780090_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

0 Division of Wager Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 780090 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780090
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region:
Date of Visit: 02/20/2017 Entry Time: 12:00 pm Exit Time: 1:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name: 5071, 5072, 5073, & 5074 Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone:
Mailing Address: PO BOX 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 4729 Hasty Rd Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34' 41' 35" Longitude: 79' 20' 31"
Take NC 130 south of Maxton approx. 2 miles to SR 1189 (unpaved). Farm is on north side of SR 1189 approx. 112 mile from jct.
NC 130 & SR 1189.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Star, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-296-1800
Certified Operator:
Ronald Lee Matthews
Operator Certification Number: 990008
Secondary OIC(s):
Onstte Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Cudd
Phone
On -site representative
Mike Cudd
Phone
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/20/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 35,200
Total Design Capacity: 35,200
Total SSLW: 4,752,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7071
19.00
32.00
Lagoon
7072
19.00
60.00
Lagoon
7073
19.00
56.00
Lagoon
7074
19.00
47.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/20/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
DischaEges & Stream Im acts
Yes
No Na Na
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
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%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/20/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro loamy sand, 0 to
2% slopes
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg sandy loam
Soil Type 3
McColl loam
Soil Type 4
Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2%
slopes
Soli Type 5
Rutlege loamy sand
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
M ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack 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?
❑
❑ ❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page: 4

0 f
Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02120W Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yea No Na No
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑N
❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑E
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
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 concem? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
E ❑
❑
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
❑
N ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewerlinspector 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

a I
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
780090
Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780090
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County: Robeson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
03/11/2015 Entry Time: 11:30 am Exit Time: 12:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
5071, 5072, 5073. & 5074 Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
4729 Hasty Rd
Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude: 34' 41' 35" Longitude:
79' 20' 31"
Take NC 130 south of
Maxton approx. 2 miles to
SR 1189 (unpaved). Farm is on north side of SR 1189 approx. 112 mile from jct.
NC 130 & SR 1189.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts
Waste Col. Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Ronald Lee Matthews
Operator Certification Number: 990008
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Reprosentative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Cudd
Phone
On -site representative
Mike Cudd
Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/11M5 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 35,200
. Total Design Capacity: 35,200
Total SSLW: 4,752,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7071
19.00
39.00
Lagoon ::=7072
19.00
30.00
Lagoon
7073
19.00
34.00
Lagoon
7074
19.00
35.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
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)
❑
❑ N
❑
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
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na N�
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (i.e./ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. 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
❑
no
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
[] 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 780090
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No No Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Cverseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro loamy sand, o to
2% slopes
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg sandy loam
Soil Type 3
McColl loam
Soil Type 4
Norfolk loamy sand, a to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 5
Rudege loamy sand
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ M ❑ ❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ ❑ []
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
determination?
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ❑ []
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ❑ ❑
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?
❑ ME][]
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/11/15 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Rainfall?
[]
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 Cl
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 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?
❑
M ❑
❑
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility tail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
■ ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by 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
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

■ Division of Water Resources
❑
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Facility Number:
780090 Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS780090
❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine County:
Robeson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
0311912014 Entry Time: 04:00 pm Exit Time: 4:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
5071, 5072, 5073, & 5074
Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-296-1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
4729 Hasty Rd
Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
34' 41' 35" Longitude:
79" 20' 31"
Take NC 130 south of Maxton approx. 2 miles to SR 1189 (unpaved). Farm is on north side of SR 1189 approx, 112 mile from ict.
NC 130 & SR 1189.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
24 hour contact name
On -site representative
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Lagoon levels:
50713 = 49"
50723 = 32"
50733 = 35"
50743 = 33"
Records reviewed 3/3114,
Site visit 3/19114.
Michael L Cudd
Name
Mike Cudd
Mike Cudd
Operator Certification Number: 25233
Title
Phone
Phone
Phone
Robert Marble Phone:
Date:
page: 1

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7071
19.00
Lagoon
7072
19.00
Lagoon
7073
19.00
Lagoon
7074
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No No 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?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes No No Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.eJ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
0 ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No No No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%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?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Aaplication Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2 small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg
Soil Type 3
McColl
Soil Type 4
Norfolk
Soil Type 5
Rains
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
M ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
1& Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
II& Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
1:1
❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 03/19/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No No No
Crop yields?
[]
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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?
1301111
Other issues
Yes No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
w ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑
S ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
S ❑
❑
page: 5

I r
Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 780090 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS780090
Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Robeson Region:
Date of Visit: 02/26/2013 Entry Time: 03:30 pm Exit Time: 4:00 pm
Farm Name: 5071, 5072, 5073, & 5074
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 4729 Hasty Rd Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34' 41' 35" Longitude: 79' 20' 31"
Take NC 130 south of Maxton approx. 2 miles to SR 1189 (unpaved). Farm is on north side of SR 1189 approx. 112 mile from jct.
NC 130 & SR 1189.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
Incident #
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Certified Operator: Harold E Whittaker Operator Certification Number: 25624
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone:
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2/8113
Site visit 2126113
page: 1

