780083_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

IVA
I% Z-0
IType of Visit: (f Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:-&1;utine O Complaint C) Follow-up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Mi? Departure Time: I C'N S County: R-Za l
Farm Name: 14,u --ro- Owner Email:
Owner Name: H G S �1`5 S C_ r[fcrAoV Phone:
,----
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: rcvi J(G✓1. Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:.. 0 AZL
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region:I L-4
Integrator: M t S
Certification Number:�-
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Wet Pouitey
I JI-ayer
I jNon-Layer
D , P,oul
Layers
Non -Layers
Design
Capacity
I
Design
a aiPo
Current
Pop.
Current
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Daig Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [ -No- ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [:]No [r NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No C]--NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? .01
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 [ 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes ��o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

I_%
Facili ty Number: Z e - e 3 jDate of Inspection: o&
Waste Collection & Treatment
4� Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
D<O
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1� A
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
II
Observed Freeboard (in): 31
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
2' 11go
❑ 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
Q'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?
g-l"es
[�ffo
❑ 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
MlCo
❑ 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?
1 I . is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes (2 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN 0 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): q V b rk W � e'--AV A 'cs G
1 l
13. Soil Type(s): atetI. r'w rdC,{.G
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
0'N-o-
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[;J-io
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes r;o___C1
� NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ pease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [-]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 81i_; ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 7 T - Date of Inspection: 1.
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
o NA
❑ NE
2r. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check
[—]Yes
rNo❑ 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
F1 "" ❑ 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)
❑ Yes U:�We^ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ETZ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes C3'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
Ef-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
E'l _❑NA ❑NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No [] NA 0 NE
Use drawin sof fscrLtyto better eaplarn�rtUahans {useadd�tEonai pages.as..necessary).', ;,a, Y
ommentsa re.er to ueston`;# • 1✓x lam an FaYESanswers"and/or an additional recommendation"s or an other cowmen
g t
u [ �� r�►- u� s c�J 5 S7r.�cQ c MG.
a fua
L -?_ 4 S-A F-1
cu
c-.cA( 7lo-3o0-6�61
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
Phone:R to - q 33 333Lf
Date ► U W O
v ^
21412015

3im5 -aa bEz-dI Is-D
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
780083 Facility Status:
'eve Permit: AWS780083
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance inspection
inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit
Routine
County: Robeson Region:
Fayetteville
Data of Visit:
10/07/2017 Entry Time: 09:30 am
Exit Time: 10:10 am Incident 8
Farm Name:
Hugs Pigs
Owner Email:
Owner.
Hugs Hogs, Inc.
Phone:
910-862-4556
MaiTing Address:
PO Box 908
Elizabethtown NC 283370908
Physical Address:
3220 Barlow Rd
Parldon NC 28371
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 34' 55' 36" Longitude:
79' 03' 12"
On the north side of SR 1712 approx..2 miles southeast of SR 1789. east of Parkton, NC.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts Waste Col, Stor, 8 Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Ronald W Huggins Operator Certification Number: 16287
Secondary OIC(s):
Onsita Representative(s(: Name Tate Phone
24 hour contact name Kathy Barker Phone:
On -site representative Kathy Barker Phone
Primary Inspector. Bill Dunlap Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
inspection Summary:
Calibration Sept 15, Sludge Survey March 19-2017, 0-3.5, P-2.7 47%
page: 1

Permit: AW'S780083 Owner - Facility : Hugs Hogs, Inc. Facility Number: 780083
Inspection Date: 10/07/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Wean to Feeder 3,552 2,899
Total Design Capacity: 3,552
Total SSLW: 106,560
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
1
20.00
27.00
Lagoon
78-83-1
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780083 Owner - Facility : Hugs Hogs, Inc. Facility Number. 780083
Inspection Date: 10/07/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
M ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑M
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
01111
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na He
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (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
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
Cl
page: 3

Permit: AWS780083 Owner - Facility : Hugs Hogs, Inc. Facility Number. 780083
Inspection Date: 10/07/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Aoolication
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Coastal Bermuda Grass w/
Rye Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Marlboro
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
■ ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑0
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
M ❑
❑
18. Is there a tack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
[]
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
Cl
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780083 Owner - Facility : Hugs hogs, Inc. Facility Number. 780083
Inspection Date: 10/07/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
N ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El
E ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26_ Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑0
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
N ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yea No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
N ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
E ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ M ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
page: 5

9 9-7 zroLy ll, RrL)
Type of Visit: QCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access 11
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: t o tRegion:
MAO-
Farm Name: s T L LA& Owner Email:
Owner Name: 1 90 y r Phone:
e
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 4- a4-1't Title:
16
Onsite Representative: 0
Pho(n'e:
Integrator: Jr W
Certified Operator: kv V% I{ Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
JgjjEjjLv_estgn
Swine
Current
GapacityK 'Pop.
Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Cat#le
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
I
ILayer
I
ow
alf
Dai heifer
$i8it
q fj I
I jNon-Layer
I
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Design Current
D . P,onl Ca aci P,o P.
D Cow
Non-Daity
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Gilts
Non -Layers
Pullets
Boars
O_#he
Other
Turke s
ex Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[g4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[31A
❑ 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 ofthe. State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E!f NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[ Ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili umber: - Date of inspection: a 0
Waste Collection & Treatment �
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes � 'Vu ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No 2-1<A ❑ 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
[3'5o'-
❑ 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
to
❑ 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
[BOITTo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[3 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
[�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
I I . Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes [2] 4o ❑ 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 Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): J d fo 57 VC
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA r] NE
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.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [r] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Wo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ l20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [-]Yes ffN
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [r No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili umber: - Date of Ins ection:
A Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [] Yes g],Nv ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [c3- ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey El 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 g+-M ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes Q o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Cal I-a_&(y
St4'.t'5Cw-LAj' CM G T 31-( 5
Reviewer/Inspector Name: '\ Q:]
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ Yes E3­no ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ffVo ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes &ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: i 33 3 3 3 Y
Date: 10 Ve
16
21412015

I M. S
or,-l5A0
Type of Visit; EMompliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: lad Departure Timiie County: L7L6 r4­,_ Region:
Farm Name: C Owner Email:
t
Owner Name: Phone:
i
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: L1)G CTitle: Phone:
Onsite Representative: I Integrator:
Certified Operator: LwI Certification Number: f 6�, F/
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design CurrentI A111.
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pap.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
1� �j-,44 P 7
1
INon-Layer
I
IDairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
1Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
I Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,o._uf
Ca aci
P,a]Non-Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
❑ Yes DIKO ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No [3'lqA- �~❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No B A ❑ 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 L-d" "' ❑ NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes L=1 N ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

lFachity Number: jDate of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes EjNa-r❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No [ ❑ 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?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes D_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
E]' 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 DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
o
❑ 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
[§"nU
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
EKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0-go ❑ 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): 6r/ '_ S
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q-N-o—
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[ -<oo
❑ 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
two 1
f
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWM P readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Q'No
❑ NA
[3 NE
the appropriate box.
[]WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfali ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [-]Yes L o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: jDateof Inspection:,,Tq
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? V ❑ Yes [3-'go ❑ 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 fast survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N ❑ 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
❑ o
❑ 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
0 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
Q 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
LLJ 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
[21No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[ Ef_No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
D-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional. rkommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)..
mr - .
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
1'i I l D o
V77
Phone:q ` 33
Date: L�I
zi4 ola

1'ype of Visit: (Compliance Inspection U Operation Review (> Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (B'Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit-
-&I Arrival Time: Departure Time: dd County: So"L
Farm Name: d G Owner Email:
Owner Name: PLC Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region:7�1/ "t/
Physical Address: rc
Facility Contact: �a�'C�[,�, Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: t L Integrator:
Certified Operator: � d M If ty- ('trJ Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish I
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle
I Layer Dairy Cow
INon-Layer I Dairy Calf
Design Current
Capacity Pap.
Wean to Feeder
11
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Design rrent Cow
D , P,oul Ca itCuop.lry
Layers Beef Stocker
Gilts
HPullets
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
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)
❑ Yes [�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes [:]No E31NA ❑ NE
[—]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 [?rNA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? [—]Yes [2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. -Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes EEr<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: ;2 7
oc-rd"y
'Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?'
❑ Yes.
A
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes •
❑ No [DbLAr—❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5y
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
D-"cr- ❑ 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
Q400—_❑ 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
Ej No ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[2'go— ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
D?%—o ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E "" o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN 0 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): &J a _
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?
IT 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.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
✓ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[21 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �;`Co [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ 1"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
[-]Yes
L31 50-
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Z <'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑Yesge❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Hr o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [Aio ❑ 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 ® ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes IJt' o ❑ NA [] NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ©456 ❑ 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 Ey5o ❑ 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 [§1 io ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface file drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes l.tkKb' ❑ NA
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 6No ❑ NA
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes E
rN�❑NA
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes❑ NA
Comments (refer to ggestion #): Explain any YES answers and/or. any additional recommendationsRoriany other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better expWn.situations„(use ad�t�onal.pages as°necessary) . L ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
n
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ NE
❑ NE
ONE
❑ NE
Phone: [ j'Q 3—V-V j 1
Date:-tgk I`- ba
21412014

Type of Visit: QyCompliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation V Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: "outine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral O Emergency Q Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: t o Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Haiq < i Owner Email:
Owner Name: OA Phone: Mailing Address: [� _ � ` J V I
Physical Address:
Region
Facility Contact: Title: a Phone:
Onsite Representative: �i Integrator: M _e
Certified Operator: �.Iw I! fffit-cco.-S Certification Number: !6 /
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. {Weft P,� ' la a i t­VM Pop. le C►apaeity Pop.
Wean to Finish La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er I
L
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
�'_ "`' "` `'''`
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
= Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D`:l?ouit Ca aci PoP.
INon-Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
-Turkey Poults
L_LOther
10ther
Discharees and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Y
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 ET -'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ Nod
CDXA
[] NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[aXA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[aNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
03 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[?(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

lei 12
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [2�Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [g-<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):.L�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑.Kis ❑ 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 [3-V-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 [g NNo ❑ 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 Apiptication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes CE No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [1j'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?
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?
Rewired 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 E&W
❑ Yes Eja>o
[]Yes EZLNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑il-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 4Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E]rNo [DNA ❑ NE
[]Yes [T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2fo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis [] Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [�No [DNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ '
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes a�lGo
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 L j xo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes E?,<o
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[Z�d"o
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
�No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
Ijd'N
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
[]-]Qo
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O'No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[;],No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[E go
Comments (refer to gUestion #):'Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other;I
Use drawings of-facilityto better explain situations (use additional pages.as necessary).
C4 b �IIb4 � a10c
6*4 W& r, L) OL " a
c
Reviewerilnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
+' or-c- 3
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone:I 10 Vj
Date: l )-big
21412011

t
Type of Visit: (3-Coimpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 01 routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ® Arrival Time: Departure'
Farm Name: 4i
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Title: < �
Integrator: /0Ar �l Dry
Certification Number:
County: Y,- / r-- Region:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
nCurrent' �'
Current
DesignSwine
Design Current
ram,
FIDE�
tty ;'Pop
Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop :;:
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
'` =
Dai Caw
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Destgn�ACprrent
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,oul s
Ca act Pow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
�'
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turkey Poul[s
Other
N
Other
Discharges and Stream Imnacts
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)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes �4 No
[—]Yes ELNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Confinued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: /
' Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [] NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):�
Observed Freeboard (in): -
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Pallo ❑ 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
Ea 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 incorrec# land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E.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): �r/' _ _ Z�7 v�iSry ,�f
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 ❑ WE
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
Eg_ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[:]Yes
11 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [-]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 ❑ Wastc Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [] Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [ ] Yes [n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [] Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 V412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
®. No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
r 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
[SI 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
FUse
ents (refer to question #�: Explain any YES answers andlor any:additional recommendations or any othermme conts' ,gym
awings of facility to better explain situations'(use additional pages'as necessary).,,......- " c'S 4
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: /, V�
Date: _ 6
214/2011

Type of Visit: i-Comp 'ance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: L1=dL�LJ Arrival Time: ;Q Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: }t"ttgL5_ ftp-j_i fir G. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: f ,�d
Certified Operator: z&
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title: 22,, ,.._ s;s
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine,etlPoultry.
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle C*apacity Pop.
We to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
k.: Non -La er
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
l
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
r Y h
Design
Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
- ,D .=P,oult .
Ca aci
P,o _ 1
-Dairy
Farrow to Finish_
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
�
Other
—Turkey Points
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 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 �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes C2FNo
❑ Yes 54.No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [R�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0 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 [0 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
2 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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[:]Yes
SLNo
❑ 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
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
IL 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
/I Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): /flQ ;�?` �L D4-
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?
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes jo No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes JZ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection-
,k 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permii conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ER No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 L Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes Eg No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ig No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
O No
[DNA
❑ NE
Comments {refer to,queshon #) Explain any YES answers and/or any additioaal�recommendations or any other cotniiij n- .
Use drawm s of racth better�,explatnasituations (use additional pages`as,neces a g ty4,to ry). t _
:.�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:d�
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit 1erCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Wkoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: .3 / Arrival Time: ���f� Departure Time: County: T Region:
Farm Name: t2477 tZ&eay T uG • Owner Email:
C--A ,/
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Physical Address: !!'' 1
---�—�
Facility Contact: "i/ Title: let i1. . _ _ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _-7`ll� s 11Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = f = u Longitude: = o [= . ="
Design Current
Design Curren0t
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
C►attle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
IEJ Layer
I
❑ Dairy Cow
EK Wean to Feeder
I❑ Non -Layer
t
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
DrY Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl I
❑ Turke s
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b_ Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes P tvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No RNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No [f,4A
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NE
❑ Yes L7N/o El NA
El NE
[I Yes Bo<) ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Date of Inspection 3 6
Facility Number. — ,T,3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
El,�,
Yes
�
�i;o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[]'%A
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: —41 1
Structure 5
Structure 6
Spillway?: 39
Designed Freeboard (in): aZj>
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
CI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
0'go
❑ 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?
ElI_�J Yes
�
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 21lo ❑ 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 0o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ,,-�-,,
10. Are there any required buffers,.setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes P-< ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes gKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) Gcp�p_ sJ Cr, Q.
13- Soil type(s)
i
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Br--,<�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[I Yes
9 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
E�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
R"�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
0 o
ElNA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question;#) Explain a.ny YES answers and/or any recommendations or. anylother comritents
Use drawm s'of facility to better eaplatn setuahons. (use additional pages as nec J.
gr
r
Reviewer/Inspector N " _ Phone: 6 — 3
Reviewerhnspector ature: 1,_ 1154 Date:
Page 2 of 3 12/2XI04 /' Continued

Facility Number: '7 — ,F3 Date of Inspection
,Re wired Records & Documents _�
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ElB
Yes 1`to ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes C3-1qo_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. g El Maps ❑ Other
El WUP El Checklists ❑ Design
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
IZoo
❑ NA
El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
,[—�],
2, 1/vo
❑ NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
El Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[!Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
El NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�'2-f4o
Cl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
I<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?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 L
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
B- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Irj'Ivo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Add�honal C©mmetits and/a'r Drawan s..�: - g
. Y T
Page 3 of 3 12128104

WS-7-,09-ZOO P
Facility Number $ 3
O 'Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
ell outine O Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: T17-0q Arrival Time: Departure Time: /D; SSA. County:
Farm Name: Al�_5 A'j 5:C Owner Email:
Owner Name: - ;RO/'-'a 14 0w59iy_5 Phone: _
Mailing Address:
R06es0.v Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: KA'�y%g ��, Title: a `- Ste- Phone No:
Onsite Representative: KTbVAQAI Integrator: M+wP4y L�w'N
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o ='
= Longitude: = ° =' = u
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish I I_ .
Wean to Feeder 1355 Z
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other - -
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
Other
Poults
Discharges & Stream Im acts
. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
Number of Structures: ©.
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
l ^ A
El NE
El Yes
El No
D<A
❑ NE
L'7 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 7g - e 3 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment :_0___E01NA
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes oNA [I NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: /JfJ
Designed Freeboard (in): _ / C
Observed Freeboard (in): .3 eo
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? NA [I NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ❑Yes No El
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes Ej< ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 0 N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 1< No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l 1. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) /3erM u d,,,_. (ht+ y
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
N04-
Rio
❑ 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?[:]LJ Yes
-
tvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
I SNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
El -go"
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
iJ ly , Pit C.ti,5�1>� vim. f�► r,[�en+s:oN a(f:�=t �.(o�� ­JeC d co
Reviewer/Inspector Name R i c. k Re-ve, Phone: `10.1133. 333`f
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:] t�s-� Date: IE-/ J-zDO7
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -78 — 83 1Date of Inspection LLL_Oy
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste
Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" 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
NA
0�0(0:1
❑ NE
24.
Did the facilityfail to calibrate waste application equipment as re required by the permit?
PPq P
❑ Yes
L�
NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
❑ NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
,D<oo
Ltfi No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
[I NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
,L✓_'N'
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
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
ONO
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12129104

sion of Water Quality
Facffity NumberO Division of Soil and Water Conservation.. _
Q Other Agency.:
3
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
(EM-outine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q$ Arrival Time: Departure Time: /d' fid County:
Farm Name: S A, 45 �SS /�p5-/ Owner Email:
Owner Name: r9 0,V0141 Flu i�✓� Phone: _
Mailing Address:
,eO 6�s� Region: `�Oe-0
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: i�Q y ��1�J! Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �2f -s P5l e w_/ _ - Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: latitude: 0 0 E:] ' Q Longitude: = o [� l = i,
°' -D&ign ICurfent
Design; Current
:Design. Currentr
��
Swine Capac ityl{opulatian
Vet Poultry
Capaci#y Population
Cattle
_
Capacety Poppulat,on 'ea
❑ Wean to Finish ` ;
❑ La er
(� Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
El Feeder to Finish
_
❑ Farrow to Wean
D Poultrya
❑ Farrow to Feeder
r
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
I
❑ Boars
j
Other
!
- - - ---.
❑
Structures
Other
�
Number of
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ n cow
❑ Nan-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[J'NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
ff A
❑ 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
3NA
❑ NE
z. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
[TNo
[,-I, NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
❑ No
DNA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: -7 - 83 Date of Inspection S-o9-DS
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes QTVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No EJ'9-A ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:}
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): .3 Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes EJ slo ❑ 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 [f}M ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [� V�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes [Tlqo---❑ 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 315o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 15GVatuda'_ ( A-7 ) , S. C- . (O V
i
13_
Soil type(s) AJ
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
,�
9 oo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
2 ivo ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
B-moo ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
oo ❑ NA
El NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
,L��,
t� 1 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to g restioif, #} Eiplain any YES answers and/ y onmOidations or any other comet tints m
Use drawings of facility, to'better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name "��� Gl Phone: 9f�, 5�33,G1D
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -O%-ZOoB
a NSc i f r.aar­_

Facility Number: 7$' -- 1673 1 Date of Inspection 09-0
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 8'11� ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E4-Na ❑ 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 BVIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes B'lq—o ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
25-
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
['tl�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E'lgo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑"55
❑ 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
[`TN5
❑ 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
E3
❑ 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-Ko-
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
O-hlo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additi©na! Comments and/or DraRings:
.�
rr
Page 3 of 3 12128104

0
8jAf5 45.✓kavkJ by RR 8-06-07
U00r
ber 7 $ $ 3 vision of Soil and Water ConservatioOther Agency
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 ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival T �
Time: �',OI Departure Time: County: &-ShM Region:
Farm Name: 1744.5 Is Owner Email:
Owner Name: AA/2ic( 6k1:2;AL5- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: KGt7Cc " �ftsFiiJ Title:Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: /i�uvp�.,. B1'd cr1 /✓
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = = 6 ❑ « Longitude: = O = g = .g
Design Current Design CurrentWmpaeiato
pulation Wet Poultry Cap, arty Population Cattleapacity
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er1
1
QDaiTy Cow
Wean to Feeder
35757—
❑Non-La er I
1
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dty Eoultry-�_�
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish El Layers
❑ Gilts Non -La ers
ue
❑ Boars ❑Pullets
- ❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other 110 Other
El Beef Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
NNo
❑NA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
7No
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: -7 g — 9 =3 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes r[p No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 44 Q �
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[d No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�B`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
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Qfl No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
IL Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
00 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) ee rMu VA / ar s*/s�rp J . s(l/ 4�7 g+ & to Vur5e_-.1
11 Soil type(s) Na A No A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
$No
❑ NA ❑ NE
IS. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
D9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
K No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #t): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendsttonsjbf "jA 6' r comments
Use'drawings of facility to better expla►n situateonsi':,,(use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/1nspector Name I RM C leeJe-IS Phone: (910) #33 -3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AIA Date: %— 31— 266
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

..C... -.
Facility Number:S3 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 ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ VY'Up ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes C9 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑•NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

W Division of Water Quality
Facility. Nulm66'.i. S g 3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
County: �o eSaA.1 Region:
«O
Date of Visit: $- D Arrival Time: : /t/ Departure Time: yi1S ty g
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Of
Owner Name: 910A/ ./,/ �«'i 4rwrs Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: v
Facility Contact: ha 4i494'.✓ Title:_ZprG• Phone No: /�
Onsite Representative: _ 1i 4� /Integrator: _ IYA1n 4AMJA/
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = ❑ Longitude: 0 ° ❑ { ❑ u
Design Current Design Current D�esigoFP0C.PM,7;_!,
Swine Ca aci Po elation try Ca aci Po elation Cattle _`pty P Wet Poul p Capacito_n
na
❑ Wean to Finish e ❑ Layer
Wean to Feeder 35.5 ❑ Non -La er
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean pry poultry
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers I
❑ Gilts ❑ Non -Layers
❑ Boars _ -- - ❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
Other ` TurkeyPoults
❑ Other ❑Other Number. of Street to
Discharges & Stream Impacts
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Da- Heifer
❑ D Cow
El Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
-
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
09 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
QjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
rUNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

FacilityD
Number: '� $ ` g3 Date of Inspection S' 9' 4
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
[0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
,-Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _ 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
JyNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
0I 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
[P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E jNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
IL 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 > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s) � y��t. S ,Gf �Y�iit/ �Qywsi
-
13.
Soil type(s) _ � / ye
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
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
r s
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor aoy recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings: of faciiityao better explain situations. use add�honal pages as necessary): f ;
Reviewer/Inspector Name W Phone: (
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
rugr Z. uJ .7 ■A/Za/c a vnrrrAMC

Facility Number: % 9 — Date of Inspection sr-oy- O!v
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes EyNo ❑ NA [:1 NI:
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ;R] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P 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
[M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24,
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Fallo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
r
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26,
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
;d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
(9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O lagoon Evaluation
(Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility.Number 'T8 g3 Date of Visit: Time: 9 ' 4'u
O Not erational O Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date -Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: --- Cct e- r-4n County: Q.
Owner Name: �q %�� f`�` 'Phone No:
Mailing Address: .
Facility Contact: — Title:
Onsite Representative: L i t D;,, q a•.
Certified Operator.
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator, A v — d ee" -i
Operator Certification Number.
_ I♦
[I Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• �' �"
Disc ^yes & Stream Iinpacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes CM No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray l 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 gallmin? Af
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 M No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Condnaed

Facility Number- ••7 — 8.5 Date of Inspection O .�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes 0 No
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the sitnation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 0 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes © No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancrrunprovement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate boa below.
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
U. Crop type & rm LA4& St+. 4% l/ c r� 1
.01
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWlVIP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes © No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 129 No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes M No
Air Quality representative immediately.

Facility Number- -7 _ T? Date of inspection !c7 1! 6
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Amaral Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie! WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
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?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ® No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewAnspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 121 No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes JZ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified-AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes W No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After i" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112✓03

Type of Visit i* Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: // DZ Time:10 = ��
7
Not Querational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �-�� County:
Owner Name: lr%� ve Phone No: 9
Mailing Address: —y_ 5' .07 /
Facilitv Contact: / 17� Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator
Certified Operator: le, 5=2. �a",/Z/ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine []Poultry - ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' 0 �u Longitude
- =vest ;Current
=-
Des Corretif- = _ ;,Design Current --
S�rtne
- - Ga a;cat'v
-Poiilirr-
Po i>Ilatton.�..
Cs-_
cttv� -Pet tilatiioa .-.-Cattle ._ �Ca actin -m!'o `nlst:on x
❑ Laver
s :i ❑ Dairy
❑Non -Laver
,
== ❑Non -Dairy
_ -
- ❑ Other
-
_
To#al Des!<gn CapScity';
M
.r;
T to esSL 0 1
_:- ,Number of Lagoons
_
? E:
µ ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ L 000 Area Spray Field Area
Holdtag -.Ponds'/ !-Soltd.,Traps
❑ No Liquid Waste Mane ement System -
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ BOarS
Discharges 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprav 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 S Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes DU No
❑ Yes JNNo
❑ Yes ONO
No
El
❑ Yes �[ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ Yes ZrNo
Structure 6
Continued

Facilit} Number: 7 —eq
3
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?-(ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Anolication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type h�Pinr dss� ter!/q,�.v
❑ Yes FINo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes tgNo
❑ Yes (IRNo
❑ Yes �ErNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ONO
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes gNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
� No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
I5.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
;KNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ANo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�Zj No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WL� checklists, design, m� etc.) ✓
❑ Yes
gallo
19-
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
ONO
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
NNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22-
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
17'[No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
19 No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted daring this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Camiaents (refer tg question #) Eipb3ln anv YES answers and/or any reeommendst:ons or aav other comments -
Use drawings of fartitty to4betteir e=platn sKttatzons: (ttse additions! ss ae arv)
pages F0 Field CoPv ❑ Final Notec
r
Reviewer/Inspector Name - -.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 7 -- Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
25. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes XNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes X'Jo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes X 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 e�TNo
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 PTNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes PTNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes �No
05103101

.....l.,tr e., �� ::'s4C.w �. „Sv. _ss'i-...a. t ..r,S.— - =- Y"•.-�'-^-." h
EType of Visit *Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: t' Time: �: = � b
Facility lumber
lot O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified M Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm lame: h` S ZICCountv: _ _ 12.:, 6,ex mnFZD_
Owner lame: , t�] C�ckQ _ Phone No: q l o R L 2 ' 440 C.
Mailing Address:
4 i 9" Ij G
Facilitv Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative. 2 u i3: Integrator: fir[,rs Z,,IlI _F,
Certified Operator: P, ,3 Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 4 Longitude 0 �0
Design Current
Swine Canarift Ponulation
® 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 Cs acity Po ulation
Laver I I ❑ Dairy
Non -Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
10 Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons f I j r,ELl Subsurface Drains Present HLl Lagoon Area ILI Spray Field Area
'Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ` ❑ No Li uid Waste Management Svstem ;"
Dischartres & Stream impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [0 No
Discharze ori?inated 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 eal/min?
d_ Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ER No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discbarge? ❑ 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 ; Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): -39
05IV3101 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 0 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 maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes P 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 [ANo
Waste Auolication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending [I PAN El Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes Q No
12. Crop type [3Um t '(' w.�Xk G-yu-1 n 4 . j .
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
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [9 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 O No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes 10 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
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
ReviewertInspector Name
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date: It t /! 7� / 6
AG/A3/A7

I
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
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly Within 24 hours?
28. Is there any c%idence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt.
roads, building structure, and(or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters. etc_)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent temporary cover?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes CO No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
•
05103101

't`
e AZ
W — DrvILs16n of ateT Itty,
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
y
y _ M
w
�'€3therAgencyw k"
^:
rc,
Type of Visit
ffCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit j"outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Numher Date of Visit: Time: ® Printed on: 10/26/2000
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
[:3 Permitted Ce 'lied © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated A ve Threshold: .........................
�
Farm Name: .......... .........4?4.. Lr !.."fir. . 'T� C County:......./...1�5�.............. ...
....................
C
Owner Name:...... .... ..... Phone No: .......................
Facility Contact: ........ ..... „!. .................. Title:.%r... Phone i\o:...................................................
Mailing Address: .... ! •%!� �.1 .../Oil . �tG!!. i...... ..... ....Q.l:t'..�'!'JI.Q'�./. f....� !..ti.r.................. 1..`�..
Onsite Representative: _....._....Q.. . !t e.r ............................... Integrator all r.rA..l..!..5........................ ...................... ....
Certified Operator:.. LG .iR.t ...t '. 2 ......... O erator Ccrt�lication Number .............
p
Location of Farm:
I-W
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• lam` �� Longitude ' �� �99
Design Current
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 I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other I I I
Total Design Capacity
Total SSL W
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream impacts kNo
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ElYes
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ElSpray Field [IOther
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes K No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes t
o
c. II' discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin'?
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 OU0
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier : .......................
Frechoard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

,W l
Facility Number: — f 3 1 Date of Inspection Printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes kNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes �J No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an 1
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
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
ko
IL . Is there evidence ver ap-on? ❑ Excess've Ponding []PAN []Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
AO
12. Crop type 6ri- P cal
:24A,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desig4afed in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
9No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes j�No
,
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
J<No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Ayes
❑ 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
ANo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
[:]Yes
)KNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
1KNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
J-No
�'�io y�QlaifQt>!s or defie�encies were itotea dirr.. �his:v...... will recgive q further .
correspondence. ahaut this .visit - . - . - . - . . . . . . .
Comments:(refer t6questi6n.#): Explain"any YES answers_ and/or any"recom nend.Aioiis'ar.any othim comments. = -
--
Use drawinks-of, . explainsituations: (use addttronaages as necessary): aitto better -" - - r rc�
_�, f�ca-���
7�
ei t.;S as� D s d /�oct14 `va.
5.1 sa�u. les �t ee� i toe 7�.ke►L w i / Z c*t 3'•
P
�s¢mil/ maw f aixle'd i
9
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name j
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7—0/ _ 5/00

Facility Number: —73 Date of Inspection Printed on. 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes No
liquid level of Iagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes 1� 0
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or 1
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes O'No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes � \\�TN"—
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments an or„ _rawings: _ •.. --
J
5100

© Permitted [] Certified 0 Conditiona ly Certified E Registered \ot O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name �Gt t'! ... � Gi r%1i S County:.......AAlve..SQy��.................................
- ......................................................`` /
75:,
Owner Name:........!!.f......-......i�r Phone lVo:.....ff��l7.Z...'.--T.Y�?...................................
........
Facility Contact: ....... ......... % .................................Title• ........ t' .... Phone No: •--.........---.. ..........
Mailing r\ddress:.......1...1.......�. /'1�.L6.../.�. .........,........................ L..,L.C'?'�...1.�!..C........ Z
Onsite Representative:.........1 /..1..�..c�. .-.1.✓...... ...... Integ�'ator:................ IrrQ.1/...........................................
Certified Operator:..(.g r.......--. K.... /,% , ..... Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
..............................................................................-•-•----.-..................................................................................................................................................... --j1
Latitude Longitude
". Design Current _ Design
Swine Capacity Po ulahon Pouiitry` Capacit
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
ElLayer
❑ Non -Layer
fl Other
�x D5
Tots! esign Ct apaciy
°Total. SSLW
DischaM & Stream Impacts
1- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ YesANo
Discharge originaled at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-ntade`? ❑ Yes P(No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach eater of [lie State? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes XTo
c, if discharge is observed, what is the estijuated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? El Yes `No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes KNO
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ...... �..................................................................... ................................ %
................. ................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ANo
seepage, etc.)
3/23199 Continued on back

NL
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8_ Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pond'
12. Crop type EeOIV4O�— Cr--q �
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the &rti
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ PAN
lied Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: NO-*i6lati6ris'oi. dl icier�cies -mere hb ed diWitig phis:visit: - :Y:oi� W'il] •i-eeeiye rio futthen
correspondence. about. this visit ...:
afpages'as nece
C29=5A' Ids
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
Yes ��No
o
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes \�j No
❑ Yes . 'No
❑ Yes No
ElYes No
❑ Yes j( No
❑ Yes J�No
❑ Yes Zo
o
ElYes
❑ Yes ,Qj No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes a No
❑ Yes rft No
❑ Ye's V No
❑ Yes J4 No
Al
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: /— //—
3/23/99

Facility Number: 7 — �3 Date of Inspection ,, 7
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27_ Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ YesN0
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 o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
ALi
0

Q Routine Q Com Taint Q Follow-up of DW inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review ff0ther
Facility dumber �—� Date of [nspeclion � -
Time of lnspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Permitted jaCertified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered [3 Not O erational Date Last Operated .
Farm Name: �� �. t°1'.. County: ........ .CD..oee...O.............................................
Owner Name:¢Q,,........ tray Phone Noz �Ql'o
FacilityContact:_.....A ...............N...r!.........: Title:.......................... .......... Phone No:......_............................................ .................
Mailing Address: ..............
Onsite Representative: tt/Y` Gt.e.� P-T Integrator. CC(r�r`p f/! f
................... ....�...........................................
Certified Operator:...... .................................. .. Operator Certification Number:................
Location of -Farm:
♦:
.............................................................................................................
Latitude �' �� OEM Longitude ='
Design Cnrrent
"'
Design :.Current Destgn Current .
Swine -
_... t •:.` ='Ca acity__Po elation :,;Poultry-.
..
Ca aci Population Cattle Ca ac>< _ Po elation
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
CapaC�ty "
flta)t Ss�,W
-x•:.-
Nnmher of Lagoons r L T ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
-
Solyd
Holdtn Ponds / Tra s
gr_:....r Pam-
[] No
Liquid Waste Management System
_ ......_.• _._ _ _
_ `:.
_:,� • ... _. _'
Wean to Feeder
"L
� ❑Layer
Feeder to Finish
{ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
- :-.a•-Y -- -
❑ Farrow to Feeder
,
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
- - Total Design
-
- - - T
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
_ 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
h. 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 gallmin"
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system', (If yes, notify D�VQ)
❑ 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
«'ante Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes � NO
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier. +
Freeboard (inches): ....---33...........................................
5. Are there any imme to reats to the integrity_ of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
3/23/99 - seepage, etc.) Continued on back

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
• ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
NCDENR DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
.y
HAND DELIVERED (FORM B)
JAM1r5 B-�N11?tT JR. R 1�GOVERNOR TO: 1 4 1 .
�Q �e 1—arm
BILL HCLMIAN J
BY:
C
SECRETARY
DWQ Representative
.KERR T. STEVENS DATE 2 ` 1 — 00 TIME 5 00 rat
DIRECTOR
For facilities that are identified with waste in their lagoon(s) below the level required to be
maintained for structural st-abilit;-but not adequate to also retain the 25 year, 24 hour rainfall even (typically
12 -19 inches):
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 Quality
225 Green Street - Suite 714
Fayetteville, NC 28314
Phone: [phone] Fax: [phone]
2. 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.
4. 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 if
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
g it
NOTES: Lagoon Levels
22S GREEN STREET, SUITE 714 1 SY*T[L OLD. FAVETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 25301-SO43
P}IONE 910-466-1641 FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EmpLOYER - So% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

r
(1
2.
;:0 Division of Soil and Wate'='Conservatiori .= Operation Rev0ew
0Divisncf Soil WaerGrseration- CmplanceInspeon s
� Y Y
i Y 5
Y Division of _Watei Quality = Compliance Inspection
Other -Agency per Review- —"
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow -tip of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-u of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 3 Date. of Intipecticai—
•rime or Inspection E= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
❑ Permitted Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified [3 Reg-istered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: .....�. Ct� Q Qrrms Count � �
1 ..............
..... ...../....�......... ........................... y' ......... _... ...
Owner Name:._....i!J0.0.„ i �� oZ.`..T...��t...................._.......................
................................................................. Phone No...............
Facility Contact: ...._.f!".0._ _tQ=.......` Title:....�CCJ7it°j.. . Phone No:... .......... ......................
�} G / /J................................................... ��
Flailing Address: ...�7..Q. �....!l c.e....� !t� ...f.—aI..�"dYll�hr� ........................... Z�S{.....
Onsite Representative:........ 44. �L...................................... Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified C)perator.,.,, �: c{� �. -1; „ „ ,,,, Operator Certification Number.-.... .............................................................. _ ......................
Location of Farm:
i
...............
Latitude �' �< ��� Longitude
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder
j`
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
5 7Z
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated al: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made"
h. li' discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c, if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flONV in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
identifier:
51r
Frcehoard (inches): ......
1 /6/99
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes JPINO
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes VANo
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6
....................................
Continued on back

Facility Number: W7 �3 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
la. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type ..........& ra11J�l iz2Z�� ,�lt�. i 4irtti
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desi-nated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16- Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?.
Reguire_d_Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Iff Nu.viodations •or. deficiencies .were noted during this -visit.. Y-ou w— 01'receive na further - ' . '
eorrespaideinee; abb(if this :visit.: • . • : :. ............. .. :.. .. .. ... . .
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ru No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes J�No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ,No
❑ Yes 0(No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes [gNo
Comments:(t efeir to gaestioii.#): Explain any YES answers and/or an' yrecornmendations or: any outer coniinents
Use drawiiigs`of facilityto'better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)
w ,
VDDQ �D� rrl S'i4 if s°` /iEG� a Lie 1 m cti) �i ned,
G� at feeor-s a-D Crof
s.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: �27"
1 /6/99

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation [] Other Agency
0 Division of Water Quality
l@ Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DAVO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection d0 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certifield 11 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted E3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:.....
Farm Name -+�l er 4rw�� Gr
rx� County:........ d Gr ..........—........................
t
/� 11�2-4 Owner Name:.W.�e.... i!�.�. ,f....t . Phone No:
t... ............... ............ • ........... ....................
Facility Contact: ...... �n�.. -Title :.................... ...... Phone No:
..........................................................................................................................................
q �' tt 1 w�..�
Mailing Address:.........!-....�,..w�iTe..��'`�...:....�`�"..�......... ....�GZ�rY1A.O►'\'.. fv�.
//�i ¢
Onsite Representative----- --------.! ....... Integrator:.....4�t rr�o L L.t,-S-....
.....
Certified Operator;.... Cyr... .q, ..........IJ r' ....................... Operator Certification Number: ... Z1-445'(...........
Location of Farm:
Latitude s c ca Longitude 00 6 =11
'DeCairent
gn` ,
Desi 'Current; D CuiTent
gn esign
Capacity -Population
:. � _
Poultry `Capacity Population city�Popiiiation -
•=Cattle, r.yC
Wean to Feeders
❑ Layer s ❑Dairy
-,f <
1,4
Feeder to Finish
„
"°, ❑ Non -Layer : ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other max"
El Farrow to Finish
_ Total Design Capacity N 3h
[I Gilts
:.
,.
0 Boars
Tota.SSLW
-
Ntimber ©f Lagoons 1 Hofdmg Ponds
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
M M, ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
t4 ,
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 gal/min?
4
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes XNo
,❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes fikNo
❑ Yes 5<No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ((No
❑ Yes gNo
Continued on back

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
K No
Structures La oons Ilolditt Ponds Flush Pits etc.)
9. Is less
Cl Yes
XNo
storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
G
Identifier:
/t
Freeboard(ft):......................................................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
�No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
;(No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
1XNo
Waste -Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
ANo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering wate ofthe State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type -------------8 rw...........j��1„ .......................... ........................... ..................................................................
........... ..-.
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
XNO
IT Does the facility have a lack of adequate. acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
)<No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
Wo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VNo
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fait to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
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
O No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
gNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
No.violations•or defieiencies.were noted during this:visit -You.will iecei�e no:ftirther::
rarer l eoks dead oL—A toe -It mai A+cit we4.
germ tkacL t-. e14 kak-S beer` A l seed 0. V%jA rC5Pr1;'51edc Pe r—
So ; 1 4- Waller- reGco,►�e,�o`n.Ti o,�5.
.0 fob.
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: %>!i_,C__ C, /e4wit— „z Date: (p

F
-� '��` � °` ❑DSWC Animal Feedlot Operatlon�Rev1<ew� � ,�$
+"'_�'�°?n* �, R,e k-'.+� r,�` �'�6� - ""'�_ _ �"�`�°°,r. � %e ,ow,� # of �� •9'� � wxrr?aS w
s, .:'. � �- � .�. ��1W1.1.A�n�m�1��T'iaail11lnt-iir�or�a*snn:�C■tnxin�r�ni�Nnn�x,,_. � _ _. .�: ��$ s �_..w,, r �,.
lip Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection % 3d 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours ^
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review L
gCerid'ied ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational �D�ate Last Operated:._.._ ..... ��
Farm Name: Ccx�. I , L ct rm s ..__.w....... ._w .� county... 54N _. . �.... L .:.Y.0
Land Owner Name•
J v!t Nn-a
Y S,a"^io __ 4Cz o87
Facility Conctact:..,�.,,rr..�� QS.,C���,,•..,.•,.,,,,_,,,,..�..__ Title: � �7..�e r.-.�.._� Phone No: ...-....W__-.__
Mailing Address: P{� ...�„��` ��l� P r��... 293-71
Onsite Representative:. �i4?+'t� --.... _ .... .....�.. Integrator: aar-01L r ...s.._...._....... �� r
p .
Certified Operator:..._ ... ............ .» ....... .,Ll ( .... Operator Certification Number: .... ...._ . .. .
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 4 u Longitude
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
�r ,Design-.Ctirrentgn
Current.�.��,�_� h �DestgnpCurrent�
�w ,'.%,-'a-.V'..KQ<Nwu Fd^.. ¢ vA r gF'FF£i�-:
$Ca acr Po nlatian _C aci'Po`yilatro b rCattle,�' C aciPuulation<.E
Wean to Feeder
t5ouItry=�
20 La er 0 Dairy
Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -La er ❑ Nan
3
�� �st
Total�DesignCapaei[y �S
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
-
�, ,
Tota1SSLW -
�{.�
❑ Other
, ew --
0. Number of X,agoonssl Ho ding Ponds ff ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
i,i.Ri
Lagoon Area & ❑ S ra Field Area
Genera
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (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
4/3[}I97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes )KNo
❑ Yes *o
❑ Yes 4�\
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes
Al�o`
❑ Yes
kNo
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ Yes
g No
Continued on back

Factility Number:.. TE —..7
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?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
I I . 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)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes JNo
❑ Yes JgNo
❑ Yes Of�io
❑ Yes P*10
Structure 5 Structure 6
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...._ d._ Y..........
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?
For-C4rti6ed Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 'No
❑ Yes P�No
❑ Yes IANo
❑ Yes [%No
❑ Yes $,No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes CkNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes )R(No
Comments' refer to esb�n Ex lain°an YES answersand/or an recommendahons`or any other.comments_ Y
Use drawings„of facility to better.explain situations: (use additional pagesas necessary) y� `
�,--�
good 5i .Lpe 4.'1 ir. Cor1�7[rahce,
4
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 7— 31 '-17
cc: Division of Water Quality, lyater Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

racu" trunoer: I a _ a 7
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: 512 0 6
Time: / 34
General Information:
Fann Name: �''► �.^.ti.:.,3 S►"c w C a" l d. c-•- i!*ay r,, -County-,,
Owner Name: MIA& d C ne No: (q 0) Z-7 -7 - 9 93 Z
On Site Representative: CC,.,l a t. Integrator. C okyvo I f s Food.
MailingAddress: P O `3 qA !v
PhrKto N IV G Z837/ _
Physical Address&=adon: T gr_ Afa lkw Rd "'S& ' 170 aovd tU r.0 1 e f A g_AA>
Ba.,I a K , 650( I7/Z) ri ves -4'40- is SAC /709 egd
Sot / 7/4 s7oe / L A,� v-& e 4rl- .
Latitude: / Longitude:
QRergtion 12escriRtion; (based on design character)
Type of Swine No. of Animah. Type of Poulfty No. of Anirnah 7jpe of Ca uk No. of Animals
d Saw 0 Layer O Dairy
"M=y 35 Z 0 O Non -Layer O Beef
O Feeda
OtherType of Livestock' Number of Animals:
Nunber of Lagoons: / (include in the Drawings and Observations the fiteboard of each lagoon)
Facility n ecti •
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than Ifoot'+ 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the. lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
❑ Man-made 0 Not Man,ntadr
Cover Crop
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
,,.,
( list the crops which need improvem m�)
/�
`" op type:- Berm. d ", Pas -Iu v � _ A :
C
Setback Criteria -
Is a dwelling looted within 200 feet of waste application?
- Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application?
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of BIue Line Stream?,
AOI — January 17,19%
Yes ❑
No ff'
Yes ❑
No d
Yes ©
No W
Yes ❑
No or"
Yes O No Er
Yes ❑ No 19,
Yes a Noe. _.
Yes 0 '-,No 8'- =
Yes O No 0'
Yes 0 No Er

Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes 0 No C"
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes C] NoC'
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No a
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management PIan on site? Yes G"� No C]
Explain any Yes answers: 7A,`s kesis-Ae rcd one +otu is vr-au- re,L 4e, i,Q„ Q•.►
�..�
ec Facility Asussmear Unit
Drawings or Observations:
0
Daze:
Use Anachments Iffeeded
Lf t3r!- - a �..... �. — .._.. -- - -.— - •-+��+t1s+1�r^rr.� as�r.ti. to e�+t<'f `�!1 !Hrti.•r i.w wt.y���!wS?'�'-^Ti.Y •-f_ •.�s.-
T.�t � - - _^S: r .:1i�1:u ZT:'.�� �rlt - 7�•� r f�.= �f. .t7i ���71 -Yi- r� _ -.. ^. •�..
AOr — January 17,19% ,

Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site VIsitation Record
Dater 20194 .
Time: / 30
R N
Farm Name:__ 771 �v... £ 54. e.. C 0.0 1 d s. •- �A .. ra _ Qp�ty; D b6s O
Owner. Name: ,e, u�: C t Cr_ Phone No•(q W) 7- 7 - 4 93 Z
On Site Representative: Carvo ifs AODd
Mailing Address• PC) Ta ox L &
PArk*oN NC. ZS37/
Physical Addressli,ocation: 7; Kr- &W Rd f,11A,
Qa►rlow led. (SIC /,712� ovd J.(i �r.r+ Js � beft✓rew! S„„!C /709, ar�d
Sly I7/0 a.', SR j7/Z ogl
Latitudc•� / Longitude:
Qperation Description: (based on design eharacferhft)
Type of Swine No. of Animah. Type of Poultry No. of Animals Type of Carle No. of Animah
a sow a >A�W o nay
Bfbz=y 35 Z o O Nao-L cr O Beef
ORed=
0ther7)ye of Livrswck Nionber of Animals:
Number of Lagoons _ (inchWa in the Drawings and Observations the fiwbaard of each lagoon) .
Facility Insnedion•
Lagoon
1 s lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1 foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
O Man,=& D Not Man -Made
Cover Crop '
3, S # Yes O
Noe
Yes E]
No Mr
Yes O
No Er
Yes E]
No li'
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Does the cover crap need improvement?:
( list the craps which need improaomm)
Crap type: er u v Acri:gge•
ROw �r�5
. - Setbaek Criteria . ' .. • - . � _ ., - � - - Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
- .b a well located within 100 feet of waste application?Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Steam?-
AOI — January I7AM
Yes E] No EIr
Yes E] Noe
YesO
Noc2r.
Yes a
-,No a<
Y. E3
No
Yes D
No i�

Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes 0 No
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes 0 No M"
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes 0 No 3101,
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? - Yes a No 0
Explain ally(( Yes answers: -TAi g F�� i rcld L Ory- i raM _{ram Ir{ u ese�
got-uS�� ram. a��Af4c•�hA •, i.Li'T�� a�ua� Dl6tN _ D4 t> Xg .I-*- 31 1997.
i T'
= FacUiryAssessmenr Unit .
121r_awing5 or Observations:
7
Date: .S/301f6,
Use A=cknmu iffeedsd
• _ �.�.- ..� .-ter =.rF. -L...
L.l[��1-. ��•��. — �. ..c.. -. - ♦ r'li"♦1"'rr'�/ a71-.er?q�t�r��wY.�1r�•r •ram ♦•....�M�.+►fi►�'n�-.. •.�•si
• t�'.. _�iC`*u-;• i 1.. � . �� ��. rr� r�•-i �'�v� tieawr•. � �
AOI — Janu=7 l7,199b _

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
e��
IDF.=HNF;Z
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
June 20, 1996
Mr. Jimmy Caulder
Jimmy & Sue Caulder Farm
PO Box 466
Parkton, NC 28371
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
Robeson County
Dear Mr. Caulder:
On May 20, 1996, an inspection of your animal operation was performed by the Fayetteville
Regional Office (FRO). Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance Inspection Report
for your information. It is the opinion of this office that this facility is in compliance with 15A
NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and that Animal Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact me at (910) 486-
1541 ext. 325.
Sincerely,
r
Ricky Revels
Environmental Technician IV
'R117.
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachavia Building, Suite 714, Fayettevilleif
��'_ FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 An Equal FAX
Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 N50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper
I

Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date:5,12� G
• T1mC: / 30
Onna1 Information:
FarmCa"%"V-
—countyQDbGso/u
Owner Name:
a t,c
No•`q�
On Site Representative: , w•.••
tegrator.
Mama& Addy=:— PC) . ;9 M 4LG
&�--
;ParKi-ONE
NCG 7zS37/
Physical AddressUcad
7i -io rKa /
ls2' »/r)
eeMd 3N-11 Zvelt "
er/a-i Rd.. /Sit /2ia)
ayd JA A-P. ;s
� 6�•h✓�.�
SAC l709 �.�
SIC /T/O 004
j4& , r:�rl��
.. ._
Lon 'tttde•l._/
Qperadon Description: (based on design churrderidlc:)
Type of Swine No. of Animab Type of ftid ry No. of Animals ?jpe of Cantle No. of A i r ab
0
814MMy 35 2 0 _ Q Non -Lyre Q Beef
Q Feeda
QtheDw of Lhwrock Nk n iber of ! iMa s:
Nbmber of Lagoons: (mclu& in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each Upon)
a l'
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than I foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage:?: 3, 5 4-
Yes 0
No
.Is seepage observed from the. lagoon?: .
Yes 0
No or
Is erosion observedt
Yes 0
NOW
Is any discharge observed?
Yes 0
No a
0 Man-nwde Q Not MannNsdi
Cover Crwp '
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
Yes ❑
No ES'
Does the cover crap need improvereat?:
Yes (3
No C9�
{ Lin the crops which nerd bVmvevww)
Wpe' tr a 4bit 1- Ate;
l 0L4 C,,f5
Sea adr
Is a dwelling located within 200 feat of waste application?
Yes 0
No Or ;
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? - - -- -
Yes ❑ -,No
UO'
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes 0
No 8,
_
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of BIue Line Sue=?•
Yes ❑
No Er
AOI— rangy 170%��-

Does the fw ity mamtemnc a need improvement? Yes 0 No
is that evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yea O No C3-'
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes 0 No Cl-'
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? - Yes a No 0
Explain any Y!S anS v=; -TA i 5 rrS i 37Ae rtd OD ay-A4 ojg 12 _ -e i 1T4 :k bgX c Q u
cc Fad tyAssess rAw Unk
Drawings or i0bumjjmj
u
. Due: SY30/96
Use Arad meats #'Needed
'1.1 �1�i- L1."�"•�•. - _ __ .a iiitr-fir -orw� ..7+. fo�, wi.r+r�'_ �rp.�►++.•.wM, -+h_-• .: -.a:
�` �• a,..
40 G.� �» ! _. �'s �!. �Tj^��.:_j1 .at- i� ~•��7.' �i�'�=ice' JTT►-t'}_f�.�� w ..i.
AOI — 1anu=717,i996 •.

Facility Number. 7 S - S 3
Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record
Date: S Z o/9 6
Tom: / 30
General Information:
Farm Name: 77i-.n!...y 54.E C04 1aG+- ►--arr� Cps ►; Qabesoiu
Owner Name: _ ; C c i A CI,r_ _ Phone No: (410) Zi `l - 9 93 2-
On Site Representative: Ca. _1 d e-►• Integrator. C wrvQ i s ra act.
Marling Address: 1> 0 i3 eA * (,, &
PatrKtori NC_ Z837/
Physical Addres/sA"atlon: . 7/ 4o MayoMayoht RcI anal urti► e l- ow.I10
C�✓IOW rid. 0/54 /7/Z) oe✓d •A& le ra2-LS
50- / 7/0 oy SR / 7/ Z oy S,Z& ►-� t /!
Latitude: I Lon 'tude: I
Operation Description: (based on design character sft)
T jape of Swine No. of Animals. Type of Poulfty No. of AnimaU 7ype of Cattle No. of Animals
Q sow Q Layer 0 Dairy
C3tursery► 35 Z 0 O Non -Layer 0 Beef
0 Feeder
Ozher7ype of Livestock Number of Animals:
Number of Lagoons: I (include in the Drawings and Observations the freeboard of each lagoon)
Facility -Inspection:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than I'foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?:
Is seepage observed from the lagoon?:
Is erosion observed?:
Is any discharge observed?
Q Man-made ❑ Not Mart -made
Cover CMP
Does the facility need more acreage for spraying?:
3,5 Yes 0
No e'
Yes ❑
Noe
Yes 0
No Or
Yes ©
No
Does the cover crop need improvement?:
( list the crops which ,reed improvwnertt)
Crop type: ac,-n. a a. Pe-s f uY L Acreage:
Cr
Setback Criteria
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Is a well located within 100 feet of waste application? = ::
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Is animal waste Iand applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Steam?,
Aoi — January 170%
Yes ❑
No it
Yes 0
Noe
Yes O
No L "-
Yes ❑ -,No
a<
Yes ❑
No
Yes 0
No i� .. ...

Maintenance
Does the facility maintenance need improvement? Yes ❑ No Mr'
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ No C3"
Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No 3"
Did the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan on site? Yes i' No ❑
Explain any Yes answers: -7A, .s OR ero4 i o," i 5 V C-4 6.' m4 -ice v a o+
cz ro wa mow. �' `• a [a bece-
cc: Facil4Assesment Unit -
Drawings or Observations:
Date: .S 0196,
Use Attachments if Needed
%- C+P/i.^117. —r a'f1-��_ -rr. +em s°�S[�Lt1 !►1m�•Tf-�.f+..+u.r �e,+ZHn+.aT r•"w��".�'._�
Wii.l � - _ -��i t�. ..3�*'�i ... i 1l� _ 7L +•'.� � S(. .S 'i 41��'�-•_�.'�li� -. •L-..
AOI — January 17,1996 ,

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Steve W. Tedder, Chairman
Jimmy Caulder
Caulder Farms, Inc.
4987 White Pond Road East
Fairmont NC 28340
Dear Mr. Caulder.
Ar41•
E3 E N F=1
1 1997
FA 1M I EAflLLE
?EL, os'i'iLo'
Subject: Classification of Animal Waste Management Systems
Facility: Caulder Farms, Inc.
Facility ID #: 78-83
County: Robeson
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study Commission on
Agricultural Waste, was enacted by the North Carolina General Assembly on June 21, 1996. This bill
requires that a certified operator be designated as the Operator in Charge (OIC) by January 1, 1997, for each
animal waste management system that serves 250 or more swine, 100 or more confined cattle, 75 or more
horses, 1,000 or more sheep, or 30,000 or more confined poultry with a liquid animal waste management
system. Our records indicate that your facility is registered with the Division of Water Quality and meets
the requirements for designating an OIC.
A training and certification program is available for animal waste management system operators. For
information on the training programs please contact your local Cooperative Extension Agent. Operator
certifications are issued by the Water Pollution Control Systems Operators Certification Commission
(WPCSOCC). For information on the certification process, please contact the Technical Assistance and
Certification Unit at [phone]. The type of training and certification required for the operator of each
system is based on the nature of the wastes to be treated and the treatment process (es) primarily used to treat
the animal waste. There are two types of animal waste management systems, type A and type B. Type A
animal waste management systems are generally used to treat waste generated by monogastric animals
which produce a low -fiber waste. Type B animal waste management systems are generally used to treat
waste generated by ruminants and other animals which produce a high -fiber waste. The type of training and
certification an operator receives should correspond with the type of system(s) they intend to operate. For
more information on the classification of your system please contact the Technical Assistance and
Certification Unit.
As the owner of an animal operation with an animal waste management system, you must designate an -- -
Operator in Charge and must submit the enclosed designation form to the WPCSOCC. If you do not
intend to operate your animal waste management system yourself, you must designate an employee or
engage a contract operator to be the Operator in Charge. The person designated as the Operator in Charge,
whether yourself or another person, must possess a currently valid certificate of the appropriate type.
Sincerely,
Joseph B. McMinn, Supervisor
Technical Assistance and Certification Unit
cd/AW OIC Designation
Enclosure
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper