780053_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quai

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of I7SWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 1/2-3-1
Facility Number �,�
�j Time of Inspection tL 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Registered [3 Certified 13 Applied for Permit E3 Permitted ! Not O crational Date Last Operated: .........................
Farm Name: l l 'n-.5 ...... 4.Q ckle°4C'.... a ! ................... County:.....(..?.a.` e'TAP, ............................................
Owner Name: ... `140.......(................. .A..�� t:? .f-....... ........... Phone No: ..............-----.......
.I......... ...................
Facility Contact:..../..v�11�'Gr Title:... 1. Gs.t�'? c .......................... Phone No:... - ...................
141ailing Address:....1��� L ... 1.�� ............................... r...M.!..ra#� e. , 71..E ................... ............-----7Z
f- �.................... ,........ z
Onsite Representative: ................................ ....... Integrator:.-.!��-Q,es,. �[.�
Certified Operator:.tt.Q,r..................`...........--........ Operator Certification Number:...-.. .............................
----
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 46 Longitude 0 A ' { G{
t wxiCae Destgtaty rreF
5vrme, Capacity Pctpilattan Poultry. CDesgnPu
C CI F ulatioa ��
Wean to Feeder
❑Layer'] Dairy
Feeder to Finish
r0l
" ❑Nan Layer � ❑Non Dairy
Farrow to Wean
_..- ^`.: .t.:.-.......-. "s _
jfa➢.���
❑Farrow to Feer
de
3..4 � � F wa .�J �.��� �k ���~� �✓��
❑Other Ar a
Farrow to Finish
p ;;TQtal DCStgn'-Ca}laCrty Sp
❑ Gilts
.
❑Soars`
;Total SSLW
Number of I:agoons /Holding Ponds ��3 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
E, 33S+p. �_ '"�' �4 k .nx, y.✓ bx k.. ... .. . ... .. ...... -- -. ............ .... ......
}
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System 4 A
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
Z. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is ubserved, what is the estimated flow in pftin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ Yes
I�No
❑ Yes
4No
❑ Yes
19 No
Continued
on back

a
Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes)4 -
No
Structures (Lagouns.Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes AO
Structure I Structure 3 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....2.'...iC...... ............Z .......................................
Freeboard(ft): .... ....................................................................................................4.............. .................................... ...................... .............
10- Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes ANo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ONo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
ari immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
14- Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ANo
(If in excess of WMP, or runJof�f entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .....e+" ` ............................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONO
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
9No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ONO
21.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Pern_utted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
No.violations or. deficiencie�n s.ere oted-during this.visiL- You.'W'iH i&ei ive inti further : -
correspQndence about this visit::::::: .
Fa .t3 �. • Y 3e. �F ,,.z.Y{�:. -'ii�A:.S ggo"im1'��¢u#,�o�,
Comb ien�s €refer.to question #) °Explain anv�' amwerS and/or,any recommerrdatrons}or any other comatenti=
M,
x Ott � •. ,
Use diii"s of factlaty to better explain situat uns. uk addititinEal piages as necessary} s
_ _ s1J7 n
. `'l�$ " !d '
;
�+`. L�kr"ea� `S.,L.3BrKi��... , S•a7 i d- -e�ot- CGr'�1` � p
4'ar", raacK "s 6et" b"I wer-k-eJ .
13 MA r-ke. rj •teed -l<a be //17.
7/25/97
T
Reviewerlinspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature-_ Date:
ri