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Feeder to Finish 35.200
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
7071
19.00
Lagoon
7072
19.00
FLagoon
7073
19.00
Lagoon
7074
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
�]
[]
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
D
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)
❑
[] v
[]
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑ ELIO
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
[]
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
[]
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
780090
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Goldsboro
Soil Type 2
Lynchburg
Soil Type 3
McColl
Soil Type 4
Norfolk
Soil Type 5
Rains
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ M ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ M ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ M ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS780090 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 780090
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Surrey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
0 ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
■ ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
■ ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e, discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31, Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
0
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
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

Type of Visit: tDCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: j/� Arrival Time: O3 ; 3p Departure Time: O ' ►w County_�
Farm Name: 507 �73, 5672D-3 0 5013 ~ 3 7(0-3 Owner Email:
Owner Name: M 6 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: [
Certified Operator: W i � 'VC(� 1L {�
Back-up Operator:
Region: R
Phone: M
Integrator: t ` 1 c_t( �A _)?) tfocL•
Certification Number: a5G424
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Desfgn_Current
��IDestgn Current . Design Current
Swine �`Ca act Po .'
P
� Po Cattle Ca act Po
Wet Po 1 ry;Capa itY P P h P-
Wean to Finish
La er Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Da' Heifer
Farrow to Wean
_ Desiga Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P.oW Ca aci Pop..Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars
Pullets
=
Turkeys
Other -
Turke Points
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impact
1- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NoLP
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility ?"umber: - Date of Inspection: ol(d
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q] NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: S0171-3 '50I a - 5093- aj t5Q-7
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[:]Yes
P2 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
V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the LAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NE
® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0No ❑NA ❑NE
No ❑NA ❑NE
[�No ❑NA ❑NE
® 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 JQ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes ® No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili 1`Tumber: - Date of Inspection: 17 a 7 /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes V3 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately_
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
[:]Yes &No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes Y] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes g] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ff): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional; oases as necessary).
C-COa'& 012113
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �� d'B3 _3 Jno
Date:
21412011

. ype ui visit: v i.ompnance inspecrton v uperation tceview tV structure Evaivatton V t eennicai Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: i2 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: §7/10
Farm Name: �`� r '�oZ-3 �' 3'-3 '7 6 3 Owner Email:
i 7 072j70g3j7b7 Y)
OwnerName: UjC Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: a ["LYC� Title:
Onsite Representative: N
Certified Operator: a'` twold
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: lytt l .— uK U
Certification Number: 2 5­(p Z
Certification Number:
Longitude:
D'e`stgn Current;' Desiesign Eurrent
ty z
Swine Cap_act jPo >Wet Pouit . CapacitvPopA� Cattle. Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish Layer DairyCow
Wean to Feeder Non -La er DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
ST.tX7 .' Dairy He
Farrow to Wean` Desi n� Cu ent D Cow
Farrow to Feeder t ' ' :ag T
D . Poult , Ca aci 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:
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 y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes
[:]No
NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
[—]No
NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes [—]No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 7A - Date of I m ection: 347117,
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: SU7 1-3 7a 3 _<2)-133 _�'ooLf-3
NjNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
7—
[:]No TNA ❑NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): � 37" 3� h
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
qM No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [:]Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those
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.
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Q5 No
❑ Yes [;g No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design [-]Maps [:]Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ N A ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
D Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 1:g - Date of Inspection: '21Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? if ycs, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
rid No
� NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Un No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [;h No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Qff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 05 No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes 4 No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA r] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any otber comments.
-]
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pates as necessarv).
42-31 i z-+
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: glbL-
Date: 2.
4/2011

Type of Visit ! Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I Z% rLj /[.I I Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: ASLdYi County: ��5�� Region:
Farm Name:—J� LL-r-"�; 3,rn�3- 3�sb? q =� Owner Email:
C -70_1I)-70-7a,7071-70710
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Facility Contact: ,�A �I Title: Phone No: j f /
Onsite Representative.. h 11 jj Integrator: tJr` LV_
Certified Operator: 17 �1� R�r Operator Certification Number: 2SZ PH
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =1 e ET
01, Longitude: = ° 0 g = [I
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity :Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Cattle
Design. Current y
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Daia Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures. -
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
P NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
§g NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No}
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[kDNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

acilit;Number: 0 Date of Inspection Z /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ?0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No W NA ❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 0-7 (3 6 0T?_3 5n73.3 5a7g3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): q 6 LfV `I
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
No
r
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
IM No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ElEvidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) kV & m4 64, FqS
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those desi ated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[?I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[$No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17_ Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Xec"5 ireu ea d 2/2s�/!/ .
Reviewerlinspector Name '' t Phone: lO 33 33�
�.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /
Page 2 of 3 I2128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection Z
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.
❑ WiJP ❑Checklists El 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 V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22_
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[71 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
(;I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
03 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
[:3 Yes
q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
1 ] 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
g 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
O 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
rallo
ElNA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[No
El NA
El NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

