy�pp
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ElI
Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Arc there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA EINE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > ]0% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable (Crop Window El Evidence
,�ofr Wind Drift ❑ Appllication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) S . f [ �,r t L 64 . �uS`�Lc j -e 54 I gra( n
13. Soil type(s) CCo /lig{ i_
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [29 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination`?❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 3 --33CO
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: % t
12/28/04 Continued

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?
Facility Number: — a Date of Inspection f
MNo
❑ NA
Renuired
Records & Documents
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
$ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [:1 Maps ❑ Other
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ NA
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
(P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[M 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
QU 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
b9 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
U9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
09 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12/28/04

Type of VisitCom fiance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit toutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:f Arrival Time;iIIr `� Departure Time: �G County:
Farm Name: Inc 6. (HCl. G P, Ly 'Yi Owner Email:
Owner Name: N�0 � LI Vt s-6tk rcA -✓ Yvx Phone: _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
C�7
Region:
Facility Contact: =e Yr U\ -1 z k as Title: n r I Qx Phone No: + 10 `c)T .3@10d
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Muwk
QV 4 L, a n
t
Certified Operator�� 4S Operator Certification Number: ��
Sack -up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm; Latitude: =0
=6 = Longitude: =0=1 a I1
Design Current
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Papulation
❑ NE
Wet Poultry
C►apacity Population
C«attte C►apacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
10 Layer
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ DaiEX Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
2LNean to Feeder I IM4 ❑ Non -La er I
❑ Feeder to Finish
ElNE
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars❑
El Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes
❑ Turkeys
❑ NA
Other
❑Turkey Poults
❑ Yes
❑ Other
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
ElNE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[INo
E_
EINE
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
]E*A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
SNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
tlNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12/28/04
Continued

Facility Number: I -Ozs Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?: Q
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes 40 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No UNA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes >VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 14No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes /Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) Nd
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes* o ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes XjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
VIA,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Xo
❑ 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 i a wd
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name I Phone:
33 CSD
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z, V L
7
Page 2 oj.3 1212SAW Continued

'Facility Number:4 Date of Inspection `� t
Required Records &_Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 'No [:1 NA El NE
El❑Desi n
the appropriate box. WUP ❑ Checklists g [I Maps [I Other
/ -
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes JRNo [INA ❑ 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 A 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 ❑ No jKNA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No 4NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes [:]No
4A
❑ NE
Other Issues
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes UNo
[:INA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes ANo
❑ 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 )&*o
❑ 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 N 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 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes _kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
i
C-ALl 133R ATt o N ?A U5"[ C3 c..
_PQ 10 (Z To 0C -T
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

Facility Number Date Time Out
Farm Name t-�,X ry
OIC No.
C.O.C. en l NPDS
Des Current Desi Current
Wean to Finish an to F er '7 / `f
Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean .
Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish
: :Gilts Boars
Other
Soil types Aon `k lk . lYl -
Crop Types� Pan � Window 1011 - 313 1
Q�
ALL
L CAh 1.157-7
1`
Soil Test" Plat
Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Rain gauge Rain breaker . ✓ Daily Rainfall Waste Transfers ~�
Calibration of spray equipment G.P.M. a
Jude Surve Cro Yield - ' 120 Minute inspections'
N g. Y . p. 1
1 in. Rain inspections Weather code 'Weekly Freeboard
Pumping time r 1
2
Waste Analysis % & Month I`� of y �•�
BI4IoS j// -&/0
Comments
. a, -?�N��. a ,-L

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number � � 6
Date of Visit:-,�--�-=-1� Time:/ :.
IQ Not OiDerationai Q Below Threshold
Q Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Thresholdt
Farm Name: 6f L' O : f'Uh County: ��
Owner Name: YWe � A,, Phone No: ft u ell" 3 `] I
Mailing Address: _P0 ,-R o x l orS
T'
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude a �• �u Longitude a ��w
Design` Current E'Design ,-Current,
. Design Current,:
,,
Swlne.,f;,€. Ca acity _Population.,,,. ,Pouttrf' Ca acitY., Po ulation Cattle. Ca achy Population
Wean to Feeder
EE3
❑ La er airy
e� €
❑ Feeder to Finish. ......
e� ❑Non -La er' €
i ❑ Non -Dai
71'❑ Farrow to Wean _
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other I I
❑Farrow to Finish �'` ° '` ' `Total DesignCapacity'
Y.'h�❑ Gilts
Boars ' 'total'SSCW
l Number of Lagoons '! Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area S rav Field Area
iz Hnlding'Ponds l Solid Traps �t �� x� ❑ No Liquid Waste Mana ement'S stem
Discharges &r Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [ffNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Tr-eatmut
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Struc Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

i Facility Number: �/7 -- ,2 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWt)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancermprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Apulicaton
I0. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
I5. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
I9. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ❑ No
Air Quality representative immediately.
n'1iLIe.litits
rfjeIQQeQP.tMl! d4bki.g' 3' mfFotwEo� j§-µ3 Y —Yke evPl'. Il��Be EsisAlw<iuWRdE&eTEf.s{`:ih lYi�i�or� k�� ;Y.1:CT.i7�o�lV a�yyy t(
Use drarrrings oflfad�lityntsiQbetter„plaur sitions•` iiSe.adtlitionalQgages a$ wry -� 9aS F
( )- ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes ,
M.—�'�._. _ L
.-ReviewerInspector Name ,4
. ,.�
ReviewerAkspector Signature: Date: - r D
12112103 Continued