State of North Carolina
' Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources m0fink
Fayetteville Reg€onal Off€ce
James B. Hunt, Jr„ Governor ID E H N F1
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
December 5, 1995
Mr. Anthony Locklear
Locklear Farm
Rt. 2, Box 34
Pembroke, NC 28372
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
Robeson County
Dear Mr. Locklear:
On October 19, 1995, an inspection of your animal operation was performed by the
Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office that this facility is
in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and that Animal Waste Management is being
properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact me at (910)
496-1541.
Sincerely,
Ricky Revels
Environmental Technician IV
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Buildng, Site 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention: N O
Facility No. -7 8 5 3
DIVISION OF ENVIRONhMITAL MANAGEhIFNi
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE. / O -- / 9 , 1995
Time: / 700
Farm NameJOwner: L oGk eqr Fa rAA / AAjf � L oc_K1,- v
Mailing Addreess: , 3 4 -F'�wr b ra KG 'Nc z $ 3 7 Z
County: /�
integrator: Phone:
On Site Re "amtative: w ayL L o K i v Phone: (9/0-) ,Sz/- 0709
Physical Address/Location:_ S/e �I 2E0 aft w -7/0
Type of Operation: Swine ✓" Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: SSA _Number of Animals on Site: DSO
DEW Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) (�p or No
Was any seepage observed from the iaW(s)?
Is adequate land available for spray? a or No
Crop(s) being utilized: Row Ctogs
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? ©or No
100 Feet from Wells? or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes oxQ
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes oz(&
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or® If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or®
Additional Comments: 71;,-S tau /i j 5 ITnJ C;K;S- ,,j NaM - tx�PeAyd.iAv5 peer ,hu
4t,,_+ - s re. , z r .,et
31 , 1Gr77.
Actual Freeboard:-1—Ft. O Inches
Yes or® Was any erosion observed? Yes or®
Is the cover crop adequate? Qor No
R,-, Rw as W...Z4 Ra_�
Inspector Name Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
RD Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number 3 I
Date of Inspection J/Z LL�
Time of Inspection 13� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered rt' ed © Applied for Permit ©Pernutted 13 Not Operational Da Last Operated:
Farm Name: ..... ....12�. fix' Z&Zleel t ..r County:...... ....>°r.S. ...............................
.!`!..'� y
Oumer Name: .. 1..... t t ........................... Phone No: �.... ��� .
Facility Contact:........ �0.1! ............................... Title: Phone No:
.... ............ r...--... ...............................---------•........----................
MailingAddress:._.. �.. Z �.. .... � .............. .. b....................................... l........................•------....-•
Onsite Representative:..-..Q... ............................... �... Integrator:
rator•............. f .............................................
Operator Certification Number Operator -_ .
Location of Farm:
0
'a
Latitude Longitude �• �� �"
' Design x :Current "Design CurrentDestgn Cast'
SwineN . F Capacity: Population Poultry ., Capacity.Population , Cattle x:Capacity '°;Populahoti n
❑ Wean to Feeder
Weeder to Finish
C
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
Now
❑ Non-
❑ Other ry
Total Design Capacity
` otal ssLW
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (1 f yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvcment?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
El Yes \\ No
El Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/97

Facility Number: — 3
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ANo
Structures (Lagoons.Ilolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9" Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ANo
Structure 1 Stricture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
......................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(ft): ......... ...........................I........I............... .
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance improvement? ❑ Yes �[No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes KNO
Waste Application / \
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes )�No
(If in excess of , or runoff a tering aters of the State, notify DWQ)
lly
15. Crop type . .C.W! .... Q........................ _................. ................ ............................................................... ...............................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated((( in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes WNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ANo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes KNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 0 No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewrnspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes [�No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes 'A(No
For Certified_ or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 9No
24. Were any additional problems_noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes XNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
No:vioilations.or. dericienries.were,noted-during thkvisit.-Nou:W"rill receive-ito'Airtlier.•
correspondence about this:visit::
.essaa,e,�sr � - �sa - ca., =�,. �7 :�"' �'� Explai�fatity 'YES answers antUoC Rny recommer�datrons Or as [!�' pother Cd nt5 '"-. , x s'•�,,
Ca�ttnents (refer�to �pestxon # � � , P � i fk
" as `4�w � :�"`,�,r ^y� E m� a, � Paz *-�a ,xA�4� '�'� °&�v.� - � �:�.• .,,.�'* �,c�ns e;�` �'+ '��?
iJse diravangs of faahty to t►etter eatplatuatians. (ttse acldttional;pages as`neces�a3` _�� t
Need �4 ► e&W aratj /1.0' -- s
�'Oeri -{' ^ q else A-
��� rcco rz�S
7/25/97 4
-ws^ i
Reviewer/Inspector Name o ,� kr x
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number Date of inspection
Time of Inspection ICJ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E3 Permitted E Certified © Conditionally Certified E3 Registered E3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
+.^ ............... County:......... 0 /. ..r{Q%��.............I...-- .... Farm Name: .....1.�......3^.QG�1.4�Gt.l.'........4.1r'................ � �(l1 ...................
Owner Name:..... . ............ �v� L..JC`............................... Phone No: • .... z.�...;....................................
Facility Contact: .C,J va e 1 .......................... Title: ........................ Phone No:............--..---................................
Mailing Address: ...... ..... ....... �f�JPfrta. rsl. `... .r..� ...... ........... •�..1...A.... .
..................................................
Onsite Nepresentative: ,,,,,,,.4>,t -. �•................ Integrator:
i) /� .
Certified Operator:.., ,f,-!;�.7......`..`.......1_0--e-Ae!1/..................... Operator Certification Number: ...........................................
Location of Farm:
........................................................ ....................... ............................... ........................................ ............................................ .................................... .......................
..........
Latitude Longitude �• �Ors
Design
Current . ;° ; :.::Design`-'
Current_ ' ' _
Design Current
:e
try_ Ca a
Pouli ty PoCattle ula6on elation
Capacity on _
❑ Wean to Feeder
_.' ❑ Layer
Feeder to Finish
:❑Non -Layer
FDairy
-Dairy
-
Farrow to Wean
_.
Farrow to Feeder
Rj
❑ Other
-
❑ Farrow to Finish
w
4 Total Design Capacity
❑ '
.' ❑ soars
- - :Total SSLW
si.-
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If dischargeis 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
❑ Yes 2ZNo
❑ Yes E(No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 0- No
❑ Yes 56-No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �� ��
Freeboard(inches): .........................................----................... •-- ................................... ...-----..-........................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes XNo
Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
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 maintcnance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type r�tQf N1 t.api�_ {1 ca.,t
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated 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
17. 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?
0: �'Vo •yiolaiicjris:o'r de#ieiencies were noted• during this:visit: • You will •reeeive tiro further • : • : -
coriespon�eirce about this :visit:..
❑ Yes 2kNo
❑ Yes Ig No
❑ Yes 14 No
❑ Yes 9,No
❑ Yes Xf No
❑ Yes r%No
❑ Yes UINo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes g No
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes J[ No
Cne
Yes J6W
❑ Yes 14 No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes jR No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes P-No
20. A/et?W 16 e� sal s �a= . /Uee� �ee w 4 s4c �a�ys,s e4
%c l
��da-n. ha4s A aty�ee� wtoweo� �er 5�41•
ReviewerAnspector Name-
x
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3/23/99