"Mn
Type of Visit ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3-2(0 /O Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: /�df�Gsoi✓ Region: ��&7
Farm Name: _ D` 3 , s07z -3 Sd 73A Owner Email:
Owner Name: ��� wAZL G Phone:
Mailing Address (p l d C-, 6-0 IS -qs -70.1) i -7 b� Z , 7o 73 £ 70 71/
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �u d O� Title: Q _ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Ai--kge2>r✓-Al
Certified Operator: Na�o1 a' K`r Operator Certification Number: ZSGZ
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =1 o = I = W Longitude: ❑ ° ❑ i = u
Design Curreut
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population
Cattle C►►opacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Non -Layer
_
❑ DairyCalf
❑ DairyHeifer
Dry Poultry
❑ La
❑ D Cow
ElNon-Dai
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
El Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood CoyA
ElTurke
s
Qther
❑ Other
❑ TurkeyPoults
El Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
3$ZdQ
El Farrow to Feeder
&Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El structure El Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
h. 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? (]f 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 eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Page
❑ No
YNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
dNA
❑ NE
VNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[gNo
❑ NA
❑ N]✓
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
1 of 3 11/18/04 Continued

Facility Number:Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 5071-3 S67Z -3 5-073 -3 -07el�<2
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z 9 r 27 ZG
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [2 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 ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 5?No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
_ Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. [-I Yes E9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of ,Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop typeew-
s} I�*. d £ FaSVu ICJ 5"a Ii 6rp" r.! ro vct.Se_cj J
13. Soiltype(s) &oIdsloart> L^,ci,bu J!I{cCo1l AID kL 5
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes E� 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 ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/InspectorName Phone: 91D.4433,33oD
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

' Facility Number: 78 —p % Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes fV 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 U4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
J0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
0 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
5'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
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
53 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Timers f r�•� Departure Time: ] County: �ZbB �Ai
Farm Name: 1 3 r `T q 5 t `tc51 Owner Email:
Owner Name: XH U(�, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: , rk s Title:
Onsite Representative.
Certified Operator:da, Id`
tec
Back-up Operator: A kz 4M.0
Region:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number: qTy 7 9
Location of Farm: Latitude: a o = , = « Longitude: 0 ° =1 =
Design Current �Destgn Current :
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population Wet Poultry 'CapacrtyPopulattonGattle
Capacity Population
_
.
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer ❑Dai Calf
5Y� .
5-2w n El Heifer
Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
r: -
xcDry P<oultry*�,,
-❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
"'
- El Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
y ❑ Non -La ers
�9 ❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
F; El Pullets
j ❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
Other
❑ Other
[� TurkeyPoults
El Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[d NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
A
El 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
P NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence ofa past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
t�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 1�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No �IA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 S(ttructure 6
Identifier: Qr7 f SD%o't- 5C7'7 3 _ M7-(
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [$PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ApDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs El Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑_ jEvidence of Wind
/Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) L//�++a__ '' }} �a 5'C� SM< <9'ru r�
13. Soil type(s) ( I ),
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
E�No
El NA
El NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
JONo
❑NA
El NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
AL
qV
i�
Reviewer/Inspector Name �~ Phone: io-1 3 r 33—
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Reuuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes r No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 10 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �9 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
4" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
P NA
❑ NE
24,
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
i� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
f5 NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
N 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
Ep 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
El NA
El NE
General Permit? (e/discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
L
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
In No
❑ NA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
1A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

e:
Type of Visit e Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit a Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
c
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: ,Gb County: s0 Region:
Farm Name: r+^ S&713 — 5?)-7'i' 3 Owner Email:
Owner Name: LO Lk Phone:
Hailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: .LVN k Title:
Onsite Representative: U
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator: Gt74c?
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ED o =1 1 = « Longitude: ❑ o = & = 4i
MMMMQesiJ
Swine
Current`",= NO" �.-
es-vRign Current Design Gnrrent
Cattle Population
Capacity Ptpulat�o Wet�Pouftr�es
i���Populatton C•apaeity
❑ Wean to Finish
LaverEl Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
yer
1 ❑ Non -La ❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish 1
la5_9win� ❑ Dairy Heifer
El Farrow to Wean
l -
P�ottltry �. �-- ❑ D Cow
El Farrow to Feeder
.� P' '" ` ❑- Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
,z❑ Non -Lavers ❑ Beef Feeder
EGilts
Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cov<
❑ Turkeys
F.:,i
t r
- � v: ❑ Turlce Points
Other
❑O
7 Number of Structures:
❑ Othery
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
M NA
❑ NE
b. Did the dischar-e reach waters ofthe State? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
�I NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (callons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (I f yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
71 NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge'?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 12 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 50`I 13 5D7 3 3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): J y 38
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes "Ll 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 29 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 R� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9_ Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 09 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers. setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes F) No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 19 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Hcavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Cr o Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
VI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'?
❑ Yes
W 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
F] No
❑ NA
El NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name '•�%*` p ? _�for Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Pare 2 of 72/28104 C""H"IlNd

i
t
lqj
Facility Number: Q Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have 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 El Maps El Other
❑ Yes
VO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
90 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" 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?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q5 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
16No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Qn No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
J91 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