\1
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
Nor O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13Conditionally Certified M Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: c [3rd axyw County: Tom'<< -C f2A
Owner Name: _.�i,}14Q Liu- P,SCAL Ers_l^y_+�� LC. Phone No:�:1-7-
]Hailing address: ; �±-L 3 ox 5� ���,£� —C, . -- 2�3 '�_4
Facilitv Contact: J e rri. aG G I hC 'title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: ('
Operator Certification Number: -12 f( 7?3
®swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �4 0" Longitude • �.6
Design Current
Swine C_anarity Pnnufatinn
® Wean to Feeder 1 ?—. 1 t?
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
,Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca achy Population Cattle Ca achy Po ulation
❑ Laver JEJ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
' ' ' ❑ No Liquid Waste
Di r s 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is'any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ LaQoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsenled, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated {low in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
'id .I�] Sp ay Field Area-
Discharge
rea-
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection C Ireatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches):
05/03/01 Continued

t
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 3 l
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 191 No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑YesNo
(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 �3 No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes to No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ( LNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 09 No
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes C9 No
12, Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
EP No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
[2 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
O No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
V No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
,fig
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
El Yes
t �I No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
[�g No
20,
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
W No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
(4 No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
01 No
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewhrispection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
09 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes R No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
v�iwiv� a.vn�irsucu

. 1
Facility number: — '5 Date of Inspection 3 I 0
dor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes [9j No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes El No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes tz No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comntents.and/or Drawings: , '
A,
05103101

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Reglona! Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Mr. L. M. Upchurch, Jr.
P.O. Box 440
Raeford, NC 28376
Dear Mr. Upchurch:
1DaHNF;Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
April 2, 1997
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspection
Hoke Livestock Swine Farm (McBryde)
Registration No. 47-25
Hoke County
On April 1, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facility. 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 facility was 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 facility.
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 matter, please call Robert Heath at (910) 486-
1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW
John Ray - Hoke Co. NRCS
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 NQC An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Rodtine O Com hint O Fella= of DWO los action O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Nentber
Farm Stains: C044
Date of InspeWon 13 r ftS 1
'rime of Impecdon Use 24 hr. time
ITOW Time (in hoar:) Spent onReview
or Inspeefts (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: coustv. AWA �...^
Owns Name;'.
PhoneNo•
Malling Address: --_, l..• !l, _ TUO 1�A �.c/i Aid
-_. _�_ _fll inn ��n- um--rur-.�ir�.i.w.
Onsite Representative:
r—
Certifled Operator,`. L1f"_ R �..r.,.... Operator Cer0cation Number:.,.... ....".
Location of Farm:
Latitude �• �• r�l++ Longitude
to
Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and
0
Other Type of Livestock
1. An there any buffers that need mainteaanceJimprvvament? Q Yes 0 No
2 Is any discharge observed Am any part of the operation?
i If discharge is obaerved, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Srtr£ace Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWfy
3. h there evidence of past discharge tram any part of the operation?
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than ftom a discharge?
S. Does arty part of the waste management system (other than Lgoon&Ulding pondsmRin�t?
Q Yes ® No
Q Yes 12 No
Q Yes tVNo
Q Yes 91 No
© Ya ENO
Q Yes JWNo
Q Yes )M No

G. 1: Aciilily not in compliance With any applicable setback Criteria?
D Yes 1`'0
I Did the facility fan to have a certified operator in responsible age Cif inspection after 1/l/n?13
Yes xo
& Are them lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
.� Yes A No
troctures (Lagoons and/or Holding bLdsl
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
o Yes ,B1No
Freeboard (ft): ,;Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 'Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed from any of the strucbm?
Yes ®No
IL Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the strictures observed?
Yes IRNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? . • -
t] Yes ®No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Yes No
waste Anolication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
'
� Yes 99 No'
.(If in excess of WIMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWG
13. Crop type AAAK� arG�►s•_! C.Le.1
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
Yes PkNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?E3Yes
)qNo
111. Does the cover crop need improvement?
E3 Yes .IqNo
19. Is them a lack of available irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes X[No
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
D Yes X No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes $[No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
r 'Yes ❑ No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
E3 Yes KNo
24- Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/mspwdon with owner or operator is .charge?
D Yes 4kNo
Co mmea .:
fer to�queshon #� y YES answers
.. ..e .1. ....,.,• ..:. .:..
Use tiro :. andlorarry
> .facile .:.�. :mmmdaao� or �y:oa�comts�
s�tl�ns Yi11Y� e'a�.
-.. .. .... a...... .'�usC.a '. ..... .. ...........
... ........ �...:. ...... :.. asae �n
....a..;s . , w. •pogo �. •. �F.J�..L6i:e�-
....:. .... a1i2Y:.?clax�i2�,
...., . .. ..
zz. lvwscoJ.4 wo
Wo epic N ..tea F��r a` IA�foew! .4.✓o/46 sx fO45F V •
Rtviewer/Inspector Name ": ;ir; '> `dui
Ieviwer/Inspector.Slgnature:
Dare: y 1- 9 7
•
DiV%S%On Of k'Wer Or/alfty. Wabr