780081_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULiNA
Department of Environmental Qual

1 f
Division of Water Resources
Facility Number ®- a Division of Soiland Water Conservation
© Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other
�� 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: q� Arrival Time: �o Departure Time: County:/"'1+
Farm Name:uB+rlr� �E L(-C Owner Email:
Owner Name: /7aCeths Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: L}'Ivo ke4 h e 4 Title:
Onsite Representative: If
Certified Operator:
Region;
Phone: /
Integrator:���L�
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
La er
Non -La er
La ers
Non -La ers
Design
Capacity
Design
itymRow
Current
Pop.
Current
Cattle
airy Cow
Dai Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Pullets
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2_ Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes rM No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[—]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
M NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date or Inspection: rJ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 1
TfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No PNA ❑NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 2
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 �l
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 1P
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 Avolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [] Yes No [DNA ❑ 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 /❑'? �Ev71,
Jof Wind Drift /❑j Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): STi�I Yam✓ �1'2$ /, l�'f` • (9�1� t--
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
T
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes N
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes] No
[] NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
El Sludge Survey
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes P
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 0
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes [M No [DNA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
T`
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
E� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
afions or
( 9 # xptain an WE5 answers and/or an additional reco any other comments�`�� ;
wines of facil>itr to better.,exulainasitusti6ns (use additional ua::ei as necessarv)mmen
liNe ra ... a
s
E
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q10 -g- —39y
Date: 2/ f sjJ�
214,12015

iype or visa: w i:ompuance inspection v uperatiun meview t j arructure Evamanon C1 i ecunicai .akssistance I
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine a Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: yr County: P496mr) Region: r
Farm Name: uC P-rh ir7 Owner Email:
Owner Name: ruC _ I`n Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &,,10(1e_MnC4Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
I La er
113airy Cow
Dairy Calf
Wean to Feeder
I jNon-Layer
I
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,oul
Ca aci
IPo
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
_ &W,',, :
PoultsOther
LEurke
ther
_Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
❑ Yes 'EA No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[:]No
[P NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
[] Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412015 Continued

t
FaciliNumber: - Date of Ins ection: !
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? [:]Yes � No NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 StruX 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 T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
s T
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes C!pNo
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0 No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes '�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

•Faciff Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
E] Yes
�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
}
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
CP No
[] NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
�3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer any additional recoations or.any other comments"
1Jse drawing of facility to�better. explain si#uationss(use, addmonal pa es -as necessary)sz'
i4- v Gnu d,
Reece -- A is �•� �,,� -J�
� L
pn
q C�
611 Megse S
• G►�{� r a c ��.b H cow —��� 0 :��A _`
j- D ,�f l �
' (;AV'1 YIQs i S C og S' 'hj Pon 0-7_7�4� C'4"':z 5 D'1(..�✓ �,,.�,sl
f aW61,1-
/ 116YD 4-1 j j4
No
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
-7/19
Q�lL�n n1 C_
Phone:
Date:
21412015

Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other
11,,�� 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: � County: %*1J8Region: 'g =
Farm Name: _ bit wr-y? r6L,py, 5 4LC
Owner Name: A�y2tc_e clay
Mailing Address:
Owner Email.:
Phone:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: r Title: Phone:
c
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Longitude:
Design C•nrren# Design Current
ine Capacity Pop. Wet Pointry CapacityCapacity11W601%,
Wean to Finish La er
Design
Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
n Curren#
D . I;ault , i P,o ,
Willi
La ers
Da' Heifer
Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Imaacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No `6 NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes P No DNA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 6
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Po ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No 6 NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes P] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
{not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes F)No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? Ifyes, 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 W' Drift ❑ Application
OOnutside of Approved
Area
AwW 12. Crop Type(s): ��[c- L
/( CYO
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes 1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes Q9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes No
1P
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard El Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste T fers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22_ Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes f�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes E] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 oj3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Ins ection: /6"
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
1�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft IMExpiam ariy YES,ansvicers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments: z
Use drawings of facility t "bbetter explain situations (use.additional pages as necessary). �.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q/D`���
Date:
21412015

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z /S Arrival Time: Q ,' Departure Time: p ; County: /20616-� Region: Fko
Farm Name: 6,4440yJ, r Owner Email:
Owner Name: CJf u tC 4 r YU Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: U" . o Title: Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: W Integrator: lvty"'�D��i4oC.w�
Certified Operator: W[ (�U 7)a J-w Certification Number: (Q5 -12
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design C►urrent
Design
Current
Design Current
Swipe
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pap.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dai Caw
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
I I
IDai
Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dai Heifer
)iall'arrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , Pout
Ca aei
Po ,
Non -Da'
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
5 IM JIM-
Turkeys
Other Wes_
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream lm acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No &g NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [:]No [n NA ❑ NF
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
rp No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

• Facfliiy Number: Or- 91 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
M No
DNA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
[] NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 113
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
EP 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 T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes IM No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidenc�%of Wind Drift_ ❑ A lication Outside of A roved Area
CMd12. Crop Type(s): , �"at T 4
13. Soil Type(s): /Vg { �/_/ 6vt ds&m t Z'
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
1, - I W.=' J M
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
J�g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
5a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes `P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E� No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ® No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [�j No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
[]NA ❑NE
[DNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

pFacilityNumber: - jDate of Inspection: & i
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M 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
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 file drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes Ej� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question'#f):.-Explain any :YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any: other conxrnei s r
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary): s.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 9ro`Y3 3�33ca
Date:
21412014

Type of Visit: 4R Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: OOE Arrival Time: I /ofi lD4w I Departure Time: County: 8 K)._j Region: F;�
Farm Name _p1 { [, ,+r��� S LU Owner Email:
Owner Name: T�r�ICP r��;jam Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: cc,. Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: —PA`f t e5
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
integrator:
Certification Number: ) S b 7?-
Certification Number:
Longitude:
NW,-ft, Design C gurrent
Pop.
Wet Poultry
Design'
Capacity
Current
Pop.
DesiCapacity
tattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Dat Calf
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Of3p
` '
Design Current
D , P,oul Ca aci Po
Layers
Dat Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? [—]Yes ❑ No �721 NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No P NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No RNA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: 7 J
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes �❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
EjjrNo
❑ 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
Wo
❑ 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 or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop
�Window 1 /❑�,,,Evidencc'eJoof Wind Driift❑Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): L�RS ( 9� 1k EA 61 qs S t--f f' , A44---e3, _nc - v W5&.Inl
13. Soil Type(s):
S
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15_ Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes W
No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Trdnsfers
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? C] Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 21412011 Condnued

rJ
4
IFacibty Number: 79- Date of Inspection: •z Iq
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 T� 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [] No
[:]Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? [:]Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question_#): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any -other comments. r
Use drawings of facility to. better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name: YOL+� Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: _ - - Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 Arrival Time: Departure Time: p.' County: Region: Ee:2
Farm Name 4�A&—ti ✓� U—C Owner Email:
Owner Name: LtCC_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: cz.-o � ►, PpGti
Certified Operator: k
Back-up Operator: (�" i rljQ�., �Ci✓ r�s
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
I� Desr Cures' en`t Des' C
gn agn �grrent
Swims Capacity l'op ry Wet Poultry Capaci#y Popes
Design Gnrrent
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DairyCow
DairyCalf
DairyHeifer
Wean to Finish
La er
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Feeder to Finish
� p l Y
Design Current
D . P,ou! Ca .aci Po
Layers
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
p
Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars
I
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turkeys
-Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream ImD8et5
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[:]No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[:)No
NA]
NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

T.
/Facility Number:�J Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No f NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
09 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
j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
TT
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Eviden f Wind Drift Application Outside
wof^Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): QSL t q �SS 5A4, �- LOK44 r
13. Soil Type(s): Or f�OtIJ�6Y� 1__
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
rR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ l 20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes IP No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

- Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: 2A
3
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
[DNA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes Ep No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes [a No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No
CF
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes [g No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes �] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes rM No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations_ or any.other commentsst �
Use drawings or facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). '-
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ilo�Yg3 33�
Date:
W F
21412011

type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 7t30 Departure Time: �q County: �a�if Snn! Region: FM
Farm Name: )uCk )NU Rn EA mr'3 L,_C Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ru '�AU4!JP.r�3' _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: G? r4.0 Title: `f P-Ch S D EC. Phone:
OnsiteRepresentative: E)pt..L Integrator: InttR�U��t ZRaWrj
Certified Operator: iJ�TI%f4l t 0AUT_s Certification Number: r � (9-7 1
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Desigtx C►urrent Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. We# Poultry Crap ty Pap.
re Capacity Pop.
L,
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
jNon-Layu
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish'"
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean �Qv
,I3
ign Current
W
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
PRNon-La
D , Ptoaci P,o .
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Outer
Turke Pouets
OtherI
10thCT
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
[:]No
®NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
® NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes [—]No
[—]Yes M No
❑ Yes E� No
® NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

1
Facili Number: —1 - Otj jDate of Inspection: LAJQ�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: 1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 19
Observed Freeboard (in): �� Q
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
[M 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): )'-DmMvAa Ok cie'r LCA S-G- G'
13. Soil Type(s): Co
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[:)Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[:]Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
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 [I Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis [] Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [—]Yes ®No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [-]Yes [—]No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA []NE
NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility umber: —? - C) I Date of inspection: U1 ate K 1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Q0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes r1l 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? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
r" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[AJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or anyrother:comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). "`;
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: Q lQ • - l0 5 1
Date: U a\ i a
21412011

81111-46 46111 l 11r
Type of Visit: (!Mompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation C) Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: WDeparture Time: IA4 f County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Jr /�S Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: 6408L.Phone:
Onsite Representative: .::5n hAj __ Integrator: M- 3
f.,
Certified Operator: WL It 1CL1�. S Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
w
Design Current Desigaffn YCurrent-
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry CapaciR. A�
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
ILayer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I Non La er
,
Daia Calf
Dai Heifer
D Cow
Feeder toFinish
:..
��:�,,,
FbDesiFpiCurrent
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
D , Poui a actl?o „"
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
- - = Turkeys
Other Turkey Pouets
Other Other
Discharges and Stream Imo cts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[—]Yes
[:]No
NSA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
•
MI IA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
[:]Yes
[:]No
A
[:]NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
[:]NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciti Number: - Q Date of inspection: Q
Wastd Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes fo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No Lll< ❑ 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
<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
li«doKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
L204
❑ 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
g3-Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[—]Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
J; l<o
❑ 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):
�d
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ om those d ignated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
/
E3'110
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
B10
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E20'Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
/
EK0
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑'�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes UrT'��
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
[:]Yes [ to
❑ 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 000'
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections 0 Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[—]Yes l+s o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
E34ANA'
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 77 - ZW Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes @J 1VU NA [3 NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes gG< ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA IS"`L
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
!a Z
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
L To
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
E;101 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
&24o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32_ Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0;1410o"
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
g2O oo
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
®►No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments.(refer to question. ft, Explain any XES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments:
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
lax ZW64- z
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q% !
Date:
2/ '011

3��5 �z/ /Zoo
Type of Visit (D't`ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 01.outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ►►/ : ZDA•-� Departure Time: ��%v�,¢r- County: iRo�xsa.v
Farm Name: 1�uUrC170�I /C1Ywt LLC Owner Email:
Owner Name: , gn c e__ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
F�+•� nl
Facility Contact: Gd Gw° Title: >'u,� . Ste— • Phone No: Q
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:pold Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = = =66 Longitude: a o = + = u
Swine
Design
Capacity
Current
Population
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Popnlation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
10 Layer
I I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
I ID Non -Layer
1 1
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
I
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ TurkeyPouets
❑ Other INumber of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge'?
❑ Yes L''No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
9N5 A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
`T A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
oA
❑ NE
❑Yes
�No
❑ NA
El NE
ElLe Yes
� ow
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
ElYes
B No ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
Ef<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
iI
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
❑ Yes
E o ❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
[I Yes
,7�
L'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?
El Yes
D o-❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes tTNo ❑ 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 CaN ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E31 o ❑ 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) ►'x4 wde, . r A" 45'i- St Ewt d bra:,✓
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
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
C NNoo
El NA
El NE
L=1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
5
❑NA
El NE
5oo
B'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question.#) Explain any.,YES and/or any'recommendationsor any other comments ;
Use drawings of faciti to better explain situations. use" dditional, ;a' es, as necessa
h p ( p g 6)
/ .3 3 CV
f
Reviewer/Inspector Name V' ( Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