B H�j �atiaoo� �S
t
rrr .urrwrr.r- . �i
® Division OUR Quality
Facility Number "j $ 9 Q 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Uther 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 [3 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 7: vD A1.1 Departure Time: County: Roh Son/
Farm Name: - 70713 AO '707Z3 '70-733 7D'7g3 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Au y A.4 grow Al _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region: F20
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �4"id � r��Y►��-� Title: „ fIc Iry . Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:�`��"� Bhp cJi✓
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: F—] o ❑ ` ❑ " Longitude: ❑ D ❑ ' ❑ u
Swine
Design
Capacity
Current
Population Wet Poultry
Design Current
w:
Capacity f'opy1' '0nAz
Design Current
i
C Ie Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
352D0 *
w{ ' ❑ DairyHeifer
a
❑ Farrow to Wean`
Droultry<.
❑ D Cow
a�
❑ Farrow to Feeder
_ �=
❑
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
Layers
❑Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood CmAj
Qther
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharees & 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
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
M 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
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

'
Date of Inspection12-/3-071
Facility Number: ] — tQ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
(4 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
00 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier: , 7O7/8_ 7D 7 Z :Z073 7074
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z m 3V .33 Z $
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
[0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
(p No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of
Area
12. Crop type(s) ^�,,�G.-��� Ssual��h.✓ (OS�
_
13_ Soiltype(s) GbA No A M R,,—
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
,,��
M No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[,A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
LI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes V9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
IComments (refer to question.# ): Explain any YES.answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments -
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
ReviewerAnspector Name Ff j e, K _ ��u4L, Is phone: ?/0 • #33, 3330
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �,..,�� Date: 2 — /3 — Z po -
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 7 $ — O Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ 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 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
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
fZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24_
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
QffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[WNo
❑ 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
ElNE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
/
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
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

f'
I
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 6-66- Arrival Time: Z Ss Departure Time: 3: County: f C&_'50A! Region: AR-0
!1l
Farm Name: 7 Z 7Q 70 7 Owner Email:
Owner Name:, //L/LyCl.�s� A! Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: � n & cn. "y
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: latitude: ❑ 0 ET ❑ Longitude: ❑ n = f ❑ u
DesignCurrent �� M'D
esign Current",
r Dene Capacity Popp lah n Wet Poapacty� Pop.ulahon. Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er �� E] Daig Cow
ElWean to Feeder ❑Non -La er El Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish El Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Poultry t� 5 El Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder Non-Dai
El Farrow to Finish El La ers
h,. � El Beef Stocker
FEJ Gilts 1 Non -Layers -� ❑Beef Feeder
El
❑ Pullets ❑ Beef Brood Co
yd
❑ Turkeys
Other El Turkey Points
❑ Other _ El Other tea,_ Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
rg No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
H-'6j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
JM No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of .1
t.
12128104
Continued

.M Facility Number: —
[� Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �0 No El NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes EM No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier; -707 3 70 7 V
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): L� z� j 9 N /`q Ile
SD i/ q /I
Observed Freeboard (in): �.S l�L7
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
[;K 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
P9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes
pNo
❑ 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?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc_)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
[4 No [I NA El NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
PfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments.(re&rto.question #): Explain any YES.answers:and/or any recommendations or any other comments Y
use', -drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Rt Cewe— S Phone: 9i�D��AG—/Si1�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: G -dra -Z�0ato
Page 2 of .i 12415/W i,ontinued

I�
Facility Number:'7% — 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 appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
C�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Q9 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
q 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
QdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32_
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

® Division of Water Quality',`
s s � s•
Q'Division of Soil and Water Conservation
-Obther
fr'
I
«
r..,
Agency'';
FactLty�Numtier
�
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral Q Emergency O Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: //- -OS .Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Qa�xS_�� Region: FieQ
Farm dame: %�kr Lgkow.-J 707 1 072 7073 7075� Owner Email:
Owner dame: AH/A kra�� t�rf/o L. J^j Phone:
Mailing Address: _
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: —
Back-up Operator: _
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: Al�Y®.�.._-_C`�i-�
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ o = i ❑ Longitude: ❑ ° ❑ , ❑ u
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Wean to Finish
El Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish 135"200
El Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
El Laver
ElNon-Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
[:]Yes
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Structure ❑ Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Current
Capacity Population
ElDairy
Cow
ElDai
Calf
ElDai
Hcifei
El
Dry Cow
El
Non-Dairy
El
Beef Stocker
El
Beef Feeder
El
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: El!
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?
CK No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: 7$ — g0 Date of Inspection /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes OU No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -7 t 01 Z. %0-73 `7 0-7
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ,= [q ., ,,
Observed Freeboard (in): 11 4s 1� �'S % `!
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
❑ Yes [A 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 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
0 Yes ] No El NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? 1f yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Windoo'w El Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 73 cvm i4 doL C pcc S t 5 wl�t l� �a► � n� i O u e vS� c.cl
1 r
13. Soil type(s) _ ar N5, Nark-oik C�djQS�nUl-D j mcCG S
_.
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑Yes
X] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
MP No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination: ❑ Yes
[X No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
!A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer `to question #l): Explain any YES answers and/or any. recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as. necessary):
Reviewerllnspector;\lame Rj"c; ��VGIS Phone (910jq-g6��5�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /�-' Z% --�
r�i�oiv� c,u�runura

Facility Number: -7 $ — 9O Date of Inspection 11 Q
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 FO No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
D] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
W] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
J4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28_
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Fui No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ 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
J@ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: o
12128104