Div iston of Water Quality z �' ,
;. + ` x `a a F D Divesion of Soil sand }Water Conservation ` S i y , `F ; k 44
(y�q.--`-l`i:"�'"i'JS r.:y. O,�tllCl;�AenC ,?^, ; �a-{ _r'^tr"q
�: ...._, r .� =if+, . T _ -� _ - . -g _ y fiC ar- -�,- ., M Y'`r_ . �P ��t.,
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 78 53 Date of visit: ill Z2-2003 'Time: 9:30am
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: AimMmf:LarkitarEarm........................ County: Mviam ............................ ..... ERO .............
Owner Name: i�1Qt,lMay....................... l t?e eax Phone No: 52I-0-70.8.................................................
MailingAddress: lEit. .l iRx 4........................................................................-................... 1gMb.t:QkC..KC............................................. ......... 2.83.72.............
FacilityContact: ..... ............ ............................................................. Title: ................................................................ Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: ..................................................................................... ..................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ................................... ............... .................................. . ......................... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
31T Hwy. 710 and SR 1350. +
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 34 • 41 24 Longitude 79 ' 14 4 00 u
Swine
i Design Current < Design . Current Design .,_ Current
Capacity Population Poultry "Ca acity Po elation Cattle' „ ' C.462ci ' Po itlation.
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
50
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Layer I 1 ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 50
Total SSLW 70,850
Number of Lagoons , 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Holding:. .. ,
Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Int ae€s
1. Is any discharge observed f-om 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'? (lfyes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flONV in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ® Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1..................................2....-............ .
Freeboard(inches) ............... 4"..-............. ............. g............ ............ ..................... .............. ...............-... .-.............--..---..........................
OS/0 i/01 (.'nntinued

facility Number: 78-53
Date of Inspection 10-22-2003
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6, Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Analication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding []PAN []Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
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, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to gpestion #) Explatn'atiy PIES ansNees`and/or any recommendations or any, other comments
Use drawings of faciEitj to belter,explain situations: (use additional {rages as necessary): ®Field Copy ❑Final Notes
arm visited as result of referral from SWCS. The most important problem was the lagoon levels. The marker was covered at the time of
inspection so staff shot the level and it was approximately at 9 inches. This is in the structural portion of the lagoon storage and constitue
emergency. Larry Baxley spoke with the owners father at the time of inspection as the owner, Anthony Locklear, was unavailable.
Problems included the lagoon level. 7# The lagoon banks are overgrown and should be mowed. 8# The irrigation field pipe was damage
during the hay harvest and needs to be repaired. Irrigation was impossible at the time of inspection. Note: The wet area behind the
lagoons has water to the toe of the dike and it is a dry period. Vegetative growth is thick and prevents through inspection. The records or
WUP were not available at inspection due to Mr. Locklears absence. Lary Baxley spoke with Anthony Locklear and explained the need
o communicate I oon levels each day as well as other events such as spraying, repairs, WUP requirements.
+
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Larry Baxley Danny Edwards.:.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

�S/U3/UI continued
Facility Number: 78-53 pate of Inspection 10-22-2003
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 ❑ 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 ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments.and/or Drawings , f ,V0.r: s 3, 1 , 3 t z• °w-s �, y.
SWCS employee Danny Edwards did see Mr. Lockleais records and reported no waste sample had been taken since the 2002 AL
irrigation year.
J

Type of Vieft Q Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit dRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notificaitim 0 Other Denied Access
Date of Visit: Time:E=
Facility Number 310 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
#—Permitted [3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold.
Farm Name: re-
'ft
. ... ........ ........ County: ......V
Owner Name:...... f . . ..... . .. . ...... . ........ Phone No: ...... . ..
FacilityContact: .. . ....... .. . ............. ................. . ..... Title: ....... . ............................ ' ..................... . Phone No: ........... .......
Mailing Address: ... .... . .......................................... ..... ro A . ......
Onsite Representative: .................... .. . . ..................... . ............... Integrator: ................. .....
Certified Operator: ..... .. ..........................................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
0 Swine 0 Poultry 0 Cattle 0 Horse Latitude 6 46 Longitude A Du
Pe4p I Xliii;rAt-Design VDesi Current
Ciij*fty
Population
e Null e
cipalcity - . try cl popnlition� _ ,
Wean to Feeder
to r
W5
Feeder to I
Feeder to Finish
F
Farrow ow to
arrow to Wean
ow to
Farrow to Feeder
2- 0
Farrow to Finish
E3 Gilts
El Boars
.10 Layer [.. 10 Dairy�
10 Non -Layer I ❑ Non -Dairy I
F
10 Other I I
Total Design ,.Capacity c
Total SSLW
ri Subsurface Drains
Nii" of Lagcopns
Subs Present 1p Lagoon Area TO Spray Field Area
Holder 'Ponds /.So1i&Traps .10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 YesNo
Discharge originated at: [] Lagoon [] Spray Field 0 Other �(
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin9
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? [I Spillway ❑ Yes kNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .................................... .................................... ................................... .................................... .................................... ........................ . . ........
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: -7 — S Date of Inspection Z —O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6:.Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence ofpver application? . ❑ ExcessivePonding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type c j' �!
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designa 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
17. 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?
V:N.
.*iormioW:er d fcienc{e iv re note 000xthis:visit; • Y;op will-tee-iye Rio tiuttho
corses ' -deice: ab4ui this visit_
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes TNO
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes tNoo
❑ Yeso
❑ Yeso
❑ Yes
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes A'No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes U(No
❑ Yes ANo
KYes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
�Gj. N� � IA�fta�' Mar w��-- s�,T d� s �,l�uaj�•; axe. +
ems. ! tc.l►c� 1 S e c.3 Q�; f Al L76
d 4mr a s o%s: f kq.4) 61C.
-� Kr, t* a o_k legs- 46 - [ o tc
` I +� I
4ar,� lla,,ks- A � � ►`t.6zse.ai 1g-K--- 6ci�S,��-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date; Az--L7—�% Ve 5100

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection D
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 N0
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes R§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 KNo
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 )0 No
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? �es ❑ No
r-AddUpone :> C ..ntnents ae. or ravings:. - _.. _ — g Y .
5100

a # r T O. visiOA Of 5or7 and WateF Conservatson a f.� + c % z� R
�+ �� �. � 3 � ,..� _ � x � O ,Other Agency = �, � � • -�' � � r__, � F-� � �, '� r � � �;::rr
Type of Visit g Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit WRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number s'3 Date of Visit: Time: `� Printed on: 10/26/2000
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
XPermitted 0 Certified © Cond
itionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ........................
Farm Name: ....�•..Q!�...1�.}......:..nG: ..�ea.r..�e' ..... County:_.(jLES41-..............................
t Y} / I
Owner Name:....... [� ot! .......G.....de/fA.r........................... Phone No:.........�z�....�-7D......•....--•••••-.................
Facility Contact: ........... ,(.Q n.e..r.. .......Title• Phone No: .
Mading Address:....... 2 (1 ....�,1 . �rrtf?!'plL.�.. ��.- ��3.......2,
7-, 1;....� ._. .. •.....
Onsite Representative: ..................&W-�...... Integrator :.................... �. d ..............................................
/ ............. ........................
Certified Operator: ... A,A. •, .C:......... � o..<.�1.t.a r_•.......... Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
.... ......
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 6 16 Longitude • 4 44
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity I J-D
Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area '
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Mar
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Stater (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/tnin''
d. Docs 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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes )kfNo
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes �Pd0
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
Continued on back

Facility Number: 7- Date of Inspection 17-6-17DJ Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ YesN0
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes a No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 9Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes $-No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑YesNL
Io
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ANo
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Exc79,e
ve Ponding ❑ PAN [IHydraulic Overload [IYes �To
12. Crop typeLQ eYS��'ol
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desig a d in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ YesV
o14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yeso
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? 0-Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 4No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
"No
'
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
I
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
O(No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
IFN0
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
VNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
n No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
gNo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ANo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
Nld-yiglaioris'oi- deficie djae -w're po(ea- during �itis;visit; - ;Y:oit iviil•reb ire fio furtht ....
cor'resporidence* ahaut: this :visit:
Continents -(refer to question`#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recoiiimendations'or any other comVnents
Use drawin- of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages asmecessary)-
Mew
J l
Ned � 7Je lt� o5il rcs k P I� A f 'JtrJS : w `7
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: __ Date: 7_ f -d V 5100

Facility Number: 7 $ — j Date of inspection ® Printed on: 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray.system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
,Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes T 0
❑ Yes T 0
❑ Yes 0�o
❑ Yes TO
❑ Yes ✓�
❑ Yes ❑ No
o ,. omments an orDrawings:
J
5100

O Division of Soil and Water,Conservataan
O'ii{Qerr Aeney _,,y+r�
r
4
Type of Visit} Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit WRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date, of Visit: '�-'rime;
Facility Number Q
� �/� Printed on: 1012612000
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
,
©Permitted 0 Certified Q Condidonallly Certified Registered
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold-
[3
Farm Name:.... 04 o.......�..L}� 1�....��l.�L'.,l ���f !>!t.....................
Coanty:..... ..�t��s .............................................
Owner Name:....... L ./n...f`..... ...................
1�.......... .
Phone No: ......... ...�z%. ...0 7..R.....................................
r
...r...................................... Title:..........
Facility Contact: .........��.
................................. Phone No: �-^�
jj.LJ_I.n
Mailing Address: ...---..........2... s�....... Fes--• ............... ..........................................
---�o r . %e.... lU C ---- Z 3....... �_!ls!t_ .......... ............
Onsite Representative: ............. ....................................
Integrator:..............._....:......................................... 0
L
Certified Operator:... C;,,,, ,,,...iC„1�...............
Operator Certification Number:...............---------..................
Location of Farm:
• ' •� ��``�,7• ',
❑ Swine ❑Poultry ❑ ❑ Latitude Longitude
Cattle Horse 0 � � F
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity_population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
JE1 Other
© Farrow to Finishn
I
Total Design Capacity
d
Gilts
❑ Boars
I
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream IImpact5
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance than -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 galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Spray
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
❑ Yes Mj o
1k
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes Ia No
4
❑ Yes ,[� No
El Yes � \gNo
❑ Yes 5jrNo
❑ Yes iO No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
Continued on back

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 7 G,- Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes k(No
seepage, etc.) �i
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an `
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings'?
Waste Application
10.__Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
1 I- 'Is there evidence of over application'? f ❑ ExecTg,op
•e PPonding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type POOV `7n.4 t a A el LI ON— /111e ►e i &44
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desigdatdd 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
17. 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?
PElYes ❑ No
❑ Yes )QNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes �LNo
❑ Yes ©`No
�I
❑ Yes f( �No
❑ Yes +QNo
❑ YesNo
0-Yes ❑ No
i
❑ Yes] No.
❑ Yes P 1Vo
❑ Yes qNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes yqNo
❑ Yes R,
No
❑ Yes iJ No
❑ Yes / \.d.No
0: Rio-yiolatigris:o deficiencies d&ifig �bis;visit; - Y;ou will-t&a60y be futft ;
roriesporidence. about this vitsi.: .. _ _
Comunents{refer to.'q tion #).. Ezplain;any YES answers and/or any recommemdation's.orl" ' oii it comments
_. -
Use drawtngs,of facility to better explaini situations: (use additional .pages as necessary)
7 Nee) 7a Mew f rowA 0rOtv3-,J / cj rsa•'.- -
4, WOT45 5P+a7 �;e
ReviewerAnspector Name
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Date:
5/00

Facility Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor 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
RNO
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
t 0
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
1
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
[010
�� ll
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
j1No
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
l
PNQ
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
do Comments 'an or: rawingse- - _
5100

S
I ype of visit: t:� Compliance inspection V Vperatlon Review V structure Evaivation U l ecnmcal Assistance
Reason for Visit: eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 45 Arrival Time: 101136 Departure Time: County: Rab&wrJ Region: FRO
Farm Name: PTAANyn n�,f I.pGK��{ (� rARr/� Owner Email:
Owner Name: N� l-,p C,K ` �� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current Design Current
S e
Capae�ty Pop}
Wet Poultry
Capacity. Pop
Cattie Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
a
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
4
�)I
Design
Current ..;
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
D Cow
to Finish
to Wean
to Feeder
Dry P,oW
Layers
Non -Layers
Ca achy
Po P.
Non -Da
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
to Finish
LtBoars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
& -
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharr-es and Stream Imoacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a- Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [:]No
[:]Yes [—]No
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: -1 - S'S jDate of Inspection: J0 71 1
Waste Collection & Treatment
4_ Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA 0 NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes [] No
[:]Yes [—]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: p
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
[]Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No [DNA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency'? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�to ar any additional recommendations or any other comments.
llse drawm s, ofjfacility to better expl_a#i situationst{uses dditional pages as necessary,).
�E r�bah A,itiP- Cj0,1,:= -�a ti,aS 9 owneR. C_6,A +uor be
C.o* k A CA-e-0 • k. r6 bT-_Zf'-
AJM;� a J We_ -�r47 11111,)OL3 br �L,S�'chn-e1'er a �PaTf 3 a�reu h1"hrfii�
l�c[o I:I tht� We a, Co, G!_S, he arM c��•lfiJhiP is n J
la9oaq M -h at iO,
- on 4Y-etr'l LockhOof aSo 6x'9'dyf e
Zbrok,e ltrc a837�
��'ch� L bwi9 hf rock elz PO Box sty l-a,d is
3-- del , Payv.Saja_Loc0e -_Sane addrejf or
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: Ctto-'5M-LO%S1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date: _ Vb Ir s i '-X
21412011

S.
Type of Visit
ompliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
outine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: -Qn/9� /O Arrival Time: ;rya r,.� Departure Time: 3; �S" County: A010eso�y Region:
Farm Name: 14NI zt ON " '4r1c.k1eg Y f 4 ��+�► Owner Email:
Owner Name: Dn! z, 1-ocklec. Y _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: dM/11 d A L, L aCk l « Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: integrator: „ _271kj Je.4
Certified Operator: AA; �14U n::4 ZOaCb� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = s = Longitude: El 0 0 ' = U
. . I ...1
Design Current
rrent
WCapaci! Cu-....
Design
Current
ine Capacity Population
Wet PoulPopulation
Fettle Capacity
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
" :``-' ° "`
Dty Poultry
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
/
=
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Non-DaiTy
❑ Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish s'Q
❑ Gilts
El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
_
❑Turke s
Other
❑Turke Poults
ther
Number of Structures:
❑ 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)
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 - Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
['I 1A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
E+<A
❑ NE
L_I'NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
El No
El Yes
[INA
ElNE
❑ Yes
,D-Koo
L9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes Q446� NA ❑ NE
Structure Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2 u
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑'iq❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
ET 0�❑ 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
[}N-o--❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes[]
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
3'N-5— ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ Igo ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes G++a� 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)r d lf� h� S l� �o �i'u �D • S . J
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
El NA
El NE
ElJ Yes
,--igoo
f No
El NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes 0`N-o—❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes O' ol�❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [IN—O—❑ NA ❑ NE
Nam !emu or fn//a S/ Se y4r a-1 yea r S Nd SP�"'`j�"j l.c� s e tr'c. pied, el •t y!o /a N�...4.✓
O T+ G t 6j S SY�7 G�-Q �! � `�'�a . S Y`�* i'... �, � - � -� ► S t� u G
Reviewer/Inspector Name G A .�S Phone: 910, y33 , 3 3 O O
OW
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:O
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 7—,53 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19_ Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑'Ko' ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0�<o_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
8-NT—❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
3-N6— ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0-957 ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ETwo-- ❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
©"I�o NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
[:1 Yes
[T 5—E] NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[..��}cr [I NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
BIZ�❑ 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
B<o_ ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
L71vo ❑ 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
B-55~ ❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑"IQo 0 NA
❑ NE
AddiiioIIal Coinmenls"atid/or DCSWin s r �4 irx 1wr s r
r.
IfGS4' ( j/CGI� 07' /NSlec414-y.s //6 SPY��in� waC 4eccle.Q/
butQ
dui Ve`7 /o" ,vu�c�►- o� tiogs tc�Sr� d
OW
t
-4044 +
p GaGk ,j 2oD1 1eL �d tit',-.-�cO 7 Ssw ca+�t
t-
,f+f►af
!A'
4�kJJS ��,/W+'�Lt.UFYfwiJ I tit T i/T Q�SG fl'JrwS/P �//7 �I �r..a i% Llt 5 OcCUI+'�� t�cY
CIO
Lj /aYj�' N.�p+v o7 le. v SSS Rddi�4'bh/FC
vJ a.S
�'
/ S j,(crk
LS//°S �D 5� � =� o./.r ��y S, `� waS
!It y�v7+-S� r j f{N;Ai'LlEl.vrlL �+P4/ie.j�-t .���s'tir� •}`.!is`jpr.,. on1 L% Z�?U/D . .mac I u- 37�itia�
y '� Yn�w.w Nc�✓e:� P�otls 4o k.vIr- w—.-C i�nif- 10-20 Se-S or /J'o wfert qA&I-
/Ncf b� N�e�.a �� W ,k. NG rcca
Z`V9 XOys 41it D \)
�+G / /� < rJ+'��%r�C-�C �o /►+C <1�r`Cer� �C;J[S/ Onl
Page 3 of 3 12128104

TA
- ,: ('� ivision of Water Quality
Facility Number 7ff ELS3 O Division of Soil and Water Co11
nservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit &G-rnpliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit a Flo-utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 -2Y-9 Arrh-al Time: `/t%ss a.r Departure Time: S: 3a w.. County: AGe-ran Region: F.QB
Farm Name: AA14Ajz,,tr Z. c�c r 0 Owner Email:
Owner Name: v A G N �APhone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Facility Contact: AN ekh Lo c-k4`, Title: d[.aPhone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: -X�rJie!E±
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number -
Back -up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑4 F--T = it Longitude: = o = t = u
Design
Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine C►apacity
Population Wet Poultry
CTpMe i KE ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dai Cow
I ❑ Daia Calf
'" * ❑ Daia Heifer
❑ Da Cow
❑ Non-Dai Ey
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE1 Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to finish
Dry Poultry
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
arrow to Finish
Sv
El Layers
/
❑ Beef -Stocker
❑Gilts
Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
El Pullets
❑ Boars
�:T
❑Beef Brood Cow
❑Turke ys
Other
;
❑ Turkey Poults
Number of Structures: EE
❑ Other
❑Other
Dischar es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
L7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
El"NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ol'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
D-5o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
D<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
BNo
❑ 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
Ej`N­o
❑ NA [I NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes
,j,
L�'o--
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
Io
❑ 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
Oro
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[--]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs []Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application of Area
Outside
12. Crop type(s) 9"41' a /,— (Y.!7 Sd �r 4�` (✓u :.� ct �'s ✓.Sc t_�(
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o
[3,[2 NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
[3 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
NN-
El NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El yes
f�
EKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0<.
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name s G .: e'fs T a Phone: Wo. V33. 333 yl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3
Page 2 of 5 12/25/W continues

Facility Number: Ty — S,3 Date of Inspection 13 -219' -,Oq
Required Records & Documents �
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes B ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0`11o' ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
D ❑ 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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
G o ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NNoo El NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElG Yes
,
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
tom❑ NA
El NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
El Yes
3<0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E Now❑
NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
L�<0 ❑ 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
EJ-11
❑ 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
�,
Ehlo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
����
Dllo
❑ NA
ElNE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
Ehgo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/orljrrawings:
a
Page 3 of 3 12128104

STALL 4—P.y Ile-rc_ of V/a Z/o B
Di,%ision of Water Quality
Facility Number M
���
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of VisitCommp�pliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit a Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: �.`�1d County: RMC.So/✓ Region: A/�'
Farm Name:NY�tauu
Owner Name: kvAaaV La
Mailing. Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: ft^f 44o a u Title: d w K Phone No:
Onsite Representative: integrator: 1raiW1,11<14y
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: Elo = ` = u Longitude: ❑ O ❑ , ❑ «
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
10 Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ICR Farrow to Finish 30
❑ Gilts
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Nan -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: a
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge'?
❑ Yes [f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
�2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12178104 Continued

- " C92 -jZ -0
Facility Number: 7 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
21 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
[2rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): , j n t t
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
[21 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
0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
1� 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
Fj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
P] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
P6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: %/©, �e. , 330a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
121281042, /Z _Continued
2-c-'p F

Z^ I?,-OT
« 4
Facility Number: 7
S —,S3 Date of Inspection
Reuuired 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 CA No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers '0 Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections 0 Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[,0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
FV1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
00 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[;?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 ratcs that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[37No
❑ 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
0No
❑ 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
(N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawines:
12128104

Facility Number
0 Division of Water Quality
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 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Si d0 Departure Time: t'p: UO County: 46eS0n/ Region:
Farm Name: Q nr44e wrh Lo c_kl Pa , Owner Email:
Owner Name: A"-tko_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite-Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o ❑ 1 = Longitude: = ° = 1 = u
. Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I� ❑ Non -La er
1 _
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: " ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current I
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockei
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
I
❑ Yes q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[59 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ Yes
V3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 78 S3
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
[I NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 Q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
� No
El NA [I NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
91 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11 _ Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[INo
❑ NA El 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 oaf/Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside
of Area
r❑
12. Crop type(s) 'e�Q.y,-kd
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
�Vo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Rho
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
AL
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name P11ey-i Phone: �IYO, f 33 - 333e7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: a"j-1_ Date:
12128104 Continued

f_19—O34-
Facility Number: 7 $ - 5 j Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropiate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design ❑Maps El Other
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 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes V] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [51 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
(P 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
® 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
V 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
91 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
91 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Type of Visit OCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
DateofVisit: Z'z%-O(o Arrival.Time: �3� Departure Time: County: Aw Region: Aeo
Farm Name: CAJa ^ram �� �� r Owner Email:
Owner Name: Az,4-1 3. L af-k Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact- Title:
Onsite Representative: "6"Lf or/ o
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator: �iV�1 r���d�2-4
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = O = 1 =" Longitude: = ° = I = "
Dsign Current
me"Population Wet PodltyA Capacity Population)
�
Cep b "
Design CurrentCapacity
C.city Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑
DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La et
❑
DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
�' '
" •`
Dry Poultry.
❑
DairyHeifei
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑
D Cow
Qj Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑
Non -Dairy
❑Lavers
❑
Beef 5tockei
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other. #
❑Beef
Feeder
El Pullets
❑
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turkeys
`>u❑
be_ r�of�Struetures:
❑Turkey Pouets
IL
Other
❑Other
Disci & 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 ves, 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
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CyNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
I;RrNo
❑ Yes
[)_�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
•
L .
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 78 — Date of inspection 2-Z -aCv
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[,YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
El Yes
[SiNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2
5. .Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
U§No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
[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
[j No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[yNo
❑ 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
TV No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application,
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
$No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[>(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑`E/vidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of
Area
12. Crop type(s) _ How... / S*,g// jo ' i /V 0yeA-
/
-C d
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer'to question ft - Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations oranp other comments.
Use drawings of faeitity to better_eaplain situations. (use additionalypages:as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name [ ewef Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: — Z — Z 7 ZCV4o
IZlYS/U4 c.onnnuea

Facility Number: 7—�� Date of Inspection Z-Zy` t,
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes `9i No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes C4No ❑ 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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23, if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes q'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
FNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
N] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
N 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"23'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Coinments�,aadlor.-Drawings: .._,t_ ,��,
12128104

k.:
Type of Visit ! Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other © Denied Access
Date of Visit: /d Dq Tune: /.' D D
Facility Number g S3
O Not rational O Below Threshold
13 Permitted Q Certified. © Condi�tionaIly Certified E3 Registered Date -Last Operated or Above Threshold-
Farm Name: �!t �.— .+� �ec v FQ �- r., County: .—•• �e n.�/ .�....__._ Fi�
cG�L
Owner Name- � {-� 1 Phone No:
M[aiiling Address: _ 1Q, 0 LrQY 18 7A
Facility Contact: '' JJ Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _• •*!7�0• _ v integrator:... `' X�� k'—
Certified Operator: �� p Operator Certification Number.
�,c ...
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Pouttry ❑ Cattle © Horse Latitude ' it Longitude • it
Discharges & Stream jM cts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [I No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [] Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? 14 /'xj
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 19 No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6
Coniknued

Facility Number: '7Y — 53 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Cie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
0 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 maintenancefrmprovement?
Qj Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
14 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
16 No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanoerimprovement?
❑ Yes
[X No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crops �e� u�� ifr S o/% G. �.".. a v�_rs
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
qj No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor 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 `P 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 J, No
Air Quality representative immediately.

Facility Nnmber: '7 _ �53 Date of Inspection
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes (Z No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes t4 No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. aYes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard CZWaste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes [ No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes J No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes 1p No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/mspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes R No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes 9 No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes 9 No
NI MES Permitted FacHities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes % No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112/03

;D1V1Sian
` of Water�
t�£ �'}'-•� a,� '_..-n r- y 7� r. � h t � a ak'S-r - 3SE�w r A k l .� H t•�
'�,la'�' t °t n. ,y�' r a',' sar5•t •,Yw " a: r: rr�, .!} x.1- ,"i$ _•fit ' xn-=rt .d a; ). a} A e if a'T 'rr _ r
D1V1S1a11 6 o[Soil and-WatergCanservatlon•r
v -• h� e F A tifit Z �� 7
`+' l #�c h F- S - + r' •'-,,,w Q.Other
Type of Visit *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
Facility Number 7$ 53 Date of Visit: 10.22-Z003 Time: 9:30am
—,... �..r.... Q Not Operational Q Belnw Threshold
Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: A.skit.tnJ.LQcjkleau..E.arM........................................................................... County: I&Qlbesaja ............................................ FRO .............
Owner Name: Ajlihiony................................. Log1c]tear..................................................... Phone No: MAIM ........... ...........................
MailingAddress: Rt. .BQtc............................................................................................. P�uakl�s,lt�..1Y...................................................... 2.83.72 .............
Facility Contact: ........'Title:................................. ............................... Pbone No: --------
OnsiteRepresentative: .......................... . ............................................................................... Integrator: .......... ................................
Certified Operator: ... ............................................... ......................_............................ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
3ff Hwy. 710 and SR 1350.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 1 34 • 41 24 u Longitude 79 • 14 ' 00 u
M
Desigirl
Swine r9�9�tt
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
® Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Current Design Currenf Design ` Current
o ulation Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 50
Total SSLW 70,850
'Number of Lagoon's 2 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps:. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
s
Discharges & Stream lmnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. v,,as 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?
50
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than kom a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (keeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ® Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) ............... g"............... ............... !L............... ............. ...._................ ......... I ............... .------------ ----------------------------------- ....................................
05/03/01 Cantinund

acility Number: 78753
Date ofInspection 10-22-2003
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?
(1f any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any butlers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
------------
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Pen -nit 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/tnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
4 a,
Comments (refer to 3q eestion #) ;Explain any YES answers;and/or;any.,recommenddeints
aons or any other,on
iJse drawings o.t 66hty to better explain situations '{use additional pages -as necessary) c 5 ® Field Copy ❑Final Notes
k�- ,
Farm visited as result of referral from SWCS. The most important problem was the lagoon levels. The marker was covered at the time of
inspection so staffshot the level and it was approximately at 9 inches- This is in the structural portion of the lagoon storage and constitue
an emergency. Larry Baxley spoke with the owners father at the time of inspection as the owner, Anthony Locklear, was unavailable.
Problems included the lagoon level. 7# The lagoon banks are overgrown and should be mowed- 8# The irrigation field pipe was damage
during the hay harvest and needs to be repaired. Irrigation was impossible at the time of inspection. Note: The wet area behind the
lagoons has water to the toe of the dike and it is a dry period. Vegetative growth is thick and prevents through inspection. The records or
WUP were not available at inspection due to Mr. Lockiears absence. Larry Baxley spoke with Anthony Locklear and explained the need
o communicate lagoon levels each day as well as other events such asspraying, repairs, WUP re uirements.
er/inspector Name Larry Baxley,.,,Danny Edwards,er/lnspector
E
Signature: Date:

US/U3/UI Continued
Facility Number: 78-53 Date of inspection IO-22-2003
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
❑ 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
❑ 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
IrAdditionai'. omments and/or VrawingS:' r cs �
WCS employee Danny Edwards did see Mr. Locklears records and reported no waste sample had been taken since the 2002
rigation year.