Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout780011_INSPECTIONS_20171231Division of Water Resources Division of Soil and Water Conservation Other Agency Facility Number: 780011 Facility Status: Active Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Date of Visit: 02/13/2017 Entry Time: 10:00 am Exit Time Farm Name: Farm 5575 permit AWS780011 Denied Access InarliivP ()r Clnsed Date - County: Robeson 11:00 am Region: Incident # Owner Ems Owner. Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: 910-296-1800 Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398 Physical Address: 445 Clearwater Rd Red Springs NC 28377 Facility Status: Murphy -Brawn LLC Compliant Not Compliant Integrator: Location of Farm: Latitude: 340 50' 00" Longitude: 79' 08' 43" From Red Springs lade 71 North and proceed 1.7 miles and the farm entrance is on the right opposite of SR 1701. Cross the railroad tracks and the farm is 0.5 mile further. Question Areas: E Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application Fayetteville N Records and Documents ■ Other Issues Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752 Secondary OIC(s): OnSlte Repmaentative(s): Name Title Phone 24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone: On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone : Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone: Inspector Signature: Dale: Secondary Inspector(s): inspection Summary: page: 1 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions Swine El SvAne - Farrow to Wean 3,927 Total Design Capacity: 3,927 Total SSLW: 1,700,391 Waste Structures Disignated Observed Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard Lagoon 1 19.00 4g.00 Lagoon 5575 page: 2 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780011 Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No Na No 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discharge originated at: Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other ❑ a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ M ❑ c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the ❑ ❑ ❑ State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection Stora e & Treatment Yes No Na He 4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)? 6. Are there structures on site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ waste management or closure plan? 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ M ❑ ❑ 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable ❑ M ❑ ❑ to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? Waste Application Yes No Na No 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ M ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Excessive Ponding? ❑ Hydraulic Overload? ❑ Frozen Ground? ❑ Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑ PAN? ❑ Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑ Total Phosphorus? ❑ Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑ Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑ Evidence of wind drift? ❑ Application outside of application area? ❑ page: 3 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780011 Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Waste ADDlication Crop Type 1 coastal Bermuda Grass (Hay) Crop Type 2 Com, wheat, Soybeans Crop Type 3 Small Grain Overseed Crop Type 4 Crop Type 5 Crop Type 6 Soil Type 1 Norfolk loamy sand, o to 2% slopes Soil Type 2 Wagram loamy sand, 0 to 6% slopes Soil Type 3 Soil Type 4 Soil Type 5 Soil Type 6 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Management Plan(CAWMP)? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 1101111 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Records and Documents Yes No Na No 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑01111 If yes, check the appropriate box below. WUP? ❑ Checklists? ❑ Design? ❑ Maps? ❑ Lease Agreements? ❑ Other? ❑ If Other, please specify 21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Waste Application? ❑ Weekly Freeboard? ❑ Waste Analysis? ❑ Soil analysis? ❑ Waste Transfers? ❑ Weather code? ❑ page. 4 Permit: AWS780011 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780011 Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Records and Documents Yes No Nam Rainfall? ❑ Stocking? ❑ Crop yields? ❑ 120 Minute inspections? ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ M ❑ ❑ 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment ❑ ❑ ❑ (NPDES only)? 24. Did the Facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ M ❑ ❑ 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ appropriate box(es) below: Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑ List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Other Issues Yea No Na Ne 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document ❑ M ❑ ❑ and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ M ❑ ❑ (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface tie drains exist at the facility? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ if yes, check the appropriate box below. Application Field ❑ Lagoon 1 Storage Pond ❑ Other ❑ If Other, please specify 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative? ❑ M ❑ ❑ 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ page: 5 i Division of Water Resources ❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency Facility Number. 780011 Facility Status: Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Date of Visit: 03/10/2015 Entry Time: 09:00 am Farm Name: Farm 5575 Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Active Permit: AWS780011 ❑ Denied Access Inactive Or Closed Date: County: Robeson Region: Fayetteville Exit Time: 10:00 am Incident # Owner Email- Phone: 910-2W1800 Mailing Address: PO Box 467 Warsaw NC 28398 Physical Address: 445 Clearwater Rd Red Springs NC 28377 Facility Status: NCompliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC Location of Farm: Latitude: 34' 50' 00" Longitude: 79' 08' 43" From Red Springs tade 71 North and proceed 1.7 miles and the farm entrance is on the right opposite of SR 1701. Cross the railroad tracks and the farm is 0.5 mile further. Question Areas: Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application Records and Documents Other Issues Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752 Secondary OIC(s): On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone 24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone Or}site representative Mike Cudd Phone Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone: Inspector Signature: Date: Secondary Inspector(s): Inspection Summary: page: 1 Permit: AWS78001 i Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions Swine Swine - Farrow to Wean 3,927 Total Design Capacity: 3,927 Total SSLW: 1,700,391 Waste Structures Disignated Observed Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard Lagoon 1 19.00 28.00 Lagoon 5575 page: 2 0 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No Na No 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Discharge originated at: Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other ❑ a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ EIM ❑ b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ M ❑ 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the ❑ M ❑ ❑ State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Yes No Na Ne q. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ ❑ [] If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large ❑ ❑ ❑ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)? 6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ ❑ ❑ waste management or closure plan? 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable ❑ M ❑ ❑ to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? Waste Application Yes No Na No 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Excessive Ponding? ❑ Hydraulic Overload? ❑ Frozen Ground? ❑ Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑ PAN? ❑ Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑ Total Phosphorus? ❑ Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑ Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑ Evidence of wind drift? ❑ Application outside of application area? ❑ page: 3 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Waste Application Yes No No No Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass (hay) Crop Type 2 Com, Wheat, soybeans Crop Type 3 Small Grain Overseod Crop Type 4 Crop Type 5 Crop Type 6 Soil Type 1 Norfolk Soil Type 2 Wagram Soil Type 3 Soil Type 4 Soil Type 5 Soil Type 6 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Management Plan(CAWMP)? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre ❑ ❑ ❑ determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Records and Documents Yes No No No 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below WU P? ❑ Checklists? ❑ Design? ❑ Maps? ❑ Lease Agreements? ❑ Other? ❑ If Other, please specify 21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Waste Application? ❑ Weekly Freeboard? ❑ Waste Analysis? ❑ Soil analysis? ❑ Waste Transfers? ❑ Weather code? ❑ Rainfall? ❑ Stocking? ❑ page: 4 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/10/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Records and Documents Yes No Na No Crop yields? ❑ 120 Minute inspections? ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ (NPDES only)? 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ appropriate box(es) below: Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑ List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Other Issues Yes No Na Na 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ N ❑ ❑ and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface Tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Application Field ❑ Lagoon 1 Storage Pond ❑ Other ❑ If Other, please specify 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewertinspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ page: 5 r I I M Division of Water Resources El Division of Soil and Water Conservation El Other Agency Facility Number: 780011 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780011 ❑ Denied Access Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Dale: Reason for visit: Routine County: Robeson Region: Fayetteville Date of Visit: 03/1812014 Entry Time: 11:00 am Exit Time: 11:30 am Incident # Farm Name: Farm 5575 Owner Email: Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: 910-296-1800 Mailing Address: PO Sox 487 Warsaw NC 28398 Physical Address: 445 Clearwater Rd Red Springs NC 28377 Facility Status: ❑ Murphy -Brown LLC 111111111 Compliant Not Compliant Integrator. Location of Farm: Latitude. 34' 50' 00" Longitude: 79` 08' 43" From Red Springs tade 71 North and proceed 1.7 miles and the farm entrance is on the right opposite of SR 1701. Cross the railroad tracks and the farm is 0.5 mile further. Question Areas: Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application 0 Records and Documents 0 Other Issues Certified Operator: Michael L Cudd Operator Certification Number: 25233 Secondary OIC(s): On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone 24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone: On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone: Inspector Signature: Date: Secondary Inspector(s): Inspection Summary: Records reviewed 2/26114. Site visit 3/18114. page: 1 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions Swine ❑ Swim-- Farrow to Wean Total Design Capacity: Total SSLW: Waste Structures Disignated Observed Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard Lagoon 1 19.00 Lagoon 5575 page: 2 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No Na Ne 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 1101111 Discharge originated at: Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other ❑ a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ 00 ❑ 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the ❑ M ❑ ❑ State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment Y# No Na Ne 4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)? 6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ ❑ ❑ waste management or closure plan? 