M
Facility Number: Date of Inspection©
Required Records & Documents ,,��,,�
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [3<. ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes E7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ET o ❑ 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
io
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Q<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
[IYes
,E9'No
1.9 <o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E FI<
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
E+ivo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues ,.,
28_ Were anv additional nroblems noted which cause non-comnliance of the permit or CAWMP? [ILd
Yes 4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
91<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
El Yes
,.,�
E3lvo
❑ 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
L`TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
,__,,�
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0-1 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ON
❑ NA
❑ NE
1217&04

'6:r'40�5 7-e j
Type of Visit ercro'rnpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (5rfGutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: f; 3t% Departure Time: /0: jQ,f County: S[1.J Region:
Farm Name: Quciehe" Form LI-C Owner Email:
Owner Name: IJ rac <_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: /
Facility Contact: Ge-AJV %s//r4NC.d M Title: �- Sp4ck Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: .Ray Y1Sf�oy-l6t..10 f�`i"^r`c�y Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: m o 0 i m« Longitude: M o M I M fl
1
s
DesigWnG urrent
Design�� Carr nt
Design Current
Swine
Capacula�tion"' Wet Poultry
Capac iyPapulattoi%^s"CStt1e Capacity Population
1,9
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. 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 Q o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
1
❑ No
L7 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
ET5A
❑ NE
ETRA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: 79 —$1
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier: Last, 1
Spillway?: hlL�
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 9
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes E NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes IJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes L"J No El NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) ,lam
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑yes ETNo El NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 01 o ❑ 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) 17ei,^f14-
13. Soil type(s) 13 eL G b Ar�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes El"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 [31o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [314o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name HIle-k e,ve-/S Phone: '940. �133.333,4"
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 7 Date: 5--2/-20D `l
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — S/ Date of Inspection
Required Records_& Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 21 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes MIN. ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
I" 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
El NA
El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
/fNo
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
LT 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
S No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
,B
L7 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
�,/
L�'f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3l. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
0 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?
El Yes
L"J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12178104

airs o V -08 A- --
Type of Visit CTmplian
-C-Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
Routine O Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 18-07-40M Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: AbCS. A/ Region: r�0
Farm Name: ur hpeAl /`` 2rir{S z/-ZC* Owner Email:
Owner Name: ,[�Y[1C �. f/!is 5lif/5 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 4'Cwy?,& Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: eq e.A10 A�u611C Integrator:�i1 ��✓/'�
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e =1 I Q " Longitude: = ° 0 I = "
Design Current
Design =, Current
Design Current
Swine
Ca ac' ' pfty .Population
v�'etliry Capacity�Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Da Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
�_
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
d
�Paultry�=� r
Dry -
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder""
- `
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑Pullets
El Turkeys
❑Beef Brood Co
her
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
,�,/
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
El Yes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
El Yes
ElE No
��
NNAA'
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Lk'NA
❑ NE
c_ What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E3<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
2<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
ElNE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
ElYes
❑-Ivow❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): j
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
2- o ❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
[3 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑yes No ❑ NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 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 [3 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) g�}''�t Crr3' & (v _Ve_ / C141VrAl 67..5, )
13.
Soil type(s) R,� L A1p A (j A Co
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
jT 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
0<0
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
D<o
[] NA
❑ NE
,g6ktton1#) ,,E'X' ain_any
pity to.11ietter, expla�n;situ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: [phone]
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: $ — 0 7—;ZQ0Q
Page Z of 3 IL/lS1U4 Gonunuea

Facility Number. — g% Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes B10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[J] N
❑ 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
NNo�o
El NA
El NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
[I NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
,B
G oo
[INA
ElNE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElD Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
5oo
[I NA
[:3 NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
El Yes
,T,
2<
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
L rNo
❑ 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 concem?
❑ Yes
ErNio
❑ 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
Cl Yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
G<O❑
NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments-and/or`Drawm s
Page 3 of 3 12128104

i`
B (Hf 41/-)10-, CFVf
® Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ? g] O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
- ( Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: # 2-07 1 Arrival 'rime: Departure Time: 3: 30 x! County: F04 SoN
Farm Name: RU Lre Y''-j Owner Email:
Owner Name: — �%' k� �KSS �� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region: Fla
Facility Contact: 6e4110 kl eNNent" I Title: 7� • SQP-Nr_ _ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: e"Nj Integrator: _ f ky4 HiZ IJAJ
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o [ = ❑ Il Longitude: ❑ ° ❑ f 0
Design Current Design Current Design ": Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ on-Layet
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 491000 NEW 75,
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Daia Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Numberof Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Od No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued
AN

Facility Number: 78F — g'/ Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?: NO
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes E0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require C] Yes [ No ❑ NA El NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
W. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes [X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% or l0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) au-,ct�eo�ct, CV,,y (Oyevse.a/)
_
13.
Soil type(s) Ca _ 616 N o
r
-
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
[4 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 #): 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 P'1e k Qts/ePhone: 910_ '�',3,3334
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 4' — /z — 0 7
12128104 Continued
J,

Facility plumber: Date of Inspection 19 /2-07
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [$ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping treed improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
H�I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
IF No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[U No
El NA
El 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?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104
k-

Division Water Quality
Faeffl Number �� �� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit
ompliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
O Routine O Complaint
Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ' j Departure Time: p County:
Farm Name: JLC' k . e, Eue-ryLS J% C Owner Email:
Owner Name: Z ru s' r- ,,,,,_ L u m e: i x 5 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �Yrtr� {{rnn� Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator -
Back -up Operator: S1 ue,C
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Region: rl<z)—
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 ❑ I ❑ " Longitude: = ° = { = "
ww
w Design Current
- t 4'Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Potiltry �CapacilyPopulation
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -La et,
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean lD
Dry Poultry?
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
��' "' "
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
-Layers
❑ [3eef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
�. �--- -
IN
❑ Turkeys
-1. -_ -
Other r .
❑ Turkey Poults
-
g..
❑ Other
Other
Nfractures: umber of S
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c_ What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
D(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of inspection{'
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes J&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropiate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists gn ❑ Maps
❑ Desi p El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[$ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
(9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
M-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Add�tional'Commettts and/or Drav►ings
�.
1 b t- S r.�-� •-�
,r l� '3 -lin-
12128104

Facility Number: — X7 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 Coe
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 25 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes Ail tvo []NA ❑ NE
ICU
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,4 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 ZI 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 l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) �Gf fC�Z__ --•-
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
ENO
❑ 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
9LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date. /
12128104 Continued

Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit • Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other © Denied Access
Facility Number Date "'visit: Time: 1 g: 404,,
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
e tted ..ertified (] Conditionally Certified Q Registered Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: -69-d&wa &CMJ LL C. County: 66,fCtol R _.
Owner Name: .. _�Lki A a sp Fn �ps!"_ GL L 'Phone No: 910 — iMG
.Mailing Address:. _ P _0,_..4o x _3 Lf 7 Ly,ri « en r ll%C� 283.S�f
T
Facility Contact: __G e"� kc., �y Ti e: . _ . Phone No:
Onsite Representative: 6::gn v Kegn f +� `s Integrator. M v f4A „ `,Sr a hea
Certified Operator. 'l✓.'1l.'a.., Day, Operator Certification Number -
Location of Farm:
L
Biwine ❑ poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• ��
Discharges & Stream i_maacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [axo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 9a
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes E3 o
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/rnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes UfTo
2_ Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes MTo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [ io
Waste Collection & Treatment /
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes QNo
Structure 1 Structure 2
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
l2/I2/O3
Continued

Facility Number: '] -- g Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes El-�Ko
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes [1Io
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance./improvement? ❑ Yes Q.Ko
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 010
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes S-o
elevation markings?
Waste Armlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenananceltmprovement? ❑ Yes G3,90
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E�Ko
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
7 sw
12. Crop type Berh✓a .5..►� // �r�► :.� - _ _
r -�
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes [jaVo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acne 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 M'W
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes [9wo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Erla
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 53Xb
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ FinaI Notes
far worL79 vff4 R;ck mar,,!' : < fv i'Anpfave s��a,, .'e/� env
gvzk/i y, SCm& Weed ceyellva, is efe5e, IL-
Reviewerllnspector Name z �,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: !D -
IMV03 Congnm!d

t
Facility Number: 7 Date of Inspection
Reouired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
Q'fes
❑ No
22_ Does the facility fail to have all corn vents of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W11f, cl fists, , etc.)
❑ Yes
Q-W
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
LQ-Ko
❑ TXI— °rPPl:-- ' n ❑£�bwm ❑ W=te�:lysis � �d
3_1 ? 1, B-
24_ Is facility not in c pIianee with any appii le setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑Yes
SiQo
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[-No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(itt discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
Q'No
27. Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Ea -Pro
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
91'ro
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the ^.-rrdffied AWMP?
❑ Yes
9-No
ATPDES Permitted Facilities
30. is the facility covered under a NPDFS Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
ErVes
❑ No
31. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
QWo
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
RWo
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
Ems
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
Q-Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms treed improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑fig ❑1'Eytnilkm
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no farther correspondence about this visit.
-.71 -64 DIGS
k I1O-A Q Geray
O%�
A l'0 5
Gc„ a Fein I�)
.S�a�ld 17e WOO/e/
of
d�% p �+lic
%��m ;
Atio✓ 9 ;ve 7La
Fw...,. �+•roglr fv
1[s��
rCCQ��s�
3 3 awl 3 Y TA Le
��i%;cari.av� egvrp+htnf A q
r S ZP r''9
ehd of 7FAe year,
ail 41 f4C LG�.OrU�%r.� of w,2jle
3S RenD�aT,'Or�3 '{si
/., '."e � n C -ter r,44 A y -/-Ae-
12U2/03

q�, �� i•�F'. �i�°TS Q-D,viston'of Sotl and Water Conservahon'�' ��'� ��,e"x�'�''"�' '�'yy jS d'x s�'� � �s}��.� �l?
of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 7$ 81 Date of Visit: Time: 9:00
Q Not p erational Q Below `rhresbold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold_
Farm Name: Hmckhctrn.Fit'ms.LL.0............................ ............................... County: Robes= --------------------------------- FRO ----------
Owner Name: BrlLce_ --- --- - - - - -i ----- --- ----- ----- - - Phone No: -
MailingAddress: ..Qa.Ba�c 4z�...................................................................................... Luxubt<rtna..N.0 .................................................... 28,359..............
Facility Contact:...........................................................Title: .......... Phone No
Onsite Representative:.----------------------------------------------___--- Integrator: �soSYo=ssLf��fNiu.lns-----------------•
Certified Operator: j?WI............................ JQ.Oyis.................................................. Operator Certification Number: 1,%6.72.......... ......
Location of Farm:
f ravel US 301 South. 1/2 mile south of NC 71 intersection to farm entrance road. Follow raod for approx. 1 mile to farm. �
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 • ® 14 G Longitude 78 •F 58 ` 34 u
= Desigii Carrent Design Current Design ;Current
Swine '' Ca" aci Po ulation = a'oultry Capacity .Population Cattle, Capacity., Population.
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
4000
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boats
NuEiiber,of Lagoons t ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
11oldi6'9 Ponds ! Sohd Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System h 1'
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water ofthe State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & 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:
Freeboard (inches): ------------- i4............
05/03/01 C'nntinued

lFacith Number: 78-81 Date of Inspection QS-12-2QQ3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure pion? El 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? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12.
Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15..
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Roquired
Records _&_Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments to question,#) Explain any YES answers and/or any t•ecommendations or and other comEiients
s(refer
Use drawings -of facility to better explain situations :(use additional pages as necessary)
r Field Cop [I Final Notes "6
Visited farm as result of reported lagoon level. Walked the banks and found no problems.Aj
,? t
er/Inspector Name Larry Baxley -- Httghie.White _� +
ERevie,er/Inspector
Signature: Date:

\V
Type of Visit kCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility \umber Date of Vkit: r� Time: ni �
10 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated o2elf6m—
Owner ove.Threshald:
Farm Name: r.,L— S LL C_ Countv: Name: _ t3r�G'e S Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1010 74 1 % AZ C_
Facilit%' Contact: _ ���J{� J'1 �1/iS_ Title: A 9'o'r Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ae-olO
Certified Operator_ A) f' q•-t 4
Location of Farm:
integrator:
Operator Certification Dumber:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 & " Longitude ` I �K
Design Current
Swine f nnarity Panntatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
�71D
❑ Farro,,;- to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca acity Po ulation
❑ Laver F—
iry
Da
❑Non -Laver Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity dvv
Total SSLR%
Number of Lagoons %I 1LJ Subsurface Drains Present j❑ Lagoon Area JLJ Spray Field Area
Holding Foods 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System -
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is anv discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsened, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, nctif;- 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 pan of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05IV3101
❑ Yes El.lvo
❑ Yes 3dNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes NNO
❑ Yes [5No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes Lie
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection —Z? Z_5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes AfNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes 07No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes X No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes W No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 4No
Waste AiDnlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes PO
11. Is there evidence of over application? ElExcessyve Pondingw ❑PAN ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes
12. Crop type yi�/rt_, ti_C. — k-a i / 5 rt. (-r—e!s w n a Pile v
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated/n the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes J.No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
KNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
6jNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
Wo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
KNO
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
OtNo
Reguired
REords & D cum nts
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
JqNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
ANo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
KNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
$NO
22
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes X No
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes f LNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes KNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ,,
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
_;-k:
N.
,So i 1 Sa�,Q'e S � c4cle lee-, S4� rt.l �d �a
Reviewer/inspector Name k
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
❑ Field Covy ❑ Final Notes
lf- 5-01� fa
A&ler ?L .
- a
Date.
05103101 v I Continued

Z
....
OENVision of Sal! aad Water C41LS� Yatfo _
o oma
-��.- --=. ',....u..:.;�:r _.......-:s '.�4r-. .=.^�.r'�-.._-..._ _. �'-r'_?xas?-�r'r.�,.�.."=„="":w.�,�, ,a,,,' _ .,....•7: - - .Ram- ...'"`.a.� �:» .,...,..«"�'..:._..',._ . .. ,..,.t,- �v ...
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number slate of visit: Time:
rO Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted Certified Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Count':
Owner Name: 13.Pl� /'' // A) Phone No:
Mailing Address: 'P (9• 9..,- ,7 7
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: / ,f�r�//�i�+ L�,Q(�/, =SV_C/A 9FALMocIntegrator: aL�"S ' Z��
Certified Operator: �!/i9.aL _ �/� . Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 0' 0 " Longitude 0' 0 0
Design-:T ' ';Carrent.: :Design Carrent Destget Current
a apKV F
❑ Wean to Feeder
_2FUh3tmn.
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Odl!
ddD
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
i4umhet of Lagoons i ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ S rav Field Area
Hold Ponds`/SolidTra .s _
0i _ __.w. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharses & Stream facts
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?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
❑ Yes allo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes %No
❑ Yes K] No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 7SI — ? j
Date of inspection 0
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 Aoolication
❑ Yes PTNo
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes �RrNo
❑ Yes 5allo
❑ Yes qa�No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®'No
11. Is there evidence
//of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes CRRo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes 5JNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? X—Yes o
16_ Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Yes /N No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONO
18. floes the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ UP, checklists, design, map tc.) ✓ ❑ Yes XNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, wastei;Qysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes X No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Iallo
22_ Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑Yes 2 No
23_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 51No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes allo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ®"No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Lomrtaents-(rdier _to question_ i#) ESplaut.any YEs 8QS4Ct1'S and/or any' nmommendWri 9 nor anv:Ocher comments.
ilse clraw�ngs of laciltty to -better explain si#u$#atts: (use additionsl;pages ss necessary} a _
Field Conv ❑Final Notec
- - _ _ _ . -
�J
S �Jri a,�/���f� i»� ��/�is� .� ; r.�l/.+�C>F C✓� `���:..trG�4njpf17�a.*>�.
�
1/ ��o Cap✓
f�y��� ,4 co,� v �/ ,�
�e-W
4�dr
Reviewer/Inspector Name -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: — / Date of Inspection
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
X-No
2&
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
[RNo
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
Wo
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
[WNo
32_
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
Off No
O510.3101

Facility Number Date of Visit: Zi -O Time: 3ZI
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
)J(Permitted U Certified Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or A ve Threshold:
Farm Name:lC l f3 . 4.!�f'.. County:.....,��PS�.._���.
.. ..
Owner Name: _. .._ Lr ,Cle?�............. Phone No: . �..C�... �.23..
Facility Contact: ......1../.t..(.. f!� .... ...i� U�..5 ...........Title:.......;K.............................. ....A-,
Phone No........................ ............
Mailing Address:... /
f�DBa ��7.........:..........._._..........�....._.....L. ?2t<2e__z_V
Onsite Representative: .....(fit.....- Integrator:..�-%�OG��_5................ ..... .�
Certified Operator• LA_/_K•r f ! a . / S_._. Operator Certification Number:_—'--_----- _
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �� �L° Longitude �• �� ��
_rDestgn Current Design Current Design y- Current
Swrae Ca' ci ` Po ulabori.. Ponitiy .. Ga aci = Population"
. Cattle Potetlatioa
Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
Farrow to Finish _ Total- C8 id _ '-
Gilts
Boars - Total SSLW
- i
Ntimher of Lagoons Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area . ❑Spray Fidd Area
YHoldmg Ponds 1 Sohd Traps . No Liquid Waste Management System
--
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes jNo
o
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon [I Spray Field [I Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yeso
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes , No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
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 G
Identifier: .................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

r
Facility Number:? — / Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence f over applica 'on? ❑ Exce ive Ponding [I PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop type Q " �Ue
'13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desi ted in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
XNo .
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
J�No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
%No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
0-No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
OYes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
A No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
WNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
RNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
kfNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
qNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
RrNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
C(No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
o
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
EWo
yipt�>zignjs;o deff�encies were pgfe� dining#his'v�sit; Yo>j� wi�i >Seeeiye Igo fuser
6 deice Motif. this visit:,'
!S �ErwluA�cZA D�l�'r
Jo�iws�9aSs � 5'vx-�e- Lohninc&e egork '� lei-nd 14
MJP,QA , J
40 cJeral r , 4A 15; we// 1Lt Q 01 �r2eo!
Reviewer/inspector Name Xj
_ , = - -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ _ n Date: 5rl% - 0/ 5/00

Facility Number: 79" — l Date of Inspection Odor Issues
Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Cl 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 o
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes o
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? (Le, broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes k
o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes :WNO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes o
5/00

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: / /% �/ Time:
Facility Number %
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified /13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �k c,�f+ a.�•.� ......................
....................................................�'°C••-'........................................................ County..sa..�.............................. .
Owner Name: Phone No:
FacilityContact: .....f�'! r-.........dDlkl/...5..................Title:............................................................... Phone No:.............................................
Mailing Address: �a..,..........................................................
Onsite Representative: ................ .. ..... Integrator: .... &W. �...... .. ?4evx-'9
r
Certified Operator: .,,,-,f �!...!°^-,,,,,,,C- Operator Certification Number: ¢vis..._... ......................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' C� 4. Longitude 0 ` •4
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 OOU irldeG
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / SoLd-Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed; was the conveyance man-made" ❑ Yes Ej No
b. If discharge is obsetwed, did it reach Water of the State? (ll-yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes M No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ,W No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes )KNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ................./..............
Freeboard (inches): ............ ..V.�..............—.... ........... .............. .
❑ Spillway
Structure 4
Structure 5
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?
❑ Yes ,�No
Structure 6
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes /�'No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes RNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ANo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes EXINo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �}No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [KNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes Q No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
& Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
IN Yes
❑ No
17.
Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
,R No
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records & Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit'?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
KYes
❑ No
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
RNo
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
$d No
Odor Issues
28.
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?
29.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
❑ No
01/01/01
Continued

Facility Number: W — f/ Date of Inspection 0
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. 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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Printed on: 1/4/2001
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
IQi✓ �.-'r�fG�icr� pi./af LC/p.✓�d/kG/Srd
d� Gp. -.,O �iSli,✓/� �✓! /"v Dit v 4 �J�"" 1. /.o s US sJrt!/ /, ,..riGi�..f .
/1101
a% ��'�-,tip �� A G./..�i�/� d.�� .�i�Z"/-� ca✓, ,�u�c�i��✓cE
�J.as /or�.r�,cs%�� �.J � C/.4 `/ / �� ac✓� /� .tea
sjr ISi // q�A/� ijsx C� .�"fi�E� f.'1E�/� �` � �Xi'"� dP/ 3`��S //�✓�.E G7dt%. /��
G,¢� S/.�o.�.�� �i�� 6.�f�✓��'.✓c�,Fr�h�-��r� d � �v�--�a�ir2C�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: / /7 200(
:.
01/01/01

4.
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection :Yel 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified' © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered E3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Blf.c-I&I� ...... County: _..._..............................................................................
............................................
Owner Name:......... /�.A.C. ......�t ram . Phone No: /Q `".Z
1,7 .... ;...................................................,�.......�...............
FacilityContact: .......2".. ......��/a� �............... Title:/................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: /..... ...y /..lQ.�,cEz=,f._. >/4......Z.r ............................... .. ................... .......... • �:......
Onsite Representative: ................................................................................:.......................... Inte-rator:........!i�.Lo�.✓�.................................................``
Certified Operator:.........k/_i ....... ........! ..:........ ed /e ............................ Operator Certification Number:........................ 6.................
Location of Farm:
Latitude �° ��� Longitude
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes � No
b_ If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes P9 No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 01 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 01 No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
hh �r
Freeboard(inches): ...........��i.!/.............................................. ... ......... ..................... ............................................................................................................
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [KNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 7Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes 8 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 maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes XNo
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require main ten ancelimprovement?
❑ Yes P`No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes W No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes )KNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes IN No
12. Crop type 9, k d
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designate in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes 1VNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes X No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes A No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes X1 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes XNo
Required 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?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes ANo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes] No
(X�
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes KNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes J0 No
yiol�ttioiis;or deficiencies -Wierra poted dtWirig this;visit: • Yolk :wili•keeeiye ii©; futfttr. :
coriesporidence: aN * this visit_ ::: : :
--
i #) �-Expla"' any YE5 answers andlor any recommend`attons or any otl
..ay. iP�.+.11 J 4V.v4aaLa 4AYadaa�.3lLuwuVR� �aa.�., auuaaava�cu,-#awsa,a-w aaca.wnw■ J/ -� + x� ;�:
Gc�F..�-ems � ✓u.C,.�.r�✓ P,[..s.�,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
�+ f Date:
i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
osr6

Facility Number: % Date of Inspection 6 !f
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
IVYes
❑ 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)
,t
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
qNo
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
X No
Wdditional:Comments-and/or rawings: - — �j

State of North Carolina IT
Department of Environment 0 •
and Natural Resources f
Division of Water Quality An W
.lames B. Hunt, Jr., Governor NCDENR
Bill Holman, Secretary
NORTH CAROtJNA DEPARTMENT OF
Kerr T. Stevens, Director ENVIRONMENT ANp NATURAL RESOURCES
April 17, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT RE UESTED
BRUcE HUGGINS
P. O. Box 3477
LUMBERTON, NC 28359
Subject: Notice of Violation and Revocation for Nonpayment
Buckhorn Farms, LLC.
Permit Number: AW1780081
Robeson County
Dear Bruce Huggins:
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.10G, all animal operations who receive an animal
waste management system permit will be charged in each year of the term an annual permit fee. Annual permit fees are
billed following the issuance of the permit and then annually thereafter on the anniversary of that date. Your animal waste
management system permit was issued on 1 /25/99.
Your annual permit fee for the period of 1/25/2000 - 1/24/2001 is $300.00. Your payment was due 3/12/2000.
Because this fee was not fully paid within 30 days after being billed, this letter initiates action to revoke the subject permit,
pursuant to 15 NCAC 2H .0205 (c) (4). and G-S. 143-215.1 (b) (3),
Effective 60 days from receipt of this notice, the subject permit is hereby revoked unless the required Annual
Animal Waste Management System Permit fee for your animal operation is received within that time. Operation of an
animal waste management system without a valid permit is a violation of North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1 and is
subject to the assessment of a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per day. Your payment should be sent to:
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Budget Office
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If you have any questions, please contact Fran McPherson at [phone] ext. 210-
Sincerely,
a+� T.vens
cc: Non -Discharge Branch Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Fayetteville Regional Office
Robeson County Health Department
Permit File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina. 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled / 10% post -consumer paper

Lo Routine O Complaint C) Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review A&Other
T�
Facility Number Date of Inspection Z --Q7�
Time of Inspection ;Q D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted [3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered JE3 Not Operational Dat Least Operated:
Farm Name . u G [ !�.l'k .....
f ` `*4%— County: SG�,�,..,.�........
.
r
Owner Name:....... rUIC.e............... ....... .-....... �jr--5.................................. Phone No:.......... .:..... 2.3..6..Y(..............................
Facility Contact: . ( f.�.�....G?::if......................... Title:....1......
1 Phone No: ....................._............................
:Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative: .................... Integrator:.............. `[QZe1 f� f...........
Certified Operator: ................................................... ........................................................ . ... Operator Certification Number:...........................................
Location of -Farm:
Latitude �• �� �•� Longitude C�• �° ��` µ
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon ❑ Spray Field
❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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 P<Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): 7..`.......................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any i d' to threat tot intc of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, [:]Yes [-]No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

n
0 Division of Soil and Water .Conservation -_-Operation
,Division of Soil and Water Consecvahon. -Compliance inspection'3
x _ Division of Water Qualtty:Compltanee Inspections, ,
3 _ - LiiOther Agency ©peration- eview-' _ y r_-
12 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DW ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ! d 24 hr. (hh:mm)
�ermitted 0 Certified Q Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 0 Not -operational Date Last Operated:
..........................
Farm Name ..... .. iCrC�Ct�A.L"i1...fi;ar ................................................ County:........ QCJ Sa1-....... ....... .......................
Owner Name: ........ �� 1r,1(Cta ............... ....................................................... Phone N'o:.......... �� .. �f�.r...Z.7�.. ..��...........
�............
Facility Contact: ...W .'- 11 GZ.S.1 5............. Title:............... r~.....-... Phone No:......................................
J��.! L. -jam/�l/�'1 l
Mailing Address: .....1 a....Y!'N.........1..7.,1.....�....................................................... ...... 1.`J.�.... ��s!
Onsite Representative:........,! L a'ft ...�` Integrator:........ %!? a... .4 4�rQ..L/..!�.C.........
..................
Certified Operator:............!.:..............�l1Lf...................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
r...............•---...........................................----.........................................................._..--.............................. ............................ I ...... I.-. ...................
i
Latitude 0 • �� �• Longitude = •
SDesign Current D---' n: Current Design Current
wine . •e , : ,Ca acity Po ulation . " Poultry Ca `acity Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I JE] Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other I I_= -
❑ Farrow to Finish Total De"sign Capacity . �U
❑ Gilts
❑ ]Boars �. Total SSLW
umber OFLagoons: �- ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area _
Holdmg:Ponds / SolidtTraps = ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: [ILagoon ElSpray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes XNo
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes jl�No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes RNo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes rgKNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ,M<No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway $,Yes MPIR
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: ��`.C� f !
Freeboard(inches): ............. ! �( 1 N ST............................----............................................... ...................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes %No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

1+acility Number: 7:?-8 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? �$No
{If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an ❑Yes )X
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of" the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
8_
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
9No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markets with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
ANo
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ANo
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
0 No
12.
Crop type f yv= Le
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designate/in the ertified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
ZNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Cl 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
Wo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
MNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
XNo
20_
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
E3.No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
P.No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
MYes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
-yiolath)hS or- deficiencies were noted diWifig this:visit: - Yon :will •teoeiye lid futth&.
correspondence: a�ou1. this visit::::
1 e ego race: ved a- eQ # 4�� ,.. /air. b2 s 54a4; "%5 ittal `;,s 4:�,ee bawJ kvB I
_ !sw_
a 15;4 'o de4rw+;ost -/Ae ola4. et' a,cT'o1­4r /O"cr(%L j
f&e r19aOA,, Jee-Lrs ` �+ /�u� ,.� de mare , P 5i4CC
D•a,T %,t f , W- S I`raold /AA re jr,,,y O D avi S ka5
`l Ke ei4ter cxt re l ie- �o► - �it�rr� c�."� Floyd • .r4Z,0�7)
S Aerr �101
06 t,uat for k)irj � r � � jnwer 1 p� ortce -9,eU jak5• �OL �� r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date: %— 2 % — 00
3/23/99

4
vrvrsjon,or�501 ana-11
El Dion of Soil andWater`Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Dwisiiin of WaterQuahty =:Compliance Inspection L
r 0 Other, Agency Operation Revrew
y
l
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-u of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection qS
Time of Inspection &4:dV 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted © Certified
/ 3 Conditionally Certified ❑/Registered [3 Not Operation al Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ........ �}_iri C:�1.ri.Qi +`.. .._L....a.fr!!►�.S.r... !. County:........., 4 5 ...............----- ...............
y............... G
Owner Name:.........rU.fr....................%!�5................................... 1'houe No:.............. ��D
/r��
Facility Contact: ....l1�'.4..�..t.. dM: . -CL!t1 t 5............. Title.... l� jr...- ......... Phone No:..................._............................... ..._.... ..._....--
Mailing Address: ................................................................. 1t'Llhr�t.....+..11......................1..
0 Q �.-�.... �' Z
'ltll` .. } n J
Onsite Representative: ...�4.1.c..L.i.�.. L4&A ....._.(1.. !. 5....._..... Integrator: Al,1!1.5......
�..I,:Q�I.!�.Q
..... ..... ...... .....
,
Certified Operator: .... pj,. I„IGtM1 �. q.V I $ Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
........... ...................................... ........................................... ...................... ........ ......... ......... ........ .......................... ................................................................................
Latitude Longitude �• �° �"
Design Current
Swine capacity
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (if yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes)<No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Ilow in gal/tnin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier: Z Z,/
Freeboard (Inches): .............................
1 /6/99
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes EVNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes TNo
❑ Yes qNo
❑ Yes KNo
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: 7 — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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 pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
L�L_J
❑ Yes $6 No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes (j No
11, Is there evidence of over
application? /❑ Ponding ❑` Nitrogen Yes REA
M No
12. Crop type l.lPr.M ut%k d .... `.�..`..`..'........................................................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes �No
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) ❑Yes MNo
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑Yes
F_ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
Wo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
KNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
MNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
�No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
KNo
23.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewhnspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
KNo
: N;D,vialations or deficiencies .were noted. Burin'gthis: visit:. V-ou rvill.retceive nu further . -.:
:-eorrespofidence'about;this:visit..-.•.-.-.•..:-:-:•......-.•.•.-.-.•_•...... .......•.-.•..-.. .
Comment8 ( refer to 4u6ti6n #)- Explain anYES answers anfj/or _any, -recommendations -or any 06et r. comments '
y .�
Use drawmgs'of facility to:better explain situations. (use additional pages as neeessa-ry) _ L
T � �`ndlvl�c�Kf �8.,-,,,� �,— �.�5-�a�,lr-�t� �'s s�'!� 9a��• ����. r��� s«ns �ro��- `
hAl /neCcrd5/ �'�^ r-I' �c�
p A"PA Ae1LCe oLiJ A/ee-IJ& �Gi lisp— Fe'fr j kyf Gur/re►J,
lve d 4 If ling J�,Or- S'Or 1 4-e4: d e Sure 7'p ,1_ Jzk"- +.per Jro . 0.rYft5
fib) M�-y 2 �Slyq. ! J
Tarn^ l4aks �ecz! Qu�rI
Reviewer/Inspector Name ; `+r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
116/99
i

Routine
of
Facility Number I
13 Registered Certfied 13 Applied for Permit Permitted
Farm Name: ... L1_rK�..... L
Owner Name:..... /5 Lice F...................
F
How -up of DSW C review O Other
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection D 24 hr. (hh:mm)
1133 Nbt Operational Date Last Operated:
.
......•• County:... ............ .. ......................
Phone No: �S�" 3�
.............................................................................................
Facility Contact:...f hl_ �.0 .J.. t ysn , ..... _ a.v.'(15................ Title:.......
.................
•................
Phone No: ...... ......................... .... ............
MailingAddress: ... l�l�... .................................................. ..W? �t ....................... �, j............. .._..... ...�_
Onsite Representativc:.....1 a•"� S integrator:............ o 7tl
jj
Certified Operator..---.�.. .11 . �;`....�...... -•..'..� t..;.5............... .... .......... Operator Certification Number:........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude i 0« Longitude • 0' "
General
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 gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
a
'o
❑ Yes 0,No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 14No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes MfNo
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.Holdin� Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ..........13...................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12.. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ANo
Structure 5 Structure 6
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess ofaWMP, or runoff entering aters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type Ll Qi.........1 t°......... ........... ....... _.............---....................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
No.violiitioins.or deficiencies.were noted;du' ring this. visit., You.vKil] recei�e:no_f&iher :;
:. cb&i spQrideimce about-this:visit: ...................
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes gNo
+
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes JV No
❑ Yes AlNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes R.No
need key a� �7e lye 9oer5e,!?,J. J%e � Zvo t-h L Weaker'
//J
3-5 � ber-►ntj, ee'ewd6l-nml�' r e wcc,-( 4f eCd 4D
4r-, leokS �c� . La�]do� i 5 a4 a. 5e0d l E Vcl Orr to f alter a-H-J
aPri'�`� • G ec-As- / 7/25/97
Reviewer/lnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AL4_ (/'! �4{ _ - _ Date: 12

Michael F. Easley, Govemor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
1�-
April 25, 2006
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Bruce Huggins
PO Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
Re: Notice of Violation/Notice of Intent
Animal Facility Annual Certification Form
Buckhorn Farms, LLC
NPDES Permit No.NCA278081
Robeson County
Dear Bruce Huggins:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have an animal waste
management system NPDES permit pursuant to NCGS 143-215.1 and Section
402 of the Clean Water Act, you have been found to be in violation of your
permit.
The General NPDES Permit, Condition III.12 states:
"An annual certification report shall be filed with the Division's Central
Office and appropriate Regional Office by March 1 of each year for the
previous year's activities on forms provided by the Division. If the
facility was not in compliance, the annual certification must be used to
summarize all noncompliance during the previous year, actions taken or
actions proposed to be taken to resolve noncompliance and explain the
current compliance status of the facility."
As of today, DWQ has still not received the Annual Certification Form for this
farm.
Required Corrective Action:
Please respond to this request by filling out the attached Annual Certification
Form for the year 2005 as required by your NPDES permit. To avoid possible
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail service Center
Internet: www.ncwatcrguality.org Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer- 50% Recycle 10% Post Consumer Paper
t
Carolina
ura!!y
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

Bruce Huggins
Page 2
April 25, 2006
enforcement action for a violation of your permit, return by May 25, 2006 to the
following address:
Miressa D. Garoma
Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
Be advised that this office is considering recommending assessment of civil
penalties to the Director of the Division of Water Quality if the Annual
Certification Form is not completed and returned by May 25, 2006. The Division
of Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than $25,000
per day per violation. Information submitted will be reviewed and, if enforcement
is still deemed appropriate, will be forwarded to the Director with the
enforcement package for his consideration.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you
the responsibility or liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State
Statue or permitting requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact
me at [phone] or Miressa D. Garoma at [phone].
Sincerely,
Stephe arnhardt
Aquifer Protection Regional Supervisor
cc: Facility File 78-81
APS Central Files
Brown's of Carolina, LLC
Division of Soil and Water, Fayetteville Regional Office
Robeson Soil and Water Conservation District

Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
April 24, 2006
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Bruce Huggins
PO Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
Re: Request for Information
Sludge Survey Report
Buckhorn Farms, LLC
NCA278081
Robeson County
Dear Bruce Huggins:
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Your Animal Waste Management General NPDES Permit contains a condition
that addresses the sludge survey requirement for the lagoon(s) at your animal
feeding operation.
Your NPDES Permit Number NCA278081 Condition 111.16, on page 10 states:
"All facilities, which are issued a COC to operate under this permit, shall conduct
a survey of the sludge accumulation in all lagoons within one (1) year of receiving
the COC and every year thereafter. This survey shall include but not be limited to
a sketch showing the depth of sludge in the various locations within each lagoon.
This survey shall be submitted as part of the facility's annual report in the year it
was conducted..."
Our records indicate that the Division has not received the sludge survey results
for the year 2005 from your facility and your facility had not previously exempted
based on prior surveys. The form was due March 1, 2006. To avoid possible
enforcement action for a violation of your permit, please submit the results within
thirty (30) days of receipt of this letter to the following address:
Miressa D. Garoma
Division of Water Quality
1636 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636
Aquifer Protection Section 1636 Mail Service Center
Intemet7 www ncwateraualitv.ors Location: 2728 Capital Boulevard
An Equal OpportunitylAffimtative Action Employer— 50% Recycled110% Post Consumer Paper
t
Carolina
ura!!y
Raleigh, NC 27699-1636 Telephone: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27604 Fax 1: [phone]
Fax 2: [phone]
Customer Service: [phone]

Bruce Huggins
Page 2
4/24/2006
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you
the responsibility or liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State
Statue or permitting requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact
me at [phone].
;Since ,
2
4, '0"LA
Stephen . Barnhardt
Fayetteville Regional Office
cc: File 78-81
APS Central Files

AaA
.M
NCDFNR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Govemor
September 20, 2002
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTE
Mr.Bruce Huggins
P.O. Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Buckhom Farm
Facility No. 78 - 81
Permit No. AWS780081
Robeson. County
Dear Mr. Huggins:
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Alan Klimek, P.E., Director
Division of Water Quality
On September 5, 2002, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality,
conducted an annual inspection of the Buckhom Farm in Robeson County. The inspection revealed that approximately
one half of the waste application field needed resprigging due to the poor stand observed. Also, the remainder of the
field had a severe weed and grass competition problem. In addition, the soil samples identified a crop need existed
that had not been addressed at the time of the inspection.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following items be addressed:
Contact an agronomist or forage crop specialist for assistance in the establishment of the required
crop (coastal bermuda) in the waste application field.
Contact a technical specialist for assistance in the chemical control of the weed and grass competition in the
bermuda grass waste application field.
3. Apply the recommended crop ammendment (lime) from the annual soil test to the coastal bermuda
waste application field for optimum crop productivity.
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street - Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043
Phone: [phone]/FAX: [phone]Internet WWw,epr-state.nc.us/ENR
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer - 50% Recycled L 10% Post Consumer Paper

Mr. Bruce Huggins
Page 2
September 20, 2002
It you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at [phone].
cc: Compliance Group
Central Files
Trent Allen - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Ed Holland - Robeson County NRCS
Kraig Westerbeek - Murphy Brown
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
t

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William `G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL -
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
BRUCE Hum\-s
P. O. Box 3477
LUMBERTON, NC 28339
Dear Bruce Huggins:
DENFi-[".
APR 2 7 ?uL11
DW
IT .
1 � •
NCDENR
NCRTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
April 19, 2001
Subject: Notice of Violation and Revocation for Nonpayment
Buckhom Farms. LLC,
Permit Number: A I7800S 1
Robeson Count,,,
In accordance with North Carolina General Statute 143-215.10G. all animal operations who receive an animal
.waste management system permit will be charged in each year of the term an annual permit fee. annual permit fees are
billed following the issuance of the permit and then annually thereafter on the anniversar. of that date. four animal waste
management system permit was issued on 1 /25;1999-
Your annual permit fee for the period of 1/25/2001 - 1/24/2002 is S300.00. Your payment was due 3. 15:1001.
Because this fee was not fully paid within 30 days after being billed, this letter initiates action to revoke the subject permit.
pursuant to 1; NCAC 2H .0205 (c) (4)- and G.S. 143-215,1 (b) (3).
Effective 60 days from receipt of this notice. the subject permit is hereby revoked unless the required .-annual
Animal Waste Management System Permit fee for your animal operation is received v.-ithin that time. Operation of an
animal ..-ante managgement system without a valid permit is a violation of North Carolina General Statute 14-3-2115. l and is
subject to the assessment of a civil penalty of up to S 10,000 per day. Your payment should be sent to:
N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Budget Office
1617 Mail Ser- ice Center
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617
If you have any questions. please contact Fran McPherson at [phone] est. 210.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Non -Discharge Branch Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Fayetteville Regional Office
Robeson County Health Department
Permit File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled." 10% post -consumer paper

FRi 3:36 PM HUGGIHGS b POUIIllS FAX NO. 9107390688
HUGGINS, POUNDS AND DAVIS; L . L . P.
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELLORS AT LAW
503 NORTH ELM STREET
P.0. BOX 1571
SRUCE W. HVGGiNS TSLEPHONg
Dua.As N. PCU=s LUMH5RTON, NORTH CAROLINA
EATHERIKZ H. nAv=S 28359 FAX
9ID-739-09
YA]C 91D-739-0688
P. I
FACSIMILE COVER SHEET �eCe/VED
DATE-` 2 / 3 / 0 0 FEB apo
8T L
To- John Hasty.. Jr. -0ZC£
From; Williarn Davis
Fax #: 9I0-4 6-07 7
Reference: BuCkhorn F6rms. LLC
We are sending you the following information: Copy of letteX
regarding _the. f-reehoar_d__level.
CONFI DNTIALITYNOTE._ THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
FACSIMILE MESSAGE IS LEGALLY PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
INFORMATION INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY
NAMED ABOVE. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED
RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION,
DISTRIBUTION OR COPYING OF THIS TELECOPY IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED.
IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS TELECOPY IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US
IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT
THE ADDRESS SHOWN ABOVE VIA THE UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE.
There are _ 2 pages? in this transmission, including cover
sheet. If receipt is interrupted and/or incomplete, please call
910-739-8196 and ask for w res.

FEBj 8-00 FRI 3:36 PM HUGGIHGS & POUNDS FAX NO. 9107390688
.. i
P. 2
Buckhorn F
Rt. 1 Box 235 Park -ton, NC 28371 [phone] [phone] (fax)
February 2, 2000
Mr. John C. Hasty, Jr.
Environmental Specialist
N C Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301-5043
RE: Buckhorn Farms, LLC
Robeson County
Dear Mr. Hasty:
To comply with the most recent, Division of Water Quality policy, this letter is to inform
you of the freeboard level at the Buckhorn Farms. The recent cold and wet weather have
prevented irrigation, and the precipitation amounts have exceeded 10 inches in the past two
weeks_ As reported to you on January 25, 2000, the lagoon level is 15". The following plan of
action has been initiated to lower and maintain the lagoon levels to the required 19" freeboard.
* Monitoring lagoon levels on a daily basis.
* Monitoring and minimizing fresh water usage within the farm to prevent additional
accumulation of liquid in lagoons.
* Storing as much lagoon liquid as possible in pit recharge buildings to prevent higher
lagoon levels-
* Irrigating as soon as possible on the winter crop in the driest sprayfields available at the
farm using frequent and light applications to reduce potential for run-off or ponding-
We are committed to operating in an environmentally safe manner and will do all that is
possible to lower and maintain the lagoon levels at an appropriate level. If there are additional
practices which you recommend, please contact me at [phone]. Thank you for your
cooperation.
Respectfully Submitted,
William E. Davis, II
General Manager of
Buckhorn Fames, LLC

._ r
L
f
HIGH FREEBOARD NOTIFICATION
DATEMME
DWQ contact
Name of Person �/r
contracting DWQ INS ,/ Telephone No. yis fsf- z36
FARM Name 19L4 C
courrty
Facility No.
i�
Freeboard level of the Lagoon:
Conditions of the spray fields:
NARRATIVE: (Include any instructions given to the farmer at the time of the calf)
(A copy of each notification should be forwarded to the 'GAFO BOX' in John Hasty's office
as soon as possible)

� NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
NCDENRDIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
FAYETTEVILLE. REG]ONAL OFFICE
: HAND DELIVERED (FORM B)
;OVI E HUNT$. YNT JR.
:ove1 f �
wNole TO: (A (�,]( rr�. arhn. S
e S CT>%.- -a -
DILL IiOLM4AH BY: 9A�=
DECRETARY
^Q&6 Representator elr �1er �d' 4& ; LL1.'fLA261-1- DWI5
KERR T. STEVENS DATE Z —/— 00 TIME 0,` 30 o-*—
DIRECTOR
For facilities that are identified with waste in their lagoon(s) below the level required to be
maintained for structural stability but not adequate to also retain the 25 year, 24 hour rainfall even (typically
12 -19 inches):
1. The producer will be required to submit a plan of action within 48 hours to lower and maintain the
lagoon level to a point below that needed for both structural stability and the 25 year, 24 hour
rainfall event. The plan should be forwarded to the Fayetteville Regional Office:
Division of Water Duality
225 Green Street - Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28314
Phone:[phone] Fax: 91D-486-0707
DWQ can not and will not condone any discharge of waste from the facility to the surface waters
as part of the management plan.
3. DWQ can not and will not condone the land application of waste at levels above that specified by
the facility's CAWMP or in violation of any other part of the CAWMP.
The producer should consider pump and haul to another facility, that can adequately manage the
waste in accordance with its CAWMP, as part of their plan.
5. If the producer's plan can not adequately demonstrate the ability to reduce the lagoon level below
that required for both structural stability and the 25 year, 24 hour rainfall event within 30 days (or
before the lagoon level is projected to rise to a level above that required for structural stability K
less than 30 days) without the removal of animals from the facilities, then removal of animals must
be a component of this plan. The number of animals removed must be to a level at which the
producer can adequately demonstrate the ability to manage the lagoon level below the level
needed for both structural stability and the 25 year, 24 hour storm event.
�i
NOTES: Lagoon Levels __ ,,, _ . _. __. •
Fr�sr:
y`I,w LF�zi"
] 0 1 0
225 GREEN STRSET, SUITE 714 ! SYSTEL OLD. FAYLTT[VILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 26301 •SO43
PHONE [phone] FAA O1O-406-0707
-• r�„-, now0wTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% ►OST-CONSUMER FA►ER

Buckhom Farms LLC
24089 US 301 N
Parkton, NC 28371
[phone] Fax [phone]
August 5,1999
Jeffrey Brown
NCDEHNR-DWQ
225 Green Street, Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Dear Mr. Brown,
UC 2 5 1999
F'4rt7TENlLLE
REG. OFFICE
Enclosed are the waste management documents for Buckhom Farms, LLC as required by the
Individual Non -Discharge Permit #AWI780081. This permit was issued in January of this year,
but several errors were made in the application compiled by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. The
application is in the process of being revised by Agri -Waste Technology, Inc. but the permit has
not been issued. in February, we discussed the necessary changes with Sue Homewood and
understood that the new conditions of this permit would not be in effect until the changes were
finalized. Since that time, we have discussed other issues with Ms. Homewood and became
aware that this was not the case and the quarterly reports and monitoring requirements were in
fact in effect as stated in the permit dated January 25, 1999.
Therefore, the documents enclosed include all records from January to June, 1999. In the future,
the required reports will be forwarded to you quarterly in a timely manner. One of the errors in
the application involved the waste management plan, enclosed is a copy of the current plan and
necessary maps.
We apologize for any inconvenience this misunderstanding has caused. If you have any questions,
please call.
Sincerely,
William Davis
Manager
Buckhom Farms, LLC
cc: Non -Discharge Permitting Unit

N
HIGH FREEBOARD NOTIFICATION
DATE/nME S 1 % ` % 9
DWQ Contact J n �+ H a 5-
Name of Person 1
contacting DWQ: Sow ca cz � o A n Son _ Telephone No.(__)
FARM Name :-Aic (-tor n
County a7---
Facility No. i
Freeboord level of the Lagoon:
conditions of the spray fields: C _
NARRATIVE: (Include ony instructions given to the farmer at the time of the call)
(A copy of each notificationshould be forwarded to the "GAFO BOX' in John HostVs office
as soon as possible)

Buckhorn Farms LLCO
RL 1 box 235 Pacicton, NC 28371 P14(910)858-2364 Fax[phone]
May 19, 1999
John Hasty
Groundwater Section
Division of Environmental Management
225 Green St. Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28301
Dear Mr. Hasty
RECE,niv
A14 r 2 1 ' 1999
REG 1�E
FF10E
Please be advised that on May 17, 1999, I called your office in accordance with my waste water
management permit to report that the level of the lagoon at Buckhorn farms had exceeded the
maximum allowable freeboard. This situation occurred due to a broken clutch plate on our lagoon
pump immediately following the harvest of our winter cover crop. We have been able to correct
our mechanical problems and will make every effort to insure that this situation does not recur.
The purpose of this letter is to advise you that as of May 18, 1999, we have fully resumed
compliance with our waste water management plan and that the lagoon is back to an acceptable
level.
Should you require any additional information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely
e��Z� —
William E. Davis
pc: Bruce W. Huggins
Sonya Johnson

JAMES B. HUNT
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
May 21, 1999
Buckhorn Farms
Mr. William Davis
Rt. 1, Box 235
Parkton, NC 28371
Dear Mr. Davis:
The Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality is in
receipt of your letter concerning the freeboard level at Buckhorn Farms. You have
met the reporting and notification requirements of your Individual Permit for your
facility for this instance and this office considers the matter closed.
If you have any further questions concerning this matter please do not
hesitate to call me at [phone].
Sincerely,
(.2
iohn:C. Hasty, Jr.
Environmental Specialist
225 GREEN STREET, SUITE 714, FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28301 -5043
PHONE [phone] FAX 91O-4a8-0707
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

NCDENR
` 'u 4; .x
kk•'wAYNE MCDEVI11. 472
58cRETARY ��rxr'.�4� -�1
- '
t.` .�:�• ire€-� � ��: a'
l
rz NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
February 18, 1998
CERTIFIED MAIL,
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Mr. Bruce Huggins
P. O. Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
Subject: Notice of Violation
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2H .0217
Buckhorn Farms
Facility No. 78-81
Robeson County
Dear Mr. Huggins:
You are hereby notified that, having been issued a Certificate of
Coverage under the General Permit for Liquid Animal Waste Operations
pursuant to G. S. 143-215.10C, you have been found to be in violation of
your permit.
J, On February 4, 1998, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the
Division of Water Quality responded to a complaint at Buckhorn Farms in
Robeson Co. The investigation revealed that the fi-eeboard level was not
within the nineteen inch required minimum level for animal waste treatment
lagoons. The lagoon level was approximately %" and was coning
dangerously close to over -topping. The liquid level was into the area of the
lagoon which is designed for structural stability. The Division is concerned
that it may cause structural failure and ultimately a loss of the liquid contained
therein, resulting in an environmental disaster to the Lumber River Basin.
The Division of Water Quality requests that the following item(s) be
addressed:
Continue to lower the level of the lagoon to a level which will not
threaten the integrity of the structure and which follows your CAWMP,
weather permitting. Continue to irrigate to get this farm back into
compliance with the required nineteen inches of freeboard. Land apply
the waste on sites included in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Plan, as amended, or by pumping and hauling the waste to alternate
sites as approved by the Fayetteville Regional Office.
225 GREEN STREET, SUITE 714, FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 213301-5043
PHONE [phone] FAX 91 O-4a5-D7O7
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /ArTIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - 50% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

Mr. Huggins
2-18-98
Page 2
Because of the above violation(s) the facility is now being required to obtain an individual
non discharge permit.You need to contact our Permits and Engineering office in Raleigh to obtain
an application for an individual non discharge permit.
Please be advised that this notice does not prevent the Division of Water Quality from taking
enforcement actions for this violation or any past or future violation. Furthermore, the Division
of Water Quality has the authority to levy a civil penalty of not more than $10,000.00 per day per
violation.
If you have any technical questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact
either myself or Mr. John Hasty, Environmental Specialist, at [phone]. If you have any
legal questions, please have your attorney call Special Deputy Attorney General Kathryn Jones
Cooper or Associate Attorney General Mary Dee Carraway at [phone].
Sincerely,
�ICerr T. Stevens
Regional Supervisor
KTS:JH/John C. Hasty, Jr.
cc. Sue Homewood - Compliance Group
Sam Warren - Bladen Co. NRCS
Audrey Oxendine - DSWC Fayetteville Office
Central Files - Raleigh

- M50 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Divon of Water Quality
Q Routine O Com laint O Follow-up of DNV 2 inspection p Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of inspection
Facility Number /
�/ Time of inspection �, 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered q Certified 13 Applied for Permit XPermitted ❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:..,,,_.... ,
). i
Farm Name: ...L�.�....h.S7.f.11,..
Owner Name:..? r."CE_..............
_ ....—...._... County:....,�b ��..Y4.....................................
� j
Z
> Phone No: 3 la_._.W....
Facility Contact: ... t., l �_ 11. i. �....... _Title: +� a t" .. Phone No:
MailingAddress: _. I..._ `'!`�... ..... ...._......... _ .... _.................. ,..... _ .........
Onsite Representative:. _ _. _ —_. Integrator:_.... _
Certified Operator,. ....' ....__.._ ..... 1.1 ._ .... ._ .._. Operator Certification Number:_
Location of Farm:
Latitude Q• Q'<' Longitude �• 0` 0«
.ayy tSl+4 >Designr sCiirrent
...
;;� Q e�.: Design Curren#w Design Cnreut
< 'f'S -
:. G^' S • '� R' ,i;iapf ,,,ws ,�. ,hF i L .iP4a( 3 2s- sa"'2.,-7Gr
:Swmes#Gapac�ty Population Pauitry 5 Cattle ' a��/�FY--lt-�acityy Popuiatian ,
,....
ii
. yCapiicityl?tipiiilatioA
G<T
t -Rb,. x:;:;• w.:. ,p_._. `� ,k `.u4` : t5v '."f4'a E.,y+A.Lr.tS' w' n ° BS'sss,'T�.n
>.
[] Other f x
',tom x.rw'-
ww 34,� �t 'ice• .a. ;,, 'i`�
E y Tots! Design Capacitya
6 a CJ
.� xr
H
' 1:.�,�X^'•��gt'�C,vy`r Y.k��4:/1.
A9#x �4e srF'6¢m.c To �fi 'SSLI Tiq
W�
iYs y ..
b
Number of Lagoo s/Holding}Ponds :� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 0 Lagoon Area Spray Field Area �Pr
' x ❑ No Liyutd Waste Management System
.�.F� � .�:.*Suin._ iC`.3Et9-^'2.,b2:.... '�`� '�,'� .A+C4•c
�s✓+o«E �Y¢-.Tw'n:..�5.�,"'�c�..'x
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
[j Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Giits�
❑ Boars
❑ Layer
<
Dairy
•.
�
Non -Layer
�-�
Non -Dairy
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes ❑ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes � No
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon ❑Spray Field ❑Other
• a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance. man-made? ❑Yes � No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) [I Yes � No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
A. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ]� No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El Yes (� No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑Yes � No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons holding ponds) require Cer�Fr ;��� ��Yes ❑ No
maintenance improvement? ri.
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑Yes (4No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑Yes (� No
7125/97
Continued on back

Facility Number. —5 1
8. Are there lagoons or storagj. 1e ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes [XNo
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits, etc
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? OdYes ❑ No
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
............................................................................................................................
Freeboard(ft):.............. .............................. ...... ................... ...... .........
................... .................
10,
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
O(No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(Ir 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 Anulication
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type R! ............................... ........ .......
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
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
( Yes
❑ No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Yes
A No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
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.violatio'ns or deficiencies.were noted -during this:visit..You4iU receive no further:
correspondence vi out this.visit:: _ : ;
Np i rr,gc ,on- f er(ormej j er rec.ar)5,
al5 i c.((7-20). Oo?,-�,Pr f•-va4 was CUx. -,y) "h
i
rr 4 `
Mee- r+ was T.�CPj, 'h.r 1A c.cc-dot kr p fer�J llec 2U/ tql i.
r�eeoo�rol je-Jel rs o[an)eroLt5/� k ilk
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name r1 iT= b R�
.{/=
Late:Reviewer/lnsPecfor Signature: T h
1

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
AAA
[DF=HNF;Z
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
August 25, 1997
N M. N-1 11M-�'
-Moll1
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Buckhorn Farm
Facility No. 78-81
Robeson County
Mr. William Davis
P. O. Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
Dear Mr. Davis:
On August 13, 1997, staff from the Fayettteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality responded to a complaint by the Division of Soil & Water. The complaint was concerning
the condition of the spray fields at Buckhorn farm. It was observed that bermuda hay had not
been established, therefore limiting the amount of nitrogen that could be utilized during an
irrigation event. It is also noted that work is being performed to install a new center pivot
irrigation system on the farce and that work had also been done to clear the spray field of weeds
which had shaded out the previously sprigged bermuda.
In regard to the deficiency noted during the inspection, the following actions are
requested:
1. Bermuda will probably need to be resprigged in the spring of 1998. For the fall crop, rye
should be planted to take up any nitrogen applied to the spray fields. You should also send the
revised specs for the new irrigation system to Raleigh to the permits and engineering department
to be evaluated with your existing permit package.
Please be reminded that once your farm receives a permit, this would be considered a
violation and not a deficiency. Read your permit carefully, once you receive it, and be sure that all
components are included in your waste management plan and kept up to date.
Please provide a written response to this office on or before-Sentember 2� 1997 as to the
actions taken or proposed to be taken to resolve this deficiency. Nothing in this letter should be
taken as absolving this facility of the responsibility and liability of any violations that have resulted
or may result from this deficiency.
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville
�FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 `�1 An Equal Opportunity Affirmat+ve Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Mr. Davis
Page 2
If you have any questions concerning this matter please contact John Hasty at (910) 486-
1541.
/Ohn
,
Casty, Jr.
Environmental Specialist
cc_ Operations Branch
Central Files Environmental Specialist
Audrey Oxendine
Ed Holland -Robeson Co. MRCS

r A 1f:Z65A
C®ENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
December 31, 2009
Bruce Huggins
Buckhorn Farms, LLC
PO Box 3477
Lumberton, NC 28359
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No: AW5780081
Buckhorn Farms, LLC
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Robeson County
Dear Bruce Huggins:
In accordance with your renewal request, we are hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage (COC)
issued to Bruce Huggins, authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste management system in accordance
with General Permit AWG100000.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management and land
application of animal waste as specified in the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP) for
the Buckhorn Farms, LLC, located in Robeson County, with an -animal capacity of no greater than an annual
average of 4000-Farrow to Wean swine. If this is a Farrow to Wean or Farrow to Feeder operation, there maybe
one boar for each 15 sows. Where boars are unnecessary, they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows.
Any of the sows may be replaced by gilts at a rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows.
Please pay particular attention to the attached groundwater monitoring requirements that are
hereby incorporated into the permit for this facility,
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2014, and shall hereby void Certificate of
Coverage Number AWS780081 dated September 26, 2005. Pursuant to this COC, you are authorized and required
to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as specified in the General Permit, the .
facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this facility. Any increase in waste production greater than the
certified design capacity or increase in number of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require
a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater
flow or number of animals.
Please carefully read this COC and the enclosed State General Permit. Please pay careful attention to the record
keepinja and monitoring conditions in this permit. Record keeping forms are unchanged with this General Permit.
Please continue to use the same record keeping forms.
1636 Mail Service Center. P,aieigh, North Carolina 27699-1636
Location: 2728 Capital Bivd., Raleigh, North Carolina 27604
Phone: [phone] FAK 919-715-05881::ustorner Service: 1-8177-623-6748
Intemet: www.nmaterquality.org
One
NorthCarollina
Natulully
An Equal Opmn.uruty S Afirmasive Action Employes

If your Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) has been developed based on site -specific information, careful evaluation of
future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current WUP is inaccurate you will need to have a
new WUP developed.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable laws,
rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate under this permit
convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Per 15A NCAC 2T .0105(h) a compliance boundary is pro,,rided for the facility and no new water supply wells shall
be constructed within the compliance boundary. Per NRCS standards a 100-foot separation shall be maintained
between water supply wells and any lagoon, storage pond, or any wetted area of a spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit or the
CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-215.6A through
143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity_ permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the General
Permit, then an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to apply for an
individual permit by contacting the Animal Feeding Operations Unit for information on this process. Unless such a
request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
In accordance with Condition 11.22 of the General Permit, waste application shall cease within four (4) hours of the
time that the National Weather Service issues a Hurricane Warning, Tropical Storm Warning, or a Flood Watch
associated with a tropical system for the county in which the facility is located. You may find detailed
watch/warning information for your county by calling the Wilmington., NC National Weather Service office at
[phone], or by visiting their website at www.erh.noaa.gov/er/ilm/.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Aquifer
Protection Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact the Animal Feeding Operations Unit staff at [phone].
Sincerely,
for Coleen H. Sullins
Enclosure (General Permit AWG100000)
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Fayetteville Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Robeson County Health Department
Robeson County Soil and Water Conservation District
AP Central Files (Permit No. AWS780081)
AFO Notebooks

Certificate of Coverage AWS780081
Buckhorn Farms
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
Reports
a. An annual evaluation of all land application areas shall be conducted by a soil scientist or agronomist. The
evaluation shall address past application events and the effects of the soils and/or crops on site, existing site
management and any future recommendations, and the ability of the sites to continue to accept animal
waste irrigation. The report from this evaluation shall be submitted upon completion to the Regional
Aquifer Protection Supervisor, Fayetteville Regional Office, 225 Green St. Suite 714, Fayetteville NC
28301.
b. A quarterly report with the information documented per Condition 111 1, Condition 1112, Condition In 3,
Condition 1114, Condition Ill 5, Condition 1I16, Condition 1117, Condition III 8, and Condition 1119 should
be submitted to the Regional Aquifer Protection Supervisor, Fayetteville Regional Office, 225 Green
St., Suite 714, Fayetteville NC 28301.
Surface Water Monitoring Requirements
No surface water monitoring is required at this time.
Groundwater Requirements
1. Sampling Criteria:
a. Monitor wells MW-7A,.MW-21, and MW-22 shall be sampled every March, July, and November for the
parameters listed below. The depth to water in each well shall be measured from the surveyed point on the
top of the casing. The measuring points (top of well casing) of all monitoring wells shall be surveyed
relative to a common datum. The water level shall be measured and recorded prior to purging the wells.
The pH shall be measured and recorded prior to sampling for the remaining parameters:
Nitrate (NO3-N)
Total Ammonia Nitrogen (NH,-N) Chloride
Total Dissolved Solids (TDS) Fecal Coliform pH (field)
Potassium Water Level Sodium
b. Monitor well(s) MW-6, MW-7, MW-17 MW-21, and MW-22 shall be sampled upon permit renewal
(March 2004) for the.parameters in la. above and the additional parameters that follow. Any of the
following parameters that exceed 1 5A NCAC 2L groundwater quality standard limits upon initial or
renewal sampling must be added to the list in 2a. for routine monitoring:
Copper
Zinc
Total Phosphorous
c. If concentrations for any single parameter, or any combination of parameters, listed in or added to la.
exceed 1 5A NCAC 2L groundwater quality standards in any single monitor well, or any combination of
monitor wells, for three consecutive monitoring periods, then monitor wells MW-7A, MW-21, and MW-
22 shall be sampled thereafter every March, July and November for the group of parameters listed in Ia.
and 1 b. .

OV
d. Any laboratory selected to analyze parameters must be Division of Water Quality (DWQ) certified for
those parameters required.
Reporting / Documentation:
a. All reports and documentation (GW-1, GW-30, GW-59) shall be mailed to -the following address:
DENR-DWQ
Information Processing Unit
1617 Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
Updated blank forms (GW-1, GW-30, GW-59) may be downloaded from the Aquifer Protection Section's
website at http://%-m,.ehnr.state.nc.us/ or requested from the address mentioned above.
b. For the initial sampling of the well(s), the permittee shall submit a copy of the GW-1 Form (Well
Construction Record) with the Compliance Monitoring Form (GW-59) for each well to the address listed in
the "Reporting / Documentation" section of the Groundwater Requirements. initial Compliance
Monitoring Forms that do not include copies of the GW-1 form may be returned to the permittee without
being processed. Failure to submit these forms as required by this permit may result in the initiation of
enforcement activities pursuant to NC General Statutes 143-215.6A.
c. The results of the sampling and analysis must be received on Form GW-59 (Groundwater Quality
Monitoring: Compliance Report Form) by the Aquifer Protection Section (address listed in the "Reporting /
Documentation" section of the Groundwater Requirements), on or before the last working day of the month
following the sampling month. The data of all groundwater sampling analyses required by the permit
conditions must be reported using the most recent GW-59 form along with attached copies of the laboratory
analyses.
Additional Requirements:
Any additional groundwater quality monitoring, as deemed necessary by the Division, shall be provided.

'03/03/'2006 I,RI 9:26 FAA 9102933138 WRLNMI
Murphy -Brown, LLC 3/3/2006 � C 2622 Hwy 24 West
-�7 P.Q. Box 856
Warsaw, NC 28398
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
Grower(s):
Farm Name:
Bruce Huggins
Buckhorne Farms, LLC 78-81
County: Robeson
Farm Capacity'.
Farrow to Wean 4000
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Storage Structure:
Storage Period:
Application Method:
Anaerobic Lagoon
>180 days
Irrigation
RECEIVED
JAN 4 5 2007
DENR - FAYE f"LLE REGIONAL OFHGE
The waste from your animal facility must be land applied at a specified rate to prevent pollution
of surface water and/or groundwater. The plant nutrients in the animal waste should be used
to reduce the amount of commercial fertilizer required for the crops in the fields where the waste
is to be applied_
This waste utilization plan uses nitrogen as the limiting nutrient. Waste should be analyzed
before each application cycle. Annual soil tests are strongly encouraged so that all plant
nutrients can be balanced for realistic yields of the crop to be grown.
Several factors are important in implementing your waste utilization plan in order to maximize
the fertilizer value of the waste and to ensure that it is applied in an environmentally safe manner:
1. Always apply waste based on the needs of the crop to be grown and the nutrient
content of the waste. Do not apply more nitrogen than the crop can utilize.
2. Soil types are important as they have different infiltration rates, leaching potentials,
cation exchange capacities, and available water holding capacities.
3. Normally waste shall be applied to land eroding at less than 5 tons per acre per
year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at 5 or more tons per acre annually, but
less than 10 tons per acre per year providing that adequate filter strips are established.
4. Do not apply waste on saturated soils, when it is raining, or when the surface is frozen
Either of these conditions may result in runoff to surface waters which is not allowed
under DWQ regulations_
5. Wind conditions should also be considered to avoid drift and downwind odor
problems.
6. To maximize the value of the nutrients for crop production and to reduce the potential
for pollution, the waste should be applied to a growing crop or applied not more than
30 days prior to planting a crop or forages breaking dormancy. Injecting the waste or
disking will conserve nutrients and reduce odor problems.
1of8

'03/03/2006 FRI 9:26 FAX [phone] WRLN-41
This plan is based on the waste application method shown above. If you choose to change
methods in the future, you need to revise this plan. Nutrient levels for different application
methods are not the same.
The estimated acres needed to apply the animal waste is based on typical nutrient content
forthis type of facility. In some cases you maywant to have plant analysis made, which could
allow additional waste to be applied. Provisions small be made for the area receiving waste to
be flexible so as to accommodate changing waste analysis content and crop type. Lime must
be applied to maintain pH in the optimum range for specific crop production.
This waste utilization plan, if carried out, meets the requirements for compiiance with 1SA NCAC
2H .0217 adopted by the Environmental Management Commission.
AMOUNT OF WASTE PRODUCED PER YEAR (gallons, ft3, tons, etc.):
Ca act —TypeWaste Produced per Animal Total
4000
Farrow to Wean
3212 gat/yr
12,848,000 gallyr
Farrow to Feeder
4015 gallyr
gallyr
Farrow to Finish
10585 gal/yr
gallyr
Wean to Feeder
223 gallyr
gaklyr
Feeder to Finish
986 galtyr
gal/yr
Total 12,848,000 gallyr
AMOUNT OF PLANT AVAILABLE NITROGEN PRODUCED PER YEAR (lbs):
C acit T e Nitrogen Produced per Animal Total
4000
Farrow to Wean
5A lbslyr
21,600 lbslyr
Farrow to Feeder
6.5 lbs/yr
Ibslyr
Farrow to Finish
26 Ibslyr
lbs/yr
Wean to Feeder
0.48 lbs/yr
Ibslyr
Feeder to Finish
2.3 Ibslyr
Ibslyr
Total 21,600 Ibslyr
Applying the above amount of waste is a big job. You should plan time and have appropriate
equipment to apply the waste in a timely manner.
LAND UTILIZATION SUMMARY
The following table describes the nutrient balance and land utilization rate for this facility
Note that the Nitrogen Balance for Crops indicates the ratio of the amount of nitrogen produced
on this facility to the amount of nitrogen that the crops under irrigation may uptake and utilize
in the normal growing season.
Total Irrigated Acreage: 77.5
Total N Required 1st Year: 21622.5
Total N Required 2nd Year: 0
Average Annual Nitrogen Requirement of Crops: 217622.50
Total Nitrogen Produced by Farm: 21,600.00
Nitrogen Balance for Crops: (22.50)
The following table describes the specifications of the hydrants and fields that contain the crops
designated for utilization of the nitrogen produced on this facility. This chart describes the size.
soil characteristics, and uptake rate for each crop in the specified crop rotation schedule for this
facility.

;Reception Area Specifications
Promm
3(b, of 8

103/03/.2006 FR1 9:28 FAA 91uZJJJ1J0 rrfurtmx
This plan does not include commercial fertilizer. The farm should produce adequate plant
available nitrogen to satisfy the requirements of the crops listed above_
The applicator is cautioned that P and K may be over applied while meeting the N requirements_
In the future, regulations may require farmers in some parts of North Carolina to have a nutrient
management plan that addresses all nutrients. This plan only addresses nitrogen.
In inlerplanted fields (i.e. small grain, etc, interseeded in bermuda), forage must be removed
through grazing, hay, andlor silage. Where grazing, plants should be grazed when they
reach a height of six to nine inches. Cattle should be removed when plants are grazed to a
height of four inches. In fields where small grain, etc, is to be removed for hay or silage, care
should be exercised not to let small grain reach maturity, especially late in the season (i.e.
April or May). Shading may result if small grain gets too high and this will definately interfere
with stand of bermudagrass. This loss of stand will result in reduced yields and less nitrogen
being utilized. Rather than cutting small grain for hay or silage just before heading as is
the normal situation, you are encouraged to cut the small grain earlier. You may want to
consider harvesting hay or silage two to three times during the season, depending on the
time small grain is planted in the fall.
The ideal time to interplant small grain, etc, is late September or early October. Drilling is
recommended over broadcasting. Bermudagrass should be grazed or cut to a height of
about two inches before drilling for best results.
CROP CODE LEGEND
Crop Code Crop
A Barley
B Hybrid Bermudagrass - Grazed
C Hybrid Bermudagrass - Hay
D Corn - Grain
E Corn - Silage
F Cotton
G Fescue- Grazed
H Fescue - Hay
I Oats
J Rye
K Small Grain - Grazed
L Small Grain - Hay
M Grain Sorghum
N Wheat
O Soybean
P Pine Trees
Lbs N utilized / unit yield
1.6 lbs N / bushel
50 Ibs N / ton
50 lbs N / ton
1.25 lbs N / bushel
12 lbs N 1 ton
0.12 lbs N 1 lbs lint
50 lbs N / ton
50 lbs N / ton
1.3 lbs N / bushel
2.4 lbs N 1 bushel
50 lbs N l acre
50 lbs N / acre
2.5 lbs. N / cwt
2.4 Ibs N / bushel
4.0 lbs N / bushel
40 lbs N 1 acre / yr
Acres shown in the preceding table are considered to be the usable acres excluding
required buffers, filter strips along ditches, odd areas unable to be irrigated, and perimeter areas
not receiving full application rates due to equipment limitations_ Actual total acres in the fields
listed may. and most likely will be, more than the acres shown in the tables.
See attached map showing the fields to be used for the utilization of animal waste.

'03/03A9006 FRI 9:ZU rn+ y1uc �JJSJV ,i �a ,+wi
SLUDGE APPLICATION:
The following table describes the annual nitrogen accumulation rate per animal
in the lagoon sludge
Farm Specifications PAN! rlanimal Farm Total! r
4000 Farrow to Wean 0.84 3360
Farrow to Feeder 1
Farrow to Finish 4.1
Wean to Feeder 0.072
Feeder to Finish 0.36
The waste utilization plan must contain provisions for periodic land application of sludge at
agronomic rates. The sludge will be nutrient rich and will require precautionary measures to
Prevent over application of nutrients or other elements. Your production facility will produce
approximately 3360 pounds of plant available nitrogen per year will accumulate in the lagoon
sludge based on the rates of accumulation listed above_
If you remove the sludge every 5 years, you will have approximately 16800 pounds of plant
available nitrogen to utilize. Assuming you apply this PAN to hybrid bermuda grass hayland at the
rate of 300 pounds of nitrogen per acre, you will need 56 acreas of land. It you apply the sludge
to corn at a rate of 125 pounds per acre, you will need 134.4 acres of land. Please note that these
are only estimates of the PAN produced and the land required to utilize that PAN. Actual values
may only be determined by sampling the sludge for plant available nitrogen content prior to application
Actual utilization rates will vary with soil type, crop, and realistic yield expectations for the specific
application fields designated for sludge application at time of removal_
APPLICATION OF WASTE BY IRRIGATION:
The irrigation application rate should not exceed the intake rate of the soil at the time of irrigation
such that runoff or ponding occurs. This rate is limited by initial soil moisture content, soil
structure, soil texture, water droplet size, and organic solids. The application amount should not
exceed the available water holding capacity of the soil at the time of irrigation nor should the
plant available nitrogen applied exceed the nitrogen needs of the crop.
If surface irrigation is the method of land application for this plan, it is the responsibility of the
producer and irrigation designer to ensure that an irrigation system is installed to properly
irrigate the acres shown in the preceding table, Failure to apply the recommended rates and
amounts of nitrogen shown in the tables may make this plan invalid.
*This is the maximum application amount allowed for the soil assuming the amount
of nitrogen allowed for the crop is not over applied_ in many situations, the application
amount shown cannot be applied because of the nitrogen limitation. The maximum
application amount shown can be applied under optimum soil conditions.
Your facility is designed for >180 days of temporary storage and the temporary storage must
be removed on the average of once every 6 months. In no instance should the volume of the
waste stored in your structure be within the 25 year 24 hour storm storage or one foot of
freeboard except in the event of the 25 year 24 hour storm.
It is the responsibility of the producer and waste applicator to ensure that the spreader equipment
is operated property to apply the correct rates to the acres shown in the tables. Failure to apply
the recommended rates and amounts of nitrogen shown in the tables may make this plan invalid.
Call your technical specialist after you receive the waste analysis report for assistance in
determining the amount of waste per acre and the proper application prior to applying the waste.
5of8

US/Uj,<YUVU I'm :1: -IV ZI1VL.9JJIJU 11�1Li•m1
Application Rate Guide
The following is provided as a guide for establishing application rates and amounts.
Soil
Application Rate
Application Amount
Tract
Hydrant
Type
Crop
inlhr
"inches
T167
_ A
Ra
BC
_
OA
1
T157
B
NoA
BC
0.5
1
T167
C
GbA
BC
0.5
1
T167
D
Co
BC
0.35
1
T167
E
Co
BC
0.35
1

Additional Comments:
The field and acres used in this plan are from the previous plan prepared by
Sonya Barber. This plan changes reflect grower changing to a hay and graze
rate. One half of the yeild must be removed as hay.

. VJ/ VJ(GV VU 1'1\} J
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN CERTIFICATION
Name of Farm:
Owner:
Manager:
Owner]Manager Agreement:
Buckhorne Farms, LLC 78-81
Bruce Huggins
I/we understand and will follow and implement the specifications and the operation and
maintenance procedures established in the approved animal waste nutrient management
plan for the farm named above. Uwe know that any expansion to the existing design capacity
of the waste treatment and/or storage system, or construction of new facilities, will require a
new nutrient management plan and a new certification to be submitted to DWQ before the new
animals are stocked.
Iiwe understand that I must own or have access to equipment, primarily irrigation equipment,
to land apply the animal waste described in this nutrient management plan. This equipment
must be available at the appropriate pumping time such that no discharge occurs from the lagoon
in the event of a 25 year 24 hour storm. I also certify that the waste will be applied on the land
according to this plan at the appropriate times and at rates which produce no runoff.
This plan will be filed on site at the farm office and at the office of the local Soil and Water
Conservation District and will be available for review by NCDWQ upon request.
Name of Facility Owner: Bruce Huggins`_
Signature: ,
�� ff Date
Name of Manager (it different from owner): Wie�Li i:)P4
Signature: 3— 7-U
Date
Name of Technical Specialist: Toni W. King
Affiliation: Murphy -Brown, LLC.
Address: 2822 Hwy 24 West, PO Drawer 856
Warsaw, NC 28398
Telephone: _ [phone]
22
Signature: c.� J 3 OLD
t Date

• Ua/Ua/.'_UUO rrtl V.ov r:y,L ZY1v L,7,341JV
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift, manmade
conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during operation or land application.
Any discharge of waste which reaches surface water is prohibited.
There must be documentation in the design folder that the producer either owns or has an
agreement for use of adequate land on which to property apply the waste. If the producer
does not own adequate land to properly dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide
evidence of an agreement with a landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity,
allowing him/her the use of the land for waste application. It is the responsibility of the
owner of the waste production facility to secure an update of the Nutrient Utilization Plan
when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of animals, method of
application, recievinq crop type, or available land.
3 Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs for realistic crop
yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical data, climatic conditions, and
level of management, unless there are regulations that restrict the rate of applications for
other nutrients.
Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per year. Waste
may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per acre per year but less than 10 tons
per acre per year provided grass filter strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (See
USDA, NRCS Field Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or diskirig after waste application. Waste
should not be applied when there is danger of drift from the land application field.
When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste will be soil
incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is applied to conservation tilled
crops or grassland, the waste may be broadcast provided the application does not occur
during a season {gone to flooding (See "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for
guidance).
7 Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration rate such that runoff
does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a method which does not cause drift
from the site during application. No ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
8 Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall events, or when the
surface is frozen.

UJ /;U Jr/ LUuu Tni a. ✓v i'nn ---
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
9 Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner that the crop is
not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit growth. The potential for salt damage
from animal waste should also be considered.
10 Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring planted crops on soils
with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient loading rates on these soils should be
held to a minimum and a suitable winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients.
Waste shall not be applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11 Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with the following:
The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is applied from a lagoon that is a
component of a swine farm shall be at least 50 feet from any residential property boundary
and canal_ Animal waste, other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1,
1995, shall not be applied closer than 25 feet to perennial waters.
12 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13 Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other than those
owned by the landowner.
14 Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public right-of-ways.
15 Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways, or wetlands by
discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be applied to prior converted cropland
provided the fields have been approved as a land application site by a "technical
specialist". .Animal waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge
directly into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be applied at
agronomic rates in a manner that causes no runoff or drift from the site.
16 Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets, sinks, etc., shall
not be discharged into the animal waste management system.

Wol Vur (Vvv ,'ley 0, - I Z_ J1 vi. yv 11a1-- ---' —
NUTRIENT UTILIZATION PLAN
REQUIRED SPECIFICATIONS
(continued)
17 A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all disturbed areas
(lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas shall be fenced, as necessary, to
protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc.,
are limited to areas where considered appropriate, lagoon areas should be kept mowed
and accessible_ Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for evidence of
erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18 If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the owner is
responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan" which will eliminate the
possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution and erosion.
19 Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected on a regular
basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks and spills. A regular maintenance checklist should be
kept on site.
20 Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other crops for direct
Duman consumption. However, if animal waste is used on crops for direct human
consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant with no further applications of animal
waste during the crop season_
21 Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom elevations of the
temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be
managed to maintain the liquid level between the markers. A marker will be required to
mark the maximum storage volume for waste storage ponds.
22 Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested at least annually
at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen shall be the rate -determining
nutrient, unless other restrictions require waste to be applied based on other nutrients,
resulting in a lower application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in
the soil shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when these metals
approach excessive leveis. pH shall be adjusted and maintained for optimum crop
production. Soil and waste analysis records shall be kept for a minimum of five, years.
Poultry dry waste application records shall be maintained for a minimum of three years.
Waste application records for all other waste shall be maintained for a minimum of five
years_
23 Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina regulations.