Facility Number 7 S - '70
Name
Farm Name Nav,4, _ Rkz t.J nl (70 71
Date l/ - Z/ - d Sr
C.O.C. ✓ permitted i--4U2100 on hand
Waste plan Soil Test --"""PLAT AIIA Deep Soil test
Soil type _ K4,i s Av-j 1p- C�zlds(,0 -o MC cc - --- --
Crop types
Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Rain gauge Rain breakers Daily Rainfall
Calibration of spray equipment G.P.M.
Sludge Survey Crop Yield 120 minute inspections
1 in. rain inspections Weather code Weekly Freeboard /
Waste Transfers Waste Analysis _
Pumping time Z-�
Waste Analysis % & Month 4�
Comments:

(Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: `f�9 `1 Time:
Facility Number
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
M-Vermined ertified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: »........... ..
Farm Name: ............ ........ Fc�r!!a....'.7.0.�'. �........................................... Countv:.....�A..d P:S.�n..... .........
..._ �2b
11�
Owner Name q rr2' .4.......... &A?Az ....:�..L.................. ................ L Phone No: i!�% '
Mailing Address:... �, C1 �px .. .5._ �LQ.��.........R ly...... IV.4......
:'
Facility Contact: ............. ..................................................... Title Phone No:
Onsite Representative:...........W...W ............_...................................
Certified Operator: ,,,•„ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
[3-Swine ❑Poultry ❑ Cattle ©Horse
Latitude �' �� ��� Longitude �• �' �'
Design Current
AL.,,.1
Ij Wean to Feeder
er to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagpons
Design Current
Poultry Capacity -Po ulation Cattle
❑ Layer I I ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I ry
Other
Total Design Capacity
Discharges & Stream I. mpacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
Total SSLW
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 gai/n-dn?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑-No--
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier.. .................................... ................................... ................................... .......
Freeboard (inches): _-) ,?
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes GNo—
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 7 D Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or []Yes ❑ No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/ttnprovement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ❑ No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding [I PAN ID Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) "ibis 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
❑ No
roads, building structure, andfor public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑ Yes
❑ No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Coatnts (r+zier to qu�on,il� Explain'YES aad/ar aay or an ot!�e
,i,n�.a.,lN..00Fpy❑Frt—e+--r-w^
L
Y
ReviewerAbispector Name x rs 34 zi L s i X r 32 3� '
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
f
LL/ll/UI uon unuea

-
Type of Visit @ Compliance Inspection O Operations Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 19 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
t Facilin- 'lumber � � F Datt of Visit: � Time:
10 Not O erotional 0 Below Threshold
®'Permitted ® Certified ©Conditionally Certified ©Reositered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold -
Farm 3r,1 A � County: i�•U ben & A
Farm Name: f'o
Owner Name: _ C a f ;s,.� 1`v`S ,�r,.n � 3~� Phone'lo: �(i h 1,iz� 7S (�,��
NlailingAddress: o 1A O — C.�
Facility Contact: _ V1fl;elj� Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: C,,C C'f d
Certified Operator: f, r, Ck —,a Operator Certification Number: .5 b
Location of Farm:
®Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude Longitude �` �• 0"
Design Current
Swine C..anarity Pnnnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
Oil
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow- to Feeder
❑ Farrow tc Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
EFLaver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver I I IL] Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
LU Subsurface Drains Present JJLJLaHoonArea JLJ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Manatrement'Svstem
Discharges S Stream Impacts
1. Is anv discharge observed from any par: of the operation?
Discharge ori_*inated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is obsen ed, did it reach Water of the State? (If ves. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves, 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 8- Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
31
�Z�
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[DNo
❑ Yes
P No
❑ Yes
[4 No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, Cl Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes El No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) /I
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes t'No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes E3'/Tqo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markets with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes [3No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Z No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [§No
12. Crop type 'Zf`CO tR CIC _ `!� SA�__ , CYf % j n ]
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes N 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 PNo
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [�j No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0 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 [3 No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes 29 No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes !=J 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
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
.W I"t so i ( Sc'�f ire.. u3 / O/a?jv3
`Q ,
dew b aloe � ►� '` `�'1 .ti
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
ocin2iar
Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date: 2�16 [ a tf-
Continued

Facility Number: g— 9 Q Date of inspection z �A
Odor issues
25. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (Le_ 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 [gNo
❑ Yes [;iNo
❑ Yes ®'No
❑ Yes Ll No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional,Comments'andlor Drawings , _ v_ _ _ �w.4',; "!k v o- . ...: r• W ,
05103101

Type of Visit ® Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Datf of Visit: /1 Time: �' .3.
Facility- dumber $ k
�. �.ro Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
[� Permitted © Certified Q Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: C.6_.rrc�(11S County: �KU
Owner Name: — _— Lr�i r z (1 !S 76 42/ Phone No: 1
flailing Address: �n_� �3 uK S 5 �, _. _ _� i�rS c� K C I ';X9 9 5 V
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: S.: �
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Cc—rr-z I S
Certified Operator: C�f1e.r.C��n2.� Operator Certification Number: 1 }GS0
Location of Farm:
ci
u S 2 l l S rear- n 1-tsbecr`o zih� �. Z 30 �2 f P�
qr
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a 9 Longitude ' �• �•�
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Po ttlatioa Poultry Ca acity Po ulation Cattle Ca ncity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder 111 Laver PEI
Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Laver Non-DairyI +
❑ Farrow to R'ean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow rc Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Bows Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I i I JLJ Subsurface Drains Present IL Lagoon area ILJ Spray Field Area I
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem _ .�
Dischar-es S Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes q No
Discharge orizinated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Stwav 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 DVt'Q) ❑Yes [] No
o. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
'. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 2� No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes P No
Wa a Collection S Treatment
4- Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ANo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure ; Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
al
Continued