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ M ❑ ❑ 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ MED ❑ maintenance or improvement? Waste Application Yes No Na Ne 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Excessive Ponding? ❑ Hydraulic Overload? ❑ Frozen Ground? ❑ Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑ PAN? ❑ Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑ Total Phosphorus? ❑ Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑ Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑ Evidence of wind drift? ❑ Application outside of application area? ❑ page: 3 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Waste Application Yes No No No Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass (Hay) Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed Crop Type 3 Com, Wheat. Soybeans Crop Type 4 Crop Type 5 Crop Type 6 Soil Type 1 Norfolk Soil Type 2 wagram Soil Type 3 Soil Type 4 Soil Type 5 Soil Type 6 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Management Plan(CAWMP)? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Records and Documents Yes No Na No 19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ N ❑ 11 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below WUP? ❑ Checklists? ❑ Design? ❑ Maps? ❑ Lease Agreements? ❑ Other? ❑ If Other, please specify 21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Waste Application? ❑ Weekly Freeboard? ❑ Waste Analysis? ❑ Soil analysis? ❑ Waste Transfers? ❑ Weather code? ❑ Rainfall? ❑ Stocking? ❑ page: 4 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Records and Documents Yas No Na No Crop yields? ❑ 120 Minute inspections? ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ 22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ (NPDES only)? 24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ N ❑ ❑ 25, Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ appropriate box(es) below: Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑ List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ ❑ ❑ 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ❑ ❑ Other Issues Yes No No No 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ E ❑ ❑ and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, ❑ N ❑ ❑ contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ E ❑ ❑ (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 1 Storage Pond ❑ Other ❑ If Other, please specify 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ❑ ❑ 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ page: 5 0 Division of Water Resources ❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency Facility Number. 780011 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780011 [] Denied Access Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date: Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region: Fayetteville Date of Visit: 02127l2013 EntryTime: 11100 am Exit Time: 11:30 am Incident # Farm Name: Farm 5575 owner Email: Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone: 910-296-1800 Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398 Physical Address: 445 Clearwater Rd Red Springs NC 28377 Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC Location of Farm: Latitude: 34' 50' 00" Longitude: 79" 08' 43" From Red Springs tede 71 North and proceed 1.7 miles and the farm entrance is on the right opposite of SR 1701. Cross the railroad tracks and the farm is 0.5 mile further. Question Areas: Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application Records and Documents Other Issues Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752 Secondary OIC(s): On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone 24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone : On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone: Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone: Inspector Signature: Date: Secondary Inspector(s) Inspection Summary: Records reviewed 2114113 Site visit 2127113 page: 1 Permit: AWS780011 Owner- Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 02/27/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions Swine Swine - Farrow to Wean 0 Total Design Capacity: Total SSLW: Waste Structures Disignated Observed Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard Lagoon 1 19.00 Lagoon 5575 page: 2 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 02/27/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No Na Ne 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ Discharge originated at: Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other ❑ a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ M ❑ c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ❑ ❑ 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ ❑ ❑ 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection Storage & TireptMen Yes No Na No 4. Is storage capacity less than adequate? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard? ❑ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)? 6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ e ❑ ❑ waste management or closure plan? . 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ M ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? Waste Application Yes No Na No 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Excessive Ponding? ❑ Hydraulic Overload? ❑ Frozen Ground? ❑ Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)? ❑ PAN? ❑ Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? ❑ Total Phosphorus? ❑ Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑ Outside of acceptable crop window? ❑ Evidence of wind drift? ❑ Application outside of application area? ❑ page: 3 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 02/27/13 tnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Waste Application Yes No Na No Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass (Hay) Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed Crop Type 3 Com, wheat, Soybeans Crop Type 4 Crop Type 5 Crop Type 6 Soil Type 1 Nortolk Soil Type 2 Wagram Soil Type 3 Soil Type 4 Soil Type 5 Soil Type 6 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Management Plan(CAWMP)? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre ❑ ■ ❑ ❑ determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 110110 1 B. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ Records and Documents Yes No Na No 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? ❑ 0 ❑ [] If yes, check the appropriate box below. WUP? ❑ Checklists? ❑ Design? ❑ Maps? ❑ Lease Agreements? ❑ Other? ❑ If Other, please specify 21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ E ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Waste Application? ❑ Weekly Freeboard? ❑ Waste Analysis? ❑ Soil analysis? ❑ Waste Transfers? ❑ Weather code? ❑ Rainfall? ❑ Stocking? ❑ page: 4 Permit: AWS780011 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780011 Inspection Date: 02/27/13 tnpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine Records and Documents Yes No Na No Crop yields? ❑ 120 Minute inspections? ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ ❑ ❑ 23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment ❑ ❑ ❑ (NPDE±S only)? 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ ❑ ❑ 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ appropriate box(es) below: Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon ❑ List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? 1101111 Other Issues Yes No Na No 28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ If yes, check the appropriate box below. Application Field ❑ Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑ Other ❑ If Other, please specify 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ CAWMP? 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ page: 5 Division of Water Quality Facility Number � -1 _ Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation 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 ❑ Denied Access . 9 Date of Visit: 51I I Arrival Time: ' QQhim Departure Time: OS SOU County: �o� S,� Region: Farm Name: 1 ` r%57 Owner Email: Owner Name: , I' fl.(wo :J/NJLcyj Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Mike Cugu Title: Phone No: Onsite Representative. u Integrator: A u&&)t, Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: E e =' = u Longitude: = e F� I = " DesiIn Current Design Current Design Cnrrent Populahon Wet Pouitry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population ❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er H. ❑ Dairy Cow ❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Non -Layer 1 ❑ Dairy Calf ❑ Feeder to Finish " ❑ Dairy Heifer ❑ Farrow to Wean ,Dry Poultry -� �-, El Dry Cow ❑ Farrow to Feeder El owFarrow to Finish ❑ La ers ElBeef Stocker El Gilts Non -Layers ❑ Beef Feeder El Boars i ❑ Pullets ❑Beef Brood Co .,..:., ...... Other +, p ❑ Turkeys �t ❑ Turkey Poults A ❑ Other b.❑ Other . yam. Number of Structures• Discharees & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No Vp] NA ❑ NE b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No 1P NA ❑ NE c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes h No ❑ NA ❑ NE other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 12128104 Continued Date of inspection 2 Facility Number: — 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 V NA ❑ NE Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 I Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE (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 Na ❑ 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 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [:]Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area 12. Crop type(s) 13. Soil type(s) lVgf-✓4v1/4 , NQG�i/►'� 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No F ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes F No ❑ NA ❑ NE 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 18_ Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Ej;No ❑ NA ❑ NE ' IBC S ri°v l e 4 '311 71 rt ( r S 'Ik'� cC-MOL ReviewerAnspector Name ` O d i'I!IGl,J►�f _ .. ;. -)Phone: 62--YrS � Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3 Z Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued Facility Number: ? — Date of inspection 3 tl Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes MNo ❑ 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 appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design g El Maps El Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VTNo ❑ 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 QFNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [!ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes r�)No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [2No ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes J] 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 §5 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 Y 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 RN No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE Additional Contrneks and/or Drawings:" Page 3 of 3 12128104 Type of visit: w tJompnance inspection U uperation Kevrew U btructure tvaivation U t ecnnrcai Assistance Reason for Visit: 40 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: 11 Arrival Time: 03i 30 +•. Departure Time: County: {22_� Region:a Farm Name: SS l S Owner Email: Owner Name: rn U Lk Phone: Mailing Address:: Physical Address: Facility Contact: IV i r-t—' k_koG- .L Title: Phone: j� Onsite Representative: (4 Integrator: Hu,j/b' 1-Aro{, to Certified Operator: Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: Design Current SwineCapacity Pop. Wean to Finish Design Wct P,guitry� C. p city La er Current Pop. Design Current Cattle .: Capacity Pop. Dai Cow Wean to Feeder Non -La er Dai Calf Feeder to Finish airy Heifer Farrow to Wean Design rem Rent Dry Cow Farrow to Feeder M, D , rioW :._�Ca.paci P,o Non -Dairy Farrow to Finish La ers Beef Stocker Gilts on -Layers Beef Feeder Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow iiyz Turkeys Other Turke Poults Other Other Discharges and Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P 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 [P 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 T No [] NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes P No [] NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 21412011 Continued r'q Fjacility Number: r,7p, - I I IDate of Inspection: Waste Collection & Treatment 4, is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No 1P ❑ 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 P ❑ 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 0 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 ADplication 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc. ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 tbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Plpproved Area 12. Crop Type(s): 13. Soil Type(s): 14. Do the receiving crops differ from thoselesignated in the CAWMP? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check the appropriate box. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑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 I" Rainfall Inspections 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑NA ❑NE ❑ Weather Code ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued Facility Number: r795- Date of Inspection: 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 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 `p NA [3NE Other Issues 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. �� 30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes Ml No ❑ NA ❑ NE 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other_ents. comm Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary}. ' Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Phone: Date:�- 2/4/2011 — / i ype or v 1511: M i.ompuance tnspecnon v'Uperanon Kevtew tJ structure r vaivanon v i ecnmcai Assistance Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: 1 Arrival Time: j (,YiRn. Departure Timer—T County: Farm Name: Owner Email: Owner Name: �7t �u}N , C' Phone: 7 Mailing Address: Physical Address: Region: t;00� Facility Contact: kQ Ud Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: N Integrator: Certified Operator: Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: 3 D gnCurrent Design ,Current ME Swme . tCapacity`:1'op. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. . _ = - Design Current Cattle Capacity Pap. Wean to Finish Layer Dai Cow Wean to Feeder Non -Layer Dai Calf Feeder to Finish "'' {' D . $oul Ca aci Pio Dai Heifer Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Dry Cow Non -Dairy Farrow to Finish 12CO Layers Beef Stocker Gilts Non -Layers Beef Feeder Boars >> Pullets Beef Brood Cow Turkeys Turkey Poults Other Other Discharges and Stream Imnacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P§ No ❑ NA ❑ NE Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No VI NA ❑ NE b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 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 P9 NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes C-79 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 21412011 Continued Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: � 2 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: 1 Spillway?: Designcd Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ng No ❑ NA ❑ NE (i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 1 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 1� 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 T ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No IR ❑ 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 maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area 12. Crop Type(s): 13. Soil Type(s): 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those 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? ❑ NE ❑ NE ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes " No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 1p No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ Yes Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes the appropriate box. No ❑ NA ❑ NE No ❑ NA ❑ NE No ❑ NA ❑ NE �No ❑NA ❑NE ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 71 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 9 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 Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: a / 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 7"" No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes CQ No d 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? 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Other Issues 28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? 29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes Qa No [DNA ❑ NE ❑ Yes J�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [A No ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [j No 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes W1 No 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE jComments (refer to question 9): Explain any YES answers�and/or_any.additional recommendations or_any other conimfbitij [Use drawings of facility to better explain situations'(use.additional_pages as necessary): * 15 �rrt y^yrm+ /' pCo2c�s � �e. v,'e w��� q(�13J :#-cP/cP7//3 Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Phone: %/a`�/33-3�- Date: =207 7 A3 21412011 R—T)sO /-/z — Zo/o Type of Visit ($'Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit outine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access Date of visit: 3 Z S- !O Arrival Time: 7100 /iywti Departure Time: County: Region: F/LO Farm Name: ,SS 75-1 (00 0 Zn6,15_) Owner Email: Owner Name: M—tFrUW/'j Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: MITitle: LN►K JKa,►tTw Phone No: Onsite Representative: Integrator: M rb `^1 nJ Certified Operator: J Ak%4. 5 A4c.G'c4y'q,.v Operator Certification Number: 986752— Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: [::] o = ' 0 « Longitude: ED 0 = Swine Design Capacity Current Design Population Wet Poultry Capacity C+urreut Design C+urrent Population Cattle Capacity Population ❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La cr ❑ DairyCow �E] Wean to Feeder ❑ Non -Layer ❑ DairyCalf ❑ Feeder to Finish 1 IDry Poultry ❑ Layers ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Pullets ❑ Dairy Heifer ❑ Dry Cow ❑ Non -Dairy ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars /200 ❑ Beef Stocker ❑Beef Feeder ❑ Beef Brood Cow Number of Structures: Other ❑ Other ❑ Turke s ❑Turkey Poults ❑ Other I Discharges & Stream Impacts L Is any discharge observed from any pail of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ' No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ®NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No [A NA ❑ NE [ZPNA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes [0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes [NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE Page I of 3 12128104 Continued Facility Number:78 — U 1/ 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 gn No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: SS%s l Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE (ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE through a waste management or closure plan? If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes IN 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 El1C� Yes , b� No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �I' 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.) ❑ FAN ❑ 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) cvwtw d 4- lid �� S044/l GVa, ;t Br.✓ � �d.S. J , A to 7a 13. Soil type(s) /I/o►• �v Ik - tJa 9 ya ref 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [2FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [2fNo ❑ 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 ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE a lain .an ° YES answers and/or an precom ,. Comments (refer to queshon�#) E p y y mendations or any other comments. ;Use drawings of faci[rty to better explain situations. (use`addtt,onai p ges as necessary) Reviewer/Inspector NameiZ�C Phone 9�0• 5�33.33aa Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1. ZZ___ Date: - O 7 - ZO/V Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued Facility Number: 7 S — pJf Date of Inspection Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Pennit 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 El Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Vj 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 P 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 14 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes §9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE Other Issues 28, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? 30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately 31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes 09 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 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE AdditionallComments andor Draweags �' _. to AL Page 3 of 3 12128104 l 1a Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: / Arrival Time: Q` Departure Time: County: Farm Name:f Owner Email: Owner Name: MCA.-�— 61Z 11 AA . VL. C Phone! Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: �lC�4LF�'� l•�"! au b---o Title: cr Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: /' �Q S L"� cy ""'x el Back-up Operator:,�[�_y w.a�iS Region: F Phone No: Integrator: � J."XU'x Operator Certification Number: Back-up Certification Number: 57 7 S Location of Farm: Latitude: = 0 0 1 = " Longitude: = ° = 1 = u Design Current ,Design Current Design Current Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry . Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population ❑ an to Finish ❑ La er ❑Dai Cow ❑ an to Feeder ❑Non -La er ❑Dai Calf ❑ Feeder to Finish Dairy Heifer ❑ Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry ❑ Dry Cow %Farrow to Feeder `' `r ❑ La ers ❑ Non -Dairy El Farrow to Finish ❑ N ers ❑ Beef Stocker ❑ Gilts ❑Beef Feeder ❑ Boars Pullets ❑ Nets ❑ Beef Brood Co -_ ❑ Turkeys - - -- Other ❑ Other ❑ Turkey Points El Other Numher,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 NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes dpNo ❑ NA ❑ NE other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 12128104 Continued J Facility Number: Date of Inspection Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No f9NA ❑ 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 �6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE (ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ff 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 f9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ yes P 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 [4No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance/improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area 12. Crop type(s) 13. Soil type(s) 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designVed in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [�FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes Oio ❑ NA ❑ NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ yes [?3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes IFPNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [? No ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question #}: Explain, any: YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other commVT ents T. Use drawvjggs of facility to better explain sitnahons. (use additional pages as "necessary} ate; ;'. Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: ��Qj r33g7 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued d Facility Number: Date of Inspection Reauired Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 15No ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check []Yes [ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig n ❑ Maps ❑ Other ��qq�,, 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes a No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes b No ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No C�NA ❑ NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes f9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes JO No ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No 1P NA ❑ NE Other Issues 28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [nNo ❑ 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 S 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 E No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes §d)No ❑ NA ❑ NE Additional Comments .and/or Drawings: Page 3 of 3 12128104 C Division of Water Quality •Facility Number -- - T O Division of Soil and Water Gonservation -- Q other Agency Type of Visit 40 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: Arrival Time: %/: QORrr+ Departure Time: County: Region: Fl-o Farm Name: rarM s�7sr Owner Email: Owner Name:_W t'+ Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: ''NOHs Title: N Onsite Representative: ` Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Phone No: Integrator: Operator Certification Number: Back-up Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: = n 0 f 0 u Longitude: 0 e= 1=" Design Cnrrent Design Current Design Cnrrent Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Popnlation Cattle Capacity Population ❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er ❑ Dairy Cow ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Non -La er ❑ Dairy Calf ❑ Feeder to Finish - Dry Roultry ❑ Dairy Heifer ❑ Dry Cow ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Layers ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Non -Dairy Beef Stocker El Beef Feeder Farrow to Finish❑ ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars El Pullets ❑ Beef Brood Co ❑ Turkeys - = Other ❑ Turkey Pouets ❑ Other Number of Structures: ❑ Other Discharges & Stream impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes J�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No 19 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 ORNA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes MINo ❑ NE 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes 19 No Ile ❑ NE other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 12128104 Continued Facility Number: — 1 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 01 NA ❑ NE Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: 15 liq Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 31 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 1p No ❑ NA ❑ NE S. Do any of the stuctures 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 El NA maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 10 No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance/improvement? 11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ 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 El Evidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of Area 12. Crop type(s) a �N) i sm , "kr' 0wnxjr.si�,. r, 13. Soil type(s) I V A81 01a B , 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes qM 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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 9`f33�3.� Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: y Page 2 of 3 121751U4 E onnnuea .i t 1. j Facility Number: — Date of Inspection l 711C/W 1 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 410 No ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design g El Maps ❑Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes VO No ❑ NA ❑ NE Other Issues 28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes f @ 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 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 Da 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 nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes F9No ❑ NA ❑ NE Additional Comm'' eats and/orDrawtngs§h .r F a s Page 3 of 3 12128104 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 ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: 30 Arriva il Time: �,.� Departure Time: ll` aD County: Farm Name: +"~ E S{ Owner Email: M Owner Name: ` " ` Phone: _ Mailing Address: ` Physical Address: Facility Contact: /J-r-r►' gn,✓ Title: Phone No: /�/� Onsite Representative: u Integrator: _1 ' � UPA Y 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: Region: Latitude: ❑ O = & ❑ Longitude: ❑ ° ❑ ' ❑ Design Current Design Current Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population ❑ Laver . ❑ Non-Layet Dry Poultry ❑ Layers ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Pullets ❑ Turkeys ❑ urkey Pouits ❑ 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 Co c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? Number of Structures: d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes tA No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No [A NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No P NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No qNA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 12%lo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes S�qo ❑ NA ❑ NE 12128104 Continued r L Facility Number: Date of Inspection _Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes in 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 El Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes iN 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 N 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 [K No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 19 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 9 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 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 [9 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 M 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 10 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE Additional Comments and/or Drawings:. .: Page 3 of 3 12128104 Facility Number: ' Date of Inspection Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? StructureI Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Identifier: 55-7S1 Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 33 h 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 F No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No F NA ❑ NE Structure 5 Structure 6 ❑ Yes 4-1] No [F El NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ER No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance/improvement? 1 ] . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes f3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) []PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 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. e typ() I V A W J I 1 Soil s p 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 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 $j No ❑ NA ❑ NE Reviewer/Inspector Name yx ; - Phone. /0 33- Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3126 p Continued Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑Denied Access Date of Visit: W/3Arrival Time: /Q; Q Departure Time: %�: z� County: A6Cso.✓ Region: FAO Farm Name: ,557S/ �o� Cty�of� 07575 J Owner Email- Owner Name: u 4, Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: ( �tkr�/�S Title: Phone No: 5?/p' 2V 16 097 Onsite Representative: /l�l��C�Fn! S Integrator:u�n Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 0 i = u Longitude: = ° = 1 = " Swine Design Current Capacity Population Design Current Wet Poultry Capacity Population Design Cnrrent Cattle Capacity Population ❑ an to Finish j 10 Layer ❑Dai Cow ❑ an to Feeder 110 Non -Layer I Dairy Calf ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Dairy Heifer El Dry Poultry El Dry Cow ElNon-Dairy ❑ Layers El Beef Stocker Non -Layers ❑ Beef Feeder ❑ Pullets wl ❑ Turkeys Other ° .; ❑ TurkeyPoults ❑ Other El Other Number of Structures: Farrow to Wean El Farrow to Feeder ® Farrow to Finish ZOO Gilts ❑ Boars Discharges &Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [--]Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other a. Was the conveyance man-made`? ❑Yes [)?No ❑ NA [I NE b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes P] 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 R No ❑ NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes Q9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State El Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 12/28/04 Continued Facility Number: 7$ — /] 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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): 2-0, 4 Observed Freeboard (in): _ 440 tI 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 M No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure 5 Structure 6 ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE El Yes ®No El 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 [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8_ Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes UPNo ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance/improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [;9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I O 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) Seymc.CCI A_ (14 13. Soil type(s) NOA Wa- 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [2) No ❑ NA ❑ NE 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? ❑ Yes 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes �No Cl NA ❑NE C� No ❑ NA ❑ NE [4No ❑ NA ❑ NE No ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other" Comm ne- -Use drawings of facility to better explain situations..(use addit,onal pages as necessary): i Reviewer/Inspector Name S� Ili I��r� Gl/ S T Phone: 3300 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: G /3 --ZOO Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued y Facility Number: 7$ Date of Inspection Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes CA No ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig n 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 [�fNo ❑ NA ❑ 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes (�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE Other Issues 28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes r% No ❑ NA ❑ NE 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document [] Yes QjNo ❑ 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 [F 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 MNo ❑ 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 [FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 3 of 3 11/28/04 Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection O Operation Review U Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: F/2'29-O Arrival Time, : ZO Departure Time: County: 90110CS0A/ Farm Name: SS I Owner Email: Owner Name: ra/ Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Ir' Title: Onsite Representative: T GarV 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 �o Latitude: Region: `" Phone No: Integrator: /ilk BYo -JAI Operator Certification Number: Back-up Certification Number: Design Current Design Current Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population ❑ Layer ❑ Non -Layer Dry Poultry ❑ Layers ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Pullets ❑ Turkeys ❑ Turkey Poults ❑ Other Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? Longitude: =0 =A Design Current: , Cattle Capacity Population:..; ❑ DairyCow ❑ Dairy Calf ❑ Dairy Heifei ❑ 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 pan of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters ofthe State other than from a discharge`? ❑ Yes [�[No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes (( No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes F% No ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE Cl Yes �4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 12128104 Continued Facility Number: 79E Date of Inspection Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Z d " Observed Freeboard (in): 33" 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ yes N 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 CO 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 UNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N 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 EA No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [] Yes [9No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance/improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1% 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) LSPr"ado, Ab.- S_Mrfl rra:N ®✓ci-Tee_ ' 5-ov0e�rs 13. Soil type(s) No A o— g 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? Cl Yes [NNo ❑ 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 [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [.XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes / `No ❑ NA ❑ NE ,v� Reviewer/Inspector Name + C % �� vim, �' Phone: 0/101* & IS7� Reviewer/Inspector Signature: All Date: /2 12128104 Continued Facility Number: S' — f Date of Inspection 9-0 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 [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropiiate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes CKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification ❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes hn No ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes �WV Imo! No ❑ NA ❑ NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes I 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 [ gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes 5�No ❑ NA ❑ NE and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? 30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ElNE 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 C`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 [;A No ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ;� No ❑ NA ❑ NE Addrtio'nal COuiments;$IILUOC Drawrntgs 12129104 I Type of Visit 49 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance Reason for Visit O Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: G -9-0 S Arrival Time: Departure'rime: County: 62AMIrn. Region: FRO Farm Name: q.t t7r Owner Email: Owner Name: Feeo( Sic.. Phone:�i/v- �y_3_- 343'/ Mailing Address: _ P, �. ��r ,C-% _ __ _ IPo k%1� , AICr ?4?17IS8 Physical Address: Facility Contact: Title: Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Mn LocAleat Phone No: Integrator:rCl/_s Operator Certification Number: Back-up Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ o = & =if Longitude: ❑ ° = 1 0 u Swine Wean to Finish Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Gilts Boars Other ❑ Other Design Current Design Current Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population ❑ Layer ❑ Non -Laver Dry Poultry Non-L Pullets L1 Turkey Poults ❑ Other Discharges & Stream Impacts I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field El Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? Cattle Design Curreh Capacity Popullation` r ❑ Dairy Cow ❑ Dairy Calf ❑ Dairy Heifer ❑ Dry Cow ❑ Non -Dairy ❑ Beef Stockei ❑ Beef Feeder ❑ Beef Brood Co M ..1 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) 1 Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑-KE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA 2fgE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [a NE [--]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 21NE 12128104 Continued Facility Number: Date of Inspection G-9 df Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ATE 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 �iE (ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA J2 E 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 [INA J2-] iE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA KE (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 PINE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA J:JfilE maintenance/improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 21es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) [-]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window 2<vidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area 12. Crop type(s) 13. Soil type(s) 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2 NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination` ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ONE 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 )EINE tb ' . I / ` • ,, !!. r�!ll L spe+� /' S v� : c'e / �uaf' '�',S-dp, r11 f ir,•✓e, ••as n o �e �o� 7�:•i.. T so.., a o'j f-�►�// ,-I(.�k i/IS�ec/Or Wu! & o^I ,lnq R/0,, AF"- we Tot i*f.sT 4iG3 Reviewer/Inspector Name if7grx` Q�n . , ,°` ''�I . Ph one: one. TO- Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,(>! Date: 9 O� 12128104 Continued � e Facility Number: Date of Inspection Required Records &-Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2<E 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA PrNE the appropirate box. ❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA E3'*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 ❑ No ❑ NA IU E 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA L'51E 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2 NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ,O�M 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA D<E 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA J2'11E Other Issues 28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0'&E 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA JDTNE 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 TKE 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 ,309E 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 L3'ffE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ,� Additional Comments and/or -Drawings: Q wQ S�Rf� v�'s�r� fc.r.., as cx res�.IA o- o< e_o1/01..I'll TES e eo.•,,slQ;,, f- fie e..:,d wa,s C,,wsj_,9 �c twrRe Wdsfe 6e1„g aPp/'ea/ An c4n.'Ff 0 fi e s�rar )r'e ll( On /1 an/ d4r;v9ftlely Cars 4r Y41�, '!'rove �J,, 4'4e', Dwq staff a./'r.'ree,(� �+trt was w��� �r: if 6e:"y earr.'e� eecrass lie r`vno� a�oi �� 4+.. b5r►Y vui'c�t WurS S�/areo( br Lv.'nd(�r:TT. �Fa'� wdr�Cer even I+*1V Ae rrr• ew %rlss� ay frv.� ><� a roao� • � .=hs�eGTor k'a��lt� w. �an� �r'ea �,'n t r'r1 aa/Jo'enT F'e /� Ges1U TG//1-k Ad //rA[ Of Gva�tYwaYtr s�raytl� OR�D U•'t� r�o�C 4�/p.f GZ�Sd /70�t� �Ci�pr+f �B/i �O'�i�. wA ))�j�r^g I'Ir LOG/C/!Or/ fit l4ir+ /�.r,rilf S1-/-J 7�LjaT A4, Lv,'n,4/ 44e J'vs/- P v p� 41 yc o 0 � v° 4 3 O 7 �1t� x rr 3 t o o V CERTIFIED MAIL. RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Carroll's Foods Inc 7575 PO Box 759 Rose Hill NC 28458 Michael F. Easley, Governor William G. Ross Jr., Secretary North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director Division of Water Quality August 5, 2003 DEER-FRI® AUU 12 20A DWQ Subject: Application for National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit Facility Number 78 - 11 Dear Carroll's Foods Inc: The Division of Water Quality (Division) has been required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to develop a NPDES permit program for animal waste management systems. The Division has developed a general NPDES permit similar to the state Non -Discharge General Permit that this facility is currently permitted under. Coverage under the General NPDES permit will be required by all facilities that are at, or above, the federal threshold numbers of animals listed below, as well as any facilities that have had a discharge to waters of the state since January 1, 2001. Federal Threshold Animal Numbers: 2500 Swine greater than 55 pounds in weight 10,000 Swine less than 55 pounds in weight 700 Mature (milking cows or any cows that have calved) Dairy Cattle 1000 Beef Cattle in confinement 30,000 Poultry with a liquid waste management system 55,000 Turkeys 125,000 Chickens other than a liquid waste management system 82,000 Laying Hens other than a liquid waste management system According to our records this facility meets the federal threshold for a NPDES permit. It you are currently operating at a population above the threshold numbers please sign and submit the enclosed NPDES Short Form B — Existing Facility. Please carefully follow the instructions on the form. If you are currently operating this facility at a population below the federal threshold you may choose to submit the enclosed "NPDES Short Form B — Existing Facility" for the design capacity of the system as it is currently permitted. You may also choose to request a new Certificate of Coverage under the State Non -Discharge Permit at a population below the federal threshold. Should you choose this option, please submit the enclosed "Request for Modification to Existing Certificate of Coverage for State Non - Discharge Permit" application and updated WUP reflecting the population change. Please note that if you are issued a modified Certificate of Coverage for a lesser population, any future increases in population would require a new permit from the Division prior to increasing the animal population. VXr iVCOENR Non -Discharge Permitting Unit Internet httpJ1h2o.enr.nc.state.us/ndpu 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone (919) 733-5083 Fax (919)715-6048 Customer Service Center Telephone 1 800 623-7748 An Equal opportunity Action Employer 50% recycledll0% post -consumer paper Please submit one of the enclosed applications within 60 days from receipt of this letter. If you choose to submit the "Request for Modification to Existing Certificate of Coverage for State Non -Discharge Permit" application you must include an updated WUP. If you are unable to obtain an updated WUP you should submit the "NPDES Short Form B — Existing Facility" for your current permitted population and request a permit modification at a later date when you have obtained a new WUP. Failure to submit the application as required may subject your facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the application. If you have any questions about the NDPES permit, the enclosed applications, or any related matter please feel free to contact J R Joshi at 919-733-5083 extension 363. Sincerely, M. Paul Sherman, P.E. Cc: Robeson Soil and Water Conservation District Fayetteville Regional Office, Division of Water Quality Permit File NCA278011 Permit Application File NCA278011 r Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access Facility Number Date of Visit: Time: iD Not rational C Below Threshold rmitted �rtified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: Farm Name: �i'� _ County: P_Se. /:9? . ...........___ � % ,� Conn ......,, o�-- - (....... Owner Name: ___ Mairmg Address: Phone No: Facility Contact: .._. /71-t' - �,A L Lr.r 4 c- --- --- Title:._ _ . Phone No: OnsiteRepresentative: Mr- ff Alf, a ,r4,r- Integrator: C4rra//c Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number. Location of Farm: El -swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ horse Latitude Longitude �• �' �" Discharges & Stream Impacts I- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Identifier: I _. _. Freeboard (inches): 3 0 ❑ Yes [:)'No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No Structure 6 12112103 Continued Facility Number: 7.9 — Date of Inspection 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or [] Yes ❑ No 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 ❑ No 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance./improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ❑ No elevation markings? Waste Aanlication 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancefrmprovement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc 12. Crop type 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No Odor issues 17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior below ❑ Yes ❑ No liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No 19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e- residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No roads, building structure, and/or public property) 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. ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes y✓Q 7`uTT ✓ S {e'Gi / a! r•. C.t S 4 I-ej u 1 f" a/ Gx C I 's pvrY+`J•a� L/tw5 LVPL[ c.roek:n5 Grp,, TAQ G�aG/! �d IOwPr f1-900,1 /LO 'SI !�/ �•t /C/� Fft1GxSle ,,b, OP9an S�nPPC'� SPrd y G"C^ Gall,,,/ % •S C1.,' o/, o C{ G u �c- � Z t?J )1 N / n /CI E'. Yo Pam. �6Gtrr.I�ay QvC.+.nq, TX y4V�nPP� i.+anGxr J/ i ,,// )f4 e 5 •!e Reviewerlinspeetor Name �ru ReviewerAWspector Signature: iZG•,v4 iQ - Date: S - ! Z - O Y lZ/1ZV3 [;onawu ea 1 � 1 Q a 3 S �• V V � C IL d'3 T' Type of Visit % Compliance inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint (:) Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access k Facility Number Date of Visit: Time-, E ..� Noi O eratinnal BelnK• Threshold ❑ Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: Farm Name: GC+ rnt lk�S c County: _ 2QJ ( 4 r=, _ip-2Ca Owner -Name: Q_',._rY'O i ( S +V__ Phone No: _ i 0 ) :2 3-,(, 31 Mailing Address: P� D. r�x R 5 L _ 4.i Al1�cJ n] 3 d Facility Contact: � � " � � "Title: Phone No: Onsite Representative: MCI R Cd"���+�?V ci�t!' Integrator:._ Ce rra _ Certified Operator: Mkt- ( SdL� Operator Certification Number: Location of Farm: ® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' z 04 Longitude ' • Design Current Swine r2narih Pnnnistinn ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Farrow to W'ean ❑ Farrow to Feeder 1B Farrow to Finish iD c7 ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars Design Current Design Current Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca aeiity Population ❑ Laver I I I[] Dairy I ❑ Non -Laver I I ILI Non -Dairy ❑ Other Total Design Capacity Total SSLW I Number of Lagoons E I JL! Subsurface Drains Present HLJ Lagoon Area iL Spray' Field Area Holding Ponds / Solid Traps . ' . ; . ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem Discharges 8 Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. if discharge is obsen-ed, was the conveyance man-made? b. If discharge is obsenfed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. if discharge is obsmed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notif., DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any' adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection 8 Treatment 4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Identifier: Freeboard (inches): 05103101 ❑ Yes P No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes] No ❑ Yes [qNo Structure 6 Continued Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? (if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes P No ❑ Yes ED No ❑ Yes q No ❑ Yes t9 No ❑ Yes Q No Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Poonding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No 12. Crop type 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes No 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes (2 No 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Z No Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes No 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ® No 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes W No 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? ❑ Yes JO No (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) 23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes RNo © No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. Comments (refei to quesdani#) Ei[plain any YES �"swe s d/oriany recommendation`s ar anyIatber comments. l kUse_dra wings of facllrty�to�lielter explain srtuaho (use ddttlon� pages as necessary) �. ❑Field Copy ❑ Final Notes ate_ it %V03 FA �,,j 311. a ovl ( e-44- T ie�� �� C,� r`� (cam, •, �[ �o v- , Reviewer/Inspector Name i' a Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 05103101 Continued Facility Number: Date of Inspection C Odor Issues 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? 28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, roads, building structure, and/or public property) 29_ is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? 30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) 31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? 32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pe:rmanent/temporary cover? EQ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes 50 No ❑ Yes [E No ❑ Yes R No Yes ❑ No 05103101 �i.� �;"'��-y,..-.�.�`':-r7 ��...r.w.:r-'�... 'S� " .v,.-..'...c _-�'•4�ra+.:.=�--�_. � a ,�-- - „�z - -ram -3: z -i' r Type of Visit 10 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access Facility Number Datc of Visit: S O Time: Not O erational Selow• Threshold M Permitted 0 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: Farm Name: Fbt'r.,\ Lv,G Count': .7- 6a." E!:, O Owner Name: C&FCDLI( Phone No: �') 1 0 flailing Address: Q 6, O1C iZSG, _1 Cc"..J _ C' 2-.S 3 ig Facility Contact: (Z j&j'Lx do tit., S Title: Ldryi Phone No: S 6- Onsite Representative: _ z L'�C� �� _ Integrator: _ C � r-r`o It's Certified Operator: W`L Operator Certification number: 2g-� $ 4 Location of Farm: Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' i 0` Longitude �' �• 0� Design Current Design Current Design Current Swine Ca achy Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Laver I JE] Da' ❑ Feeder to Finish 10 Non -Laver A ID Non -Dairy ❑ Farrow to Wean El Farrow to Feeder ❑Other Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars Total SSLW Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Lagoon Area ❑ S rav Field Area Holding Ponds / SoEid Traps 0 :" ❑ No Li uid Waste Management Svstem Discharges B Stream impacts 1. is anv discharge observed from any pan of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b, if discharge is observed, did it reach [eater of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in eat/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves, notify DWQ) ?. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan of the operation? 3. were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? Wirm Collection 8e Treatment 4_ Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure Identifier: Freeboard (inches): Q 05IV3101 ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes] No ❑ Yes W No Structure 6 Continued Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes CkNo seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? ❑ Yes [ No ([f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [SINo 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes [PNo Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes q9 No 11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes PNo 12. Crop type 13e r %, e tL -4- S- . &_ 11 G m n 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 deter-rination? ❑ Yes ❑ No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ®No 16_ Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ No 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ®No 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [2 No 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes W No 23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 1❑ Yes ® No 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No 0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. Reviewer/Inspector Name Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ❑ Field Cony ❑ Final Notes Date: 513D / O O5103101 Continued Facility lumber: 74 — i Date of Inspection o� Odor Issues 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge agar below liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? 28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt. roads, building structure, and/or public property) 29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? 30_ 'W*ere 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.) 1. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? 32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ �'es 132 No ❑ Yes F>CJ No ❑ Yes EE No 05103101 r Type of Visit (V Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access Facilitv Number Date of Visit- L.¢. Time:rO - Q Not Operational 0 Below Threshold ® Permitted 0 Certified [:1 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold: Farm Name: A.4� 7 - 25' County: x6'r-w,✓ .S .7� ��ia�'�. GEC_ Phone No: Owner Name: � fJ Mailing Address: + r i Facilit-v Contact: GO //Q�-f Title: Phone No: Onsite Representative: �Integrator: �� ` `i��� ��.-L�`•'G Certified Operator: `� Operator Certification Number: Location of Farm: ❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' 0. 0 u Longitude ' 0 0 _-De§ign'" Current -Swine Ca aeiity Po iilstron Poultry ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish LDD Z ee ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars Non-. Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes P No Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? [:]Yes JR No ❑ Yes NNo ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes V9 No Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes CffNo Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: ��// Freeboard (inches): 73 ti 05103101 Continued Facility Number: 7? — // Date of inspection 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? ❑ Yes ❑ No (If any of questions 4-6was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No 11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ❑ No 12. Crop type 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ONO 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ERNo b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ER No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Reouired Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? 18_ Doe a facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (i checklists, design, maps, etc.) ✓ t/ 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) 23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 24_ Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes 54No ❑ Yes KNo KYes �o ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes ,® No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No © No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. Comuteats (referto gues#an :- ns yrhr cos m_sam�en.st_ . _.. _ y ddtdopal pasocrtsituations.useag Use drawia f�t_o ;bet#t)cr Eex<ppllaautoa_aaYES answers andlor_any tsesosmameoeeossaartyio) ytoField Copv D Final Notes - p/,� �w��J was r�,�/ �,� r�u y Reviewer/Inspector Name — Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1,4z' 05103101 Continued Facility Number: — / Date of Inspection Odor sues 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes XNo liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ,K No 28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ONo roads, building structure, and/or public property) 29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes )!�No 30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes kNo 31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes J'No 32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? N Yes ❑ No Additional•.Commenlsiand/or,,Drawings:_ - _„� - .: :w_L. w , . .. sate 4 t Cc..iH.✓t� /E�o� � ���//f� /� (�4[�it! 9G•stsf Q� f�i�-��C-r/�� ��'�ddi-J � ,e oemw 05103101 R Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation # Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: 5-3t1`20f11 Thee: == Printed on: 6152001 Facility Number 11 O Not Operational O Belaw Threshold Permitted 11 Certified C3 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold- - -- -- -- -- -- -- Farm Name: 7575 .......................................................... ..._. County: RQbMjo............................. ERO-_----__- Owner Name:._.---------••------------ ��UCI�U'���d� IiuC.-------------- Phone No: 9�Q--29�A---------------•----------- - MiuHng Address: f.Q.j)ra zcr.j%................... ............................. _................................... WMaLtx.,IBC....-..-..........-........ ... 2832A ............. facility Contact: ftitX Kallim ...... 1l t, ...............................Title• >���1.-..........----................ Phone o:...................................... Onsite Representative: --._---------_-----_------- --------____-- Integrator: Certified Operator: h a]C . Haunt ...................... Operator Certification Number: 7.5585 Location of Farm: From Red Springs tade 71 North and proceed 1.7 miles and the farm entrance is on the right opposite of SR 1701. Cross the railroad tracks and the farm is 0.5 mile further. Swine ❑Poultry ❑ cattle ❑ Norse Latitude • £ - St? 00 Lon nude 1 79 • 08 �, 50 4 g Current :.- gn .:::'.....-._ .. : Design ...:.. Current .. Destgn orient:"::. Discharges & Strew Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is obsen ed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No b. If discharge is observed, did it reacb Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes CK No c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if )vs, 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? 0 Yes 0 No Waste Collection & Treatment 4- Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 19 No Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6 Identifier: ........................... .......................... ... ........................... Freeboard (inches): ._.._.._.._3-5...._-._-._. R >Facility Number: 78-11 Date of Inspection 15-30-20011 Printed on: 6/5/2GOI 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erasion, seepage, etc_) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? (If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevatitm markings? Waste Avvilcation 10. Are there any butlers that need maintenancelimprovement? 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Poudmg ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload 12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes ® No Yes No 0 Yes No ❑ Yes % No 0 Yes N No ❑ Yes ZR No 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes C9 No 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? Q Yes 0 No b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? [] Yes CK No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes X No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard waste analysis & soil sample reports) 20. Is facility not in compliance: with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design`? 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, fr eboard problems, over application) 23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection «rith on -site representative? 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes [9 No ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes IR No ❑ Yes N No ❑ Yes CR No 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? [:)Yes CK No No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will ireceive no further correspondence about this visit. ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes 133 lb. PAN on oversced for 2000-2001 has been changed to 50 and 100 lbs. for 2001-2002. Small grain has been cut once. Bermuda looks good. Review'erllnspector Name Reviewer/Inspector Signatui r It Routine 0 Com laint 0 Follow-up of DW ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other Facility Number Date of Inspection Time of Inspection L.'CI 7 224 hr. (hh:mm) [3 Permitted 13 Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 13 Registered 1� Not OperationalLJOID.IteLast Operated:25�Farm Name: ...................... �....... 7.� ............................... County:........�'...... ..._...... Owner Name: Gc� Y`a..�.�.................. �..>..rf .:.... Phone No:...........2 76'.Q6 `18- / i s b O „ ........... ....._.... Facility Contact: ...L� ...... 11.4_5 .. .........................Title:.. ... pqrla................ I...... Phone No: ................................................... Mailing Address:.....10d...�i� l"..... !i5�............................................ ....... !i.?,.„.AI. ......._._......... �9r OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator :................. „.......................................... ................. ... „ Certified Operator: ................................................... ...... I ...................................................... Operator Certification Number: ..„............... „........... _ �. Location of Farm: Latitude ' 1 4& Longitude ' & 4° Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes kINo Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Identifier: p !, P Freeboard (inches). 57 r d ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 3123/99 ❑ Yes ')] No ❑YesWo ❑ Yes )4No ❑ Yes ANo ❑ Yes ANo ❑ Yes �No Structure 6 ❑ Yes ®No Continued on back Facility Number: 7 — Date of Inspection 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? ❑Yes �No (It any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 4NO 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes No Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes E�No 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excgssive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes No %J A I �, 1 12. Crop type 09natudaT 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desi n ted in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 16. Is there -a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Required Records & Documents IT. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) 20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie! discharge, freeboard problems, over application) 23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? Yati4:e dgfeie�cie wire pifed>irt trig �his:visiti Yoh w# �ee�iye too Ifuth�r :::: .,coy espori�ence: abmit this visit.. jervK,_kJa f;eldf 1\"e Ca,+•,e a Icy way �d /0v� 9 arw► i S kuGl/ Met ivi/Qe4ej / ❑ Yes qNo ❑ Yes rNO o ❑ Yes ❑ Yes g No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes J� No ❑ Yes ANo ❑ Yes 1�l No ❑ Yes RNo ❑ Yes :No No ❑ Yes ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ Yes JoNo ❑ Yes id No ❑ Yes RdNo Reviewer/Inspector Name" Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: i - Datc of Inspection Facility Number: — Odor Issues 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below (--]Yes ❑ No liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 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 INo , 30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or y` or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 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 itiona omments arid/or raw;n tCgs:- "r _ r rr 3/23/99 State of North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources Division of Water Quality James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ~ Bill Holman, Secretary Kerr T. Stevens, Director Carroll's Foods Inc 7575 PO Drawer 856 Warsaw NC 28398 Dear Carroll's Foods Inc: Ai • NCDENR NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES December 30, 1999 RECEDED -N 5 2000 FAYEGEVIL OFFICE Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping Animal Waste Management System Facility Number 78-11 Robeson County This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan. In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers. Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRRI, ERR2, DRYI, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR1, SLUR2, SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ) compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an appropriate enforcement action. Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting requirement. If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the DWQ staff at (919) 733-5083 ext. 571. Sincere] , Kerr T. Stevens, Director Division of Water Quality cc: Fayetteville Regional Office Robeson County Soil and Water Conservation District Facility File 1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone 919-733-5083 Fax 919-715-60U An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper d. . ". - ti DKision of Soil anit-Wqt F Conservation -Operation Review �5 - ( :Divis�on of Soil and -Water Conservation - Com}iliance.lnspection v ` DwIsron of Water Quality -"-.'Compliance Inspection 4= Other:A1 enc O eration�Review }Routine O Com laint O Follow-u of DW ins ection O Follow-u of DSWC review O Other Facility Number Date of Inspection EEI Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm) Permitted © Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated: Farm Name: ( County: -...�„ C?S — ...................--...... Owner Name:. •rY'D s O Phone No:.,.,,.,,,,. 276 el 6 .. 1............ ..........�.�..-. .................. � .......................... �+ h Facility Contact: -• s � f itle:....G..?t q - ...... ... Phone No: ................................................. A•Iailin" Address: /��J 1 ....../f 1....... 1, L [�+ ....................... ............7.G Onsite Rep resentative:.....L �5....... S!..`L.................. Integrator:............................................................................... ........ ......... .......... ...... Certified Operator:,,,.. ..�C......................... .......,Pwt1.......... ................... Operator Certification Number:.......................................... ........... Location of Farm: Latitude 0 4 " Longitude 0 4 64 'Design Current Design Current Design Current Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population. ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy ❑ Feeder to Finish JE1 Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other Farrow to Finish Z O v Total Design Capacity 1 2Q-0 El Gifts [I soars Total SSLW Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System Discha res & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (if yes, notify DWQ)? Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State c- If dischanze is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Identifier: Frcehoard (inches): ........ �`I..................... - ............................. Structure 4 Structure 5 ❑ Yes ONo ❑ Yes O(No ❑ Yes KNo A ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes %�No ❑ Yes RNo ❑ Yes ONO Structure 6 1/6/94 Continued on back Facility Number: '7 Date of Inspection 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? ❑Yes KNo (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 V o 8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?ElYeso 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes WNo \ Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Q�Vo 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑Pending []Nitrogen ❑ Yes WNo 12. Crop type ......�l.JL�.....� �.d .�..Ul..�.....,1�,1t� Cal ........................................ ......................................................... lYt.:l�........ ........ ..... 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 2(No 14_ Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) ❑ Yes q No 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes j(No 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Of No Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes (kNo 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes [ANo 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes M No 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No VN 21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ElYes PNo 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ic/discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No 23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ( No 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 13NNo NA.viaJations.or deficiencies .were noted during .ttiis:vi' i:. You v' ilf receive nag further.:. Corr-t sbbddeiiee; abib6t: this 'visit: . ' : Comments (refer;to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recoriiinendation's 'orany.other comments Use drawin IIff o�f:fcsai�lit t/o better ex lair°situationds.((use additional pages as necessary) -x - ��IGtS a✓ iJJCErL r'et ri C� cWor t � S L1eA Reviewer/Inspector Name -__ Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1 /6/99 GAF0 TELEPHONE LOG _" OMPL.4jNT _REQUEST FOR INFORMATION OTHER DATE/TIME 7 - l - ge, DWQ CONTACT , --z ie {fla PERSON GONTACTiNG THE F.Z� n on (n RETURN TELEPHONE NO. (f,0) ADDRESS FARM NAME: PA2M nv,/MF2- rto �I `5 r,"A COUNTY O e v FAGIUTY NO.. NARRATIVE: J- Pieys � S�s kX,.j '✓� - �[S�S isy►e f-c Q „ ] Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency _ Division of Water Quality �y 0 Routine 0 Complaint O Follow°-uo cif DWO insnc•ction 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other Date of Inspection .S-. i-99 Facility Number Time of Inspection %oiP 24 hr. (hh:mm) {] Registered XCertified © Applied for Permit Xpermitted 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated: FarmName:... ............................ ...J._5................................................. 1....................... County: .............. A9,16 ....................................... Owner Name: ��1ts %I0-- c293 3- u .................................. c4rTVA ........... r.......... ,�. Xr .................. Phone No:......------•-..........---..................�T......................---• Facility Contact: ............ 42gtdi-c.............. Title:............... .......... Phone No: ..................... pp O ,•f q Mailing Address:..........f..:........%!���'........Q. 4!"4ra ............................... ,.. G /.... .--•- ........ .. Onsite Representative:..-.-.......G7.cssr.,.1 tog1Z1 ..................................... Integrator:......4.7rM11(-5............ Certified Operator .................. 1.rPaCl.*.1......................P.a.-4"./........ ................... Operator Certification Number:.-----------.....---.. Location of Farm: Latitude • 1 46 Longitude 0• 6 ” - _ Destgn;u Citrrenf " =' sDesign Current =` Destgn Current ,:. Somme 'L. .. Capacity„Papalation' " Poultry -Capacit' Population hCattle , ,_;,„... CapacEty Poptilateon ❑ Weanuto Feeder : °" ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy :.ElFeeder to Finish �a , ❑ Non -Layer =J ❑Nan-Dairyz ❑ Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other I7. Farrow to Finish 1 a570 Tntal Deslgli Capacity "z ❑:, f Gilts ++S ❑ Boars 9�a Y'� n k - FF- ti:r Iota gsi, � F SL❑ Subsurface Drains Present JJLJ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area E. ❑ No Linuid Waste Management Svstem General 1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes A No 2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RqNo Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the convevance man-made? ❑ Yes( No b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes KNo c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? NIA d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No 3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No 4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No 5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes No maintenancetimprovement? 6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes PTNo 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes CO(No 7/25/97 Continued on back Facility Number: — 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? Structures (Laugootns,llolding fonds, Flush Pits, etc.) 9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Structure 1 Identifier: Freeboard (ft): .........�..it........... Structure 2- Structure 3 Structure 4 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/improvement? (If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ;KNo ❑ Yes XNo Structure 5 Structure 0 13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? Waste Application 14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ([f in excess of WMP, or runoff teri waters of t e State, notify�DW 15. Crap type ........... ,s ..... .... .....:...-......................C��................... 16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? 17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? 18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? 20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'? 22. Does record keeping need improvement? For Certified or Permitted FaciiIJ60- (Zrily 23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? 24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit'' 0, No.violations or deficiencies were n' &e' d during this. visit. You4ill receive no further correspondence about this.visit:: ❑ Yes No IV Yes ❑ No Yes ❑ No XYes ❑ No ❑ Yes K No ❑ Yes J,No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes [XNo ❑ Yes V(No ❑ Yes PffNo ❑ Yes JXNo CKYes ❑ No ❑ Yes X-No ❑ Yes 24 No ❑ Yes INNo Go` rents;{refer,to gtiestion #): 'Explain any Y-ES an and/ar ariiv reco: mmendations or any'other commepits a _s&4' rawings of facility to better'ezplain'situations: [tire additional`pat;es as`neces`sarv) i ' .,'s � ..-=x � .:.:.-.,;..,,. • • .. ... •- y- _.... -. - .. � - .- _.. . sip _, e>.�;.. s� F 5puad",�3 Ow a-"Z. Alit, - 41� Quo, kOLD At250 Jr CAA_'Aff" OXIM25 h,71�Z_- %, ' fer a Reviewer/Inspector Name Reviewer/Inspector Signature: QL/,��..t Date: _ _57— �-- Roatine O Com laint O Follow-up of DWQ ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other Date of Inspection Facility Number 7 � Time of Inspection`:) Use 24 hr. time Farm Status: �.i h ,,,, Total Time (in hours) Spent onRevierr or inspection (ncludes travel and processing) �J Farm Name: 7.3 7_r •,, County:.,.... Owner Name: C llss, ✓C . Mailing Address: Onsite Representative:... Pbone No: Integrator: c ddZe ..... Certified Operator. GA'!iE ! - � �•tL-L -OL Operator Certification Number. Location of Farm: Latitude Longitude �•Qt �K LE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated: Type of Operation and Design Capacity Be k n ,�, Nutaber��Poultryn ry. Numberr.Nutnber Wean to feeder aLj- Layer 0 Feeder to Finish , Non- ❑ Beef F w to WeanN,t s "s11 Farrow to FeederRi ,w*rs W 9k F w to Finish -2� Other of �� �,±, ti 4' ar€- -� :�, "'.a� ,.,,-t r33:s�.. ,w.�r;��s �.��'"i�. `y xc. +y-{e:;,. k ��•�'�""�s a�.., 4 via, �;art-'°" � ti �+�.�„ Yi .:�- `�..��^ _X z. 4 �'•"' f - ''h w' "i � �•'t. � �xwf � rsr ,t6,aen� " Nnm>ier of�I:iigooas'lHoldrng Ponds 1 �_ Subsurface Drains Present° `3{ Lagoon Area Spray Field Area Ciefleral 1. Are these any buffers that need maintenanc r-improvement? 2. Is aril discharge observed from any part of the operation? a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance hum -made? - b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If -yes, notify DWt) C. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part oftbe operation? 4. Was then: 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 lagoons/bolding ponds) require mtiainteuaucelimprovement? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ Yes ENO ❑ Yes )No ❑ YesNo ❑ Yes P No E] Yes JMNo ❑ Yes 14 No 01Yes b No Continued on back 6. Is fscdity not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria? 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection afkar 1/l/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): Lagoa 1 Lagoon 2 2-0le 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./irnprovement? (if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) Lagoon 3 13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? % aste Application 14. Is there physical evidence of over application? (If in excess of VW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ) 15. Crop type 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 OnIx 20. Dues the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ;A 1. 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/iaspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge? ❑ Yes JM No ❑ Yes 14No ❑ Yes PfNo ❑ Yes ;9 No Lagoon 4 ❑ Yes ANo ❑ Yes ® No 'WYes 0 No ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ Yes a No- ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes XNO B Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes RLNo ❑ Yes Mqo ❑ Yes ;ANo M[Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes )V No ❑ Yes ONO Comments (refer.to question #) <Ex lawn arty YES answers and/or sruj+ recominconrmentso, Use dradvittg of.facritty to better eaiplasn srivattons louse addoaai p ges ase�:T<�`. IN""yam d.t /� i rri �'`� q.✓ /1/, /�'� 4 Oic r2�4��--E.J �•��� R Jos - -,4 ,l x lax% r-,V 7`( 14, Reviewer/) aspector Name jxm@ ' Reviwer/Inspectbr Signature: Date: �{; 97 _ cc-- Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Awaument Unit 11/I4/96 State of North Carollna Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources Fayetteville Regional Office James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor Jonathan B, Howes, Secretary Mr. Leslie Stutts P.O. Hon 1767 Lattriaburg, NC 28353 Dear Mr. Stuns: 1111 IDEEHNFZ DIVISION OF WATER QUAL= April 7, 1997 SURIECi`: Anmal Compliance Impaction Carroll's Food Swine Farms Region No. 78-9, 79-9, 78-11 Robeson County On April 3 & 4, 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 W the comments section on the rear of the inspection form for infmm don regarding your facility. 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 nuamgement 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) 48& 1541. Sincerely, Robert F. Heath, F.nvimnmental Specialist cc: Operations Branch Central Files Audrey Oxendine - FRO DSW Ed Holland - Robeson Co. MRCS Wachovio Building. Wte 714, Fayetteville FAX 910.486-0707 North Carolina 28301-5rM NOC An EQua! opportuNtyAf Tiative Action Employer Voice 910-486.1541 50% recycled/10% post-consurner paler F&dWy N=0w ENO GrInspecdon. LY-- !�- Time Of Inspection I 7ir IM IF -7591 Use U hr. time Farm Sftft&- GMA4EiL TOW aims on hours) Spent MRWkw lor Lwqeeftn (inckdes tr&M and process1W Farm Name: 77 Tr cmmtr- 11me No: Mailing Address: 0, DAWd.Fk ES49� OnSift Cr-'-e -C..- Carawoperamm A AZZA�k ffae:& A(Z—)f Operatm, CuOlcation Nuiubw. IAX2daD Of Farm: Latitude lAtingitude [M Not OpewflonaIZ] Date Lim Opaab& Type of Operation and Design Capacity ;A41M �ii� Ljr Wean to Feeder 774--s-- 1 Feeder to Finish Non- lAw Beef LmMLv to Me _an FF: -J� FwTow to Feeder Farrow 13 OtherType of Livestock to Finisb Subsurface Drains Present 4; ej EI _pMy R=eWAxm L&gC—*nA=MS -'.- 7 1. Are 6= my buffers that need maimen 2. b my &schmV observed fican my pm of the: opetudm? a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? b If dL%Cbwp is ob2mN44 M it mea Surface Waft%? (If yes, no* DWQ) c. If &scbwp is absevved, vim is the esdmftd flow in pllmiu? & Does d=bwp bypass a lagoon rju=? (If Yes. notify DWQ) 3. is *= "Wcnm ofpm &Scwv ftm my part oftbe aperwim? 13 Yes 9fN0 13 Yes M No . ffl%, 13 Yes )UNo E3 Yes J5N* 13 Yes No M Yes JM No 4 Was there any adverse oW to the wafers of the State other them fiam a d=bwgc? S. Does my part of the waste management system (ad= than lagoombolding ponds) require na Im — -5=Z-DVCM=O Yes No PLYes t3 No 6. D hefty not in comgiiam with any applicable m mu* abuia? _ Yes )a No 7. Did die facility far to have a certified operator in regansnft cbwp Cif won after InW)? Q Yea PC No L Are dteme lagoons or storage ponds oa site vvbirb seed to he p mpafy dosed? fl Yes K'No as sad/ r in ' 9 Is unwhaal freeboard less than adeptate? [) Yes 19 No F,eebowd (f y Lg� Z l agoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagooet a 10. 1s seepage observed from any of the saucku=7 [t Yes ANo 11. Is emsion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the ft=twes observed? E3 Yes ® No 12. Do say of the sb uce m need main ' Yes f) No (If any of questions 9-12 was answered M and the situation poses an immediate pnblk heafth or environmental threat, soft DWQ) 13. Do may of the strucums lack adquate nmat rs to identify start and slap pumping levels? Q Yes E3 No Waite &Ulication 14. Is dwre physical evidence of over apglicadon? E3 Yes M No - (If in eueu of VIW, or nmoff entering waters of the Stat-,nofify DWQ) 15. CMP type ••• �,a%O 16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? 13 Yes ® No 17. Does the facilty have a lack of adequate acreage for load applicmtiaa? © Yes 9No IS. Does the cover crop need iaapravemc t? 12 Yes Q No 19. H there a leek of available irrigation ecpapmeW 13 Yes X,No ft Off-dfied ElcO ties Ooly 20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readrly available? ❑ Yes MWO 21. Does the facility fail to comply with the AWmaf Waste Managment Plan in my vvay ? 0 Yes I[No 22. Does recozad kc9ing need improvemem7 14 Yes D No 23. Does facility require a foilaw up visit by same sgmncy ? © Yes JUNo 24. Did ReviewedbLVector fail to discuss gmawfinVectin with owner or operator in ebarge? ❑ Yes PINo Comments (refer to quespon , $Explain ashy .$ aasWers !FM ..TM==eacrtatao is or an OtheiCOMMea ,USe � ��AClll►j►.m bttt� �P� sitrratioai,�oiE ati3fiom�l�Sg�3,ffi�_ ���':+.rr� F� w � � o . - wryer. � � � • AC Al irr/j �P�✓ /t1 10/ /Q��[ do�...� /g o� 3�� �F1/ .� s�c.���/,Ev�,r.� ,�„r�i�jsc.�•-�" �° Name Signature: _ _ . Dow ._f _ L.�f7 — A:..i.Jww _Jr W-0— A..wlJw. MV s+.