Facility Number: p
Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type tZ e ..I`� ., Acz_ r
❑ Yes Q1 No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes 65;No
❑ Yes [P No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 5 No
❑ Yes W No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
[$3 No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
99 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
�9 No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
4 No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[9) No
Required Records & Document
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
M No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
[ ] No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ 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
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Pieia.p fFa=q., M Ldrd 4- ar' �j p� r a'V_
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: E7i(:7Q_
05103101 Continued

Facility- Number: 7f — LO
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 an, dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on nci:hboring vegetation, asphalt.
roads, building structure, and/or public propem )
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 fans) 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 permancntitemporary cover?
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes �a No
❑ Yes �g No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
05103101

Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Foliow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 42 mime: rO
Facility Number 7
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
■ Permitted N Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Dame: �� % County: ,/t`,,4 r4�
Owner Name: sI� �J��� S Phone No: 9Id_2 .2 P3 —_,73��77
Mailing Address: ._RQ_ ffb� A/C
�Y
Facility Contact: G.f lQy Title: Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: c aoS Integrator:_st�•�C-
Certified Operator: v_�CrE C' i/ is Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' " Longitude 0
Design Current Design CuiTent Design Current
-Swine: Capacity Population Poultrti capacity Population Cattle Capacity 'Po uintion- ;
❑ W'ean to Feeder ❑ Lave, JCI Dairy
Feeder to Finish Non -Laver [] Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
:Number of lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holds ; . �
ng Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid R'aste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed_ was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DXN'Q)
c. If discharge is observed_ what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves. 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?
Wastc Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard {inches}: /
05103101
❑ Yes �WNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes t No
ElYes No
❑Yes YNo
❑ Yes NNo
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 7.0 — 9& 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, notih- 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?
NVaste Anulication
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes PrNo
❑ Yes P�[No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes D@ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? / ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ONO
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes RNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �O No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes W-No
c)This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ERNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes � No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes K No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, map�tc.) ❑ Yes Z No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ® No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Q No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes X[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.
Cammentilrefer to.question #) .:Expfai r :any YES,ansvrers aad/or any recommrodattons or anv other_ oo >ments:
-
.Usedrawings.of,facility-to:better ezphun situateoas .{use addtttoasl pages`as necessary) al Nate.
:! - ❑ Field C opV ❑Fin s
xa< /^�//rY� i4 /✓ `�0�� ��G�q/ri G�^'` i��✓rlsf7�'�7 /'`L/�-
OP
/ifD �� ,, ,Gi� R
/!liNo,� L���,� .r ,ca �/.�..�>✓ Lac/_/%�� �"--��' A �it��� .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 2Z2 d2
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: T — pQ Date of Inspectimi D
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? )..
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes `'o
2& Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt. ❑ Yes No
roads. building structure. and/or public property) Y
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes N0
30. Were anv major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or r
orbroken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters. etc.) ❑ Yes NO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? El Yes 10
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentftemporary cover? ❑ Yes PtNo
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: _
05103101

FFacility ]Number Q Date of Visit: Time: � Printed on: 7/21/2000
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
,kPermtitted ❑ Certified © Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operate r - bove Threshold:
Farm Name: .7 .... 7/.. .. County: -.... ,1!'f �.........................................
................................ .....................
Owner Name: ,,,,,,,, , r rD �1.••f ....... � 5 �t t� Phone No:
................ ................ ........ :.A.................•.................•..............•....................._.......................... .......
Facility Contact: .. f�Q��1S................ Title: .... 1........1..:.`..1 ....................... Phone No: ......................................
Mailing Address:.......................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator: ........................... .................
L�
Certified Operator:,.--.. .e !lt�i.._..._....... Operator Certification Number:
...... �...................... .........................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude A " Longitude 0 ' 44
:T Design Current Design Current Design Cur_rept'
Poultry Cattle Ca Population Po anon
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer 1 10 Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
Gilts
K Boars Total,SLW
1 - Neer of- Lagoons ❑Subsurface' Drains Present Lag -on Area 10Spray Feld Area
Poad§ L 5did T
HoWmg raps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. If dischanx is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d, hoes discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify I)WQ) ❑ 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 o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes A-N5
Structure I Structure 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
IdentiFier: VY ................. .................................... ......................... ................................ .................. 11 ................ ......... I ....... I ................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: `7� — �d Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes o
(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
o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require main tenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
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
JNo
IL Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yeso
12. Crop type �f r+4 Qr 1l SM. in ' tl e-S
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desig ated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
ElYes
zo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
0No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
O10
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
O(No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
ANo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
jkrNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
JgNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
R—No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes P No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'? ❑ Yes V 'No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONO
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes J�
4 yi tjtis ;or ref ciencies were nott?d ditring 41MS.'visit' - You wiii _tooiye 00 futthtf
corires cieitce: mutt. this vit:si: ...
Comrioents:(refer to question ft Explain aay YES answers and/or any, reco!nmendations orany other comments
Use _offacility to better expl*'situa ons (use additional pages as necessary)
s �
61ermLid zz CAI lcl
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: z6 -- d/ 5100

Facility Number: 7S - Q Date of fuspection -U Printed on. 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26- Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted`? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc-)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes ko
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additionomments and/orDrawings: -
5100

Routine 0 Complaint OFollow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number ? Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection / d 124 hr. (hb:mm)
Permitted 13 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered 113 Not OperationalOperationall Date Last Operated:
FarmName: .................. .. 1f...................................................... .......... .......... County: .......... ,r�Q��s�Y`�.........-..... ................ _.....
OwnerName: ............. .ar..{5.........5........................ Phone No: ......_....27�L...—..Z........................... .... .......
Facility Contact: 5
------ Title:."'-.......... ?........................ Phone No: ...................................................
Mailing Address :............. (.1�' s�.lq/� ........ ' i2.... ......-----.......... 2 3 g
Onsite Representative: .. as 5 5....................................................... Integrator:
............................................................ ..................
_
Certified Operator:...................................._........................................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................
Location of Farm:
r...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..,
Latitude Longitude
Design, Cuirrent Design . -Curreiit :. -= Design Current
;Swine Ca ace PopulationPoultry Capacity. Population a =Po' ullaihon
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy '�`'
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑-177
Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts -
❑Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons" w `. , ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
a
Holding wPonds / oltd Traps x ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DischaEges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon El 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? (II' yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: A � J
Freeboard (inches): ..... ............... ...... ....... ........ . .................................... .................................... I ...................................
�,-.-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 4No
3/23199 seepage, etc.) Continued on back

•'i
Fatuity Number: — D 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 Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type L2erm 2IH . %; rat- 1n_ e-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated n e Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility Iack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there'a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
IT. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
To viola igns'oi- d�f ciertcies rare noted . pang ihis.ASJ : • y00 J1j-teceiye iio curthgr • ; •
;ctiriesporidence a OU this visit:.. ..
j�. IJe-eor r�'rD- A46Uj G-r-0-0 ,.el l a / ' 'v-* I f
1 Named Rv Keep w&v-kigj p-,�.1+_eds ;I Off
1:C"A
❑ Yes (A No
Yes
❑ Yes Po
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes (M No
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes 00
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes P No
Reviewer/Inspector Name �s•-'5
"_-
s.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ���

1.
Facility Number: 7g- D Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 10 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes "C 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 Wo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 0 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? kyes ❑ No
�&l

,; •`•«.
' - . j] I)wtsron of 5oiEand Water=ConseFvation Operation Reviews
Dwrsion of Sorl:and. Water`Conservahon - Compliance Inspection$
DEvtsion uf:Water Quality-- Compliance Inspection ` F
Other A enr O eration Review ,
g - - -
== - , p ----
Routine 0 Com laint 0 Follow-u of DWQ ins ection 0 Follow-u of f)S'L'trC review Q Other
Facility Number 1j' Date of Inspection 3n�&-
linfo of lnspcction 24 hr. (Ith:mm)
Permitted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ...... �.. County:......................eS4dL...-.................. -......-............--
............ ��
Owner Name: ...... .2!r/�C2.�l..f....-QGL..3r ....n-C-r..................... Phone No: ZZ6..........................
Facility Contact: ....L eS....... S?f ..... Citle:...�./[ Vic.--...,tt! %L� ................... Phone No:. ................................................
Mailing ...--. ,, II �—
Mailing Address: - , /J � �` &) 4 (12 ............... ..2V3.1--.I�..
........//......................C.JJ........................................................................................I...�...-....I. .....
Onsite Representative: F- .......... /.Z * ..... Integrator:...............................................................................
e... ,�--
Certitied Operator: Ce C.'�..r-.. .• �Q-�.{. f ....... .... Operator Certification Number: ........................... .............
Location of Farm:
......... ............. ............---------- ................... ..-------- ......."----...------ .....................--..--.......-................................ ........................................................................................................ �
Latitude Longitude 0 •-�"
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder JE1 Layer I I ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish VFOID ❑ Non -Layer 1E] Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity d d
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon'Area I0 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1- Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)'? ❑ Yes kNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ElSpray Field ❑ Other
a, If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
i). If discharge is observed- did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ElWaters of the State ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? ❑ Yes No
2- Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any 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? ❑ Yes §f No
Structure I Structure 2 Structur, 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier;
Freeboard (inches): ...._........................
1/6/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: -7r — qe) Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
IANo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
9�No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
I
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
❑ Yes
XNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
❑ Yes
�No
11. 1s there evidence of over application'? ❑ Pending ❑Nitrogen
❑ Yes
RA
12. Crap type .....gcr..('L1.ti..Q&.....-�:J..........-.�r..t..'�:......rCj..�..:L.........................................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes
MNo
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
❑ Yes
o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
,
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
r 0
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of -Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
18- Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design• maps, etc-)
❑ Yes
"No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
ONO
NO
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 certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
FO No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
KNo
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PqNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
N.0' ialattons:or deficienc;es.were noted. during-this.visit.. You. wiffrereive not ftirtiier .: _
ct)rresporideitt . .bout. this visit. : . . . . . . . : . . . : . . . : .. : . : . : : ; . ; . ; .... ; .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other'coinmenis.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):: _
�"41 cr)'_
�u i'e-17.4i
C,rc 1 b�k' 9 60A,
bee_ �r i , 04 a [ .
y
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �����,�� y Date: r - Z��q 11/6/99

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
RECEIVE
JUL 2 3 1993
FAYETTEI/(1 LE
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
AEG. Cr1=i
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Carroll's Foods Inc.
Carroll's #7071
PO Drawer 856
Warsaw NC 28398
Dear Carroll's Foods Inc.:
June 26, 1998
•
NCDENR
NoRTH CARouNA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT ANo NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Reissuance of Certificate of Coverage
No.AWS780090
Carroll's #7071
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage and
Application System
Robeson County
The Division of Water Quality modified the Swine Waste Operation General Permit originally issued to
this facility on June 25, 1997. In accordance with the issuance of the revised General Permit, we are
forwarding this Certificate of Coverage (COC) to Carroll's Foods Inc., authorizing the operation of the
subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with
General Permit AWG100000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but
not limited to, the management of animal waste from the Carroll's 47071, located in Robeson County,
with an animal capacity of no greater than 8800 Feeder to Finish and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003, and shall hereby void
COC No AWS780090 dated .tune 25, 1997. The COC shall hereby incorporate by reference any specific
conditions of the previous COC issued to this facility. The purpose of this COC is to allow coverage
under the revised General Permit. Please review the revised General Permit (enclosed) and pay
particular attention to Condition H.10 regarding tree removal from lagoon embankments, Condition III.1
regarding inspection frequency of the waste treatment, storage and collection system and Condition III.6
regarding notification requirements for system failures, spills and emergencies. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations
as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the
General Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance
with NCGS 143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive
relief.
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

Certificate of Coverage AWS780090
Carrollos #7071
Page 2
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding..
The subject farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this
COC or the General Permit, please contact Katharine Keaton at [phone] ext. 533.
ncerely,
for A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Robeson County Health Department
Fayetteville Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Robeson County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
® Division of Water Quality
0 Routine 0 Cam hint 0 Follow-u ' of DIV2 ins action 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number
Date of inspect ion[9F-
Q .
Time of Inspection : oca 24 hr. (hh:mm)
©Registered Certified [3 Applied for Permit JaPermitted JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:_.... ...
FarmName: ....- 0 7!.. County:......................R0 ..........---------•................................................................... Q
74
Owner Name: �.�. f........................ Phone No / 0 a93-- 3
,..r�r 1.................... %............... .
Les lie. c1
Facility Contact: ... J ►u S ..Title: ,.... Phone No:
Mailin Address: . 0'
g ... f ar :�.,........N ...................... . 29.59y
............ (_"A `'......... R.................................... ... ..................
P4,
/ /t ,
/s
Onsite Representative:..............k.. fa.! ! Integrator:...........-(Ql................................................
fc.,Certified Operator, ... ............... ....... Operator Certification Number; .......................
...................... u .............................------------......
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 4 69 Longitude 0. 04 096
,Design Current.
.Capacity FPopulation Y Poultry_
❑ Wean to Feeder
x
Feeder to Finish
DO_
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
fl
❑ Boars
❑ N
sign' ` Current.° x
,..�..,: v.,.:.,t..t:x.,
❑ Other
Total Des
❑ Non-D
Numbe ' ' f Lagoons-/ Halding•Ponds ` ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
<� m�, ,.. 4,, ",. ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System = £z
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 0 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RrNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes USNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify, DWQ)
❑ Yes
(A No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
N
14
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ yes
M No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
O No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
ViNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
O No
7/25/97
Continued on back

4W
Facility Number: — D
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (l.agoons.11oldin£ Ponds. Flush Pits- etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes ;�No
❑ Yes i( No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
:.: ;1.....................................................................
Freeboard(ft): ......... .....-....... ...................................... ................................... .............................. .......................................... ....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ l'esNu
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes [9 No
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?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify WQ)
15. Crop type C'P /..... 2! ►zti. ` ^+�L.............. 1 ........... ....... .Ql cc S...........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application"
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0 No -violations or deticiencies were n6ted-daring this'visit.- You will receive no ftirther
correspondence about this visit:
(refer'<to question'#), Explain any YES answers and/or any recormnendattons„or, .any. °other ctimiiii
s of facility to better explain situations. (use' additional pages as necessary) .".
%Ye- ❑ No
❑ Yes JKNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes
V'No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
(�$ No
;'Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
; No
❑ Yes
T`
Yes
Elt�
�L}IS�No
No
❑ Yes POINo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
r' / / �r • r ii - I 1 i•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
I Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
` ne-02er, . .91 ft7Y1 ''s t
Date: