830013_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 830013 Facility Status: Active Permit. AWS830013 ❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County, Scotland
Date of Visit: 02/13/2017 Entry Time: 05:00 pm Exit Time: 6:00 pm
Farm Name: Farm 50793-1
Owner. Murphy -Brown LLC
Region:
Incident tt
Fayetteville
Owner Email:
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 8249 Hasty Rd Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator. Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 41' 52" Longitude: 79" 29' 11"
8240 Hasty Rd. Take 401 Bypass south of Laurinburg, turn left on Hasty Rd. Go about 4 miles past Centry Care Rest Home on
right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: .tames Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On-Stte Representative(e): 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: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility dumber: 830013
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
FSwine Feeder to Finish 5,280
Total Design Capacity: 5,280
Total SSLW: 712,800
Waste Structures
Dislgnated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
1
19.00
50.00
Lagoon
7078-2
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 830013
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yea
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)
❑
❑ 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
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yea 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 (Le./ large
❑
■ ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
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
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yea No Nam
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenanoe or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 Ibs.?
❑
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: AWS830013 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 830013
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yea No Na 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
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Wagram
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑N
❑
❑
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?
❑
N ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na He
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 02/13/17 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
[a
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
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?
❑
M ❑
❑
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-oompliance 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

Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 830013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS830013
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Scotland Region:
Date of Visit: 03/09/2015 Entry Time: 12:00 pm Exit Time: 1:00 pm Incident it
Farm Name: Farm 50793-1 Owner Finail:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone:
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Sox 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 8249 Hasty Rd Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: 0Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 41' 52" Longitude: 79° 29' 11"
8240 Hasty Rd. Take 401 Bypass south of Laurinburg, turn left on Hasty Rd. Go about 4 miles past Centry Care Rest Home on
right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream impacts Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OiC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
❑ Swine - Feeder to Finish 5,280
Total Design Capacity: 5,280
Total SSLW: 712,800
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
1
ig.00
36.00
Lagoon
7078-2
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na We
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
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)
❑
❑
❑
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 (LeJ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
MEI
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
MEJ
❑
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
❑
MEJ
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 Ibs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
830013
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No Na Nip
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
Nortolk
Soil Type 2
Wagram
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
E ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
E ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0 ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
19. Did'the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
tf yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
[]
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/09/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
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
❑
❑
❑
(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?
❑0
❑
❑
Other Is"ea
Yes
No Na Ne
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,
❑
■ ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond ❑
Other ❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
CAWMP?
33, Did the Reviewerllnspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ 0 ❑ ❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ No ❑
page: 5

■ Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 830013 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS830013
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Scotland Region:
Date of Visit: 0311812014 Entry Time: 01:30 pm Exit Time: 2:00 pm Incident #
Farm Name: Farm 50793-1 Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC Phone:
❑ Denied Access
Fayetteville
910-296-1800
Mailing Address: PO Box 487 Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 8249 Hasty Rd Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator: Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm: Latitude: 34° 41' 52" Longitude: 79° 29' 11"
8240 Hasty Rd. Take 401 Bypass south of Laurinburg, turn left on Hasty Rd. Go about 4 miles past Centry Care Rest Home on
right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Star, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Michael L Cudd Operator Certification Number: 25233
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 2126114.
Site visit 3118/14.
page: 1

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
El Swine - Feeder to Finish
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon
' 1
19.00
Lagoon
7078-2
19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes Nv Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑M
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
110
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
1:10
❑
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 & Treatinent
Yes
No Na No
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 (Le.1 large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑M
❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 C]
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
■ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na 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
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Wagram
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
E ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yea _No Na -N
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ E ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
830013
Inspection Date: 03/18/14 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 Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
M ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
Failure to develop a PDA 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 D
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
M ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
0 ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
M ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number:
830013 Facility Status:
Attire Permit: AWS830013
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
count: Scotland Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit: 02/26/2013 Entry Time: 10:30 am Exit Time: 11:00 am
Farm Name: Farm 50793-1
Incident #
Owner Email:
Owner: Murphy -Brown LLC.
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 8249 Hasty Rd
Laurinburg NC 28352
Facility Status: Compliant
❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
34' 41' 52" Longitude: 79' 29' 11"
8240 Hasty Rd. Take 401 Bypass south of
Laurinburg, turn left on Hasty Rd. Go about 4
miles past Centry Care Rest Home on
right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other issues
Certified Operator: James Brian McGugan Operator Certification Number: 986752
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Cudd Phone:
On -site representative Mike Cudd Phone
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
Records reviewed 215113
Site visit 2126/13
page: 1

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: routine
Waste Structures
Type
Disignated Observed
Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 1 19.00
Lagoon 7078-2 19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brawn LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Na Ne
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ S
❑
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?
❑
❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
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 (Le./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
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
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na We
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection pate: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applicafion
Yes
No Na 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
Norfolk
Soil Type 2
Wagram
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop andlor land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
�]
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ 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?
❑ 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: AWS830013 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 830013
Inspection Date: 02/26/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na Ne
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
N 0
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
of -DO
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
E ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
E ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
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 I 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 reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
N ❑
❑
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
E ❑
❑
page: 5

Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint 0 Fallow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I ST�Irf I Arrival Time: ti ¢per Departure Time: 6J County: �� I SriQ ` Region: 12PO
L Farm Name: � _ .3 Owner Email:
Owner Name `P"%ZQt"^ L&L— Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /vt4i-2CAi-d— Title: /J/� & �,,;Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator_' amL;_C
Certified Operator: c, 1 _e+ e,t Operator Certification Number: /7b
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [� c [� 4 [� id Longitude: o = I =1 u
Design Current
Design `= Current
Design Current
Swine Capaty Population
Wet 1'oltry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
D ',oul't . ,
ty
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
p
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stacker
Gilts
❑Non -La era
❑ Beef Feeder
H-113oars
❑ Pullets
El Beef Brood Co
_-_
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ TurkeyPuults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
RNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Yes
El[o?
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
N NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — j Date of Inspection—=f--�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 39 N
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No P5NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
P9 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
(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 El Yes
No
[I NA El NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
f] No
El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 I . 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)
_" (&Q Ste+ 0
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
T No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
1No
4
[INA
[INE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
ElYes
No
P
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
313 1 /
-1/ 1
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: Q l'J3 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 3%3
Page 2 of 3 1Z/Z8/04 C,'oniinued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 3 3
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA WMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP [I Checklists El Design El 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24_
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
V9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[PNo
t�
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
ElYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal`?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:y Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: �;pC12,.� County: 5Cd 2L} JORegion: -F-kO20
Farm Name: R Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: M2 Q4U Title:
Onsite Representative: _ Lf _
Certified Operator: 7Y! l +i rew-ow
Back-up Operator:
Phone:
Integrator: I ►t yt,p[tilG
Certification Number: 7 (0 g
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Dgn
Design Current_ : MIT
Ca aci s Po Wet foul .. Ca acitY
P h' P• �._ tT3' P
Current Design Current
Po Cattle Ca aci Po .
P• P ty P
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Layer_]Dai
Calf
Feeder to Finish'
14 ''
Design-
D , l;oul Ca aci
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
P,o Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
furke s
TU rkey Poults
Other Other
- �rJr'rr ifL�..--.a'. _.. ik�w .. ,—a.i. :iuW.l:'c.3- •': -:,.'rmt:'�-u�3YlAJ
..
..
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes
[] No
[ja NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�] NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
S] No
® NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 CondAued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �T
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
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4fi were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
T
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
F�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes L 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): LarSF I l�r> er S5 _)I —;� -" r�a -srCaj
13. Soil Type(s):
r-am
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
010
❑ Yes
[o] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes y No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
D Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes ` j 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 GP No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes Q] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes fR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
tP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes CR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
<-X,,Js 2-16113
.5-� li�vl 7-Jz�ll3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: (V - -3 00
Date: '9 1 -;2 6 / _3
2/4/2011

Type of Visit: ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 ? Arrival Time: Departure Time: t i County: �1?j�Region:
Farm Name: �Q t I Owner Email:
Owner Name: �f1,� ,OWn i Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: l " i ke C. Title:
Onsite Representative: 1i
0
Certified Operator: I `L fin-'&
Phone:
Integrator-AwLi r�Z,pt,J k\
Certification Number: ll,bg!
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Destgn-=Current
Swine_ = C p tyP Pop. Wet Poultry
Desi Current ;, ., Desi n Cnrrent
Capacity : Ppp. Cattle - Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
-
D �PoulWCa
_
Desi 5,
Current
aci : Pao
I
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dal
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Other x
OtheF
"
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
E� NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Pj NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
FIA7NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[;gNo
❑❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Faci4ty Number: Date of Inspection: Z
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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e_, large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P9 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 DriCft� ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): aS74J )I��iI
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those -designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
P No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [P No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facil' Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ® No
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes `p No
El Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: T
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 1P
No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes tNo
qX,,d� W;ej-e4 ��4t2,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: r yl
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone: JL' -3300
Date: 3 Z
21412011

R%MS
` 112-/ZD/O
Type of Visit (ETCompliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 7:00Departure Time: ']: oD County: Scdtla nt�
Farm Name: 1z 5079,3 1 64"-7078-9 Z, Owner Email:
Owner Name: $fit `f� L L- C Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title: LNM "Ataq a ✓- Phone No:
Onsite Representative: integrator: �hyWiV
Certified Operator: rt?�G ✓�l Operator Certification Number: 176 3 5�
Region: 'FRO
Back-up Operator:
;d i ee.. CudM
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 0 = 6 = fl Longitude: 0 0 [= 6 = «
Design Current
Design Current Design Cnrrent
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Dairy Heifer
® Feeder to Finish 5 O 13 3 to
❑ Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
on-Dai❑
Farrow to Finish La ers
eef Stocker
Gilts ❑Non -La ers
r[I
eef Feeder
Boars �] Pullets
eef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d_ Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NNA
[I NE
,E
No KA
El Yes ❑ L
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ffNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo�❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes o ❑NA
R
❑NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3 -013
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
�5ruc 9 e Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes ,f NNoo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes EKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 3'1Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ElB Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes L7No ❑ 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 L�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ,�
10. Are there any required buffers. setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El Yes E ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L31C ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I0 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)Psrwe t! ��� �i Shoe l� (v'YR. �✓ �O.S,
13. Soiltype(s) A or-41k (,J�c�✓k!�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
Cl 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
L_"J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2" No ❑ NA ❑ NE
:_o___0[E_3
oNA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #):.Explain auy YESand/or any recommendations oanyt other3comments 1,
Use drawings of facility -to better explain situations: (use additional pages as necessary)
ReviewerA nspector Name t�iCy '%c.�/eaS Phone: `'�1D' 3'33OO
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: S_3 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [91,C ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n ❑ Maps ❑ Other �
21 _ Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes B o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
BIN' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Now
❑ NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0914'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0<8
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
CTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
ETNo,
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Conimentsa�dlor3Drawrngs yy+ e
I2128104
I2128104

EL41 S e,.,Jw-J Y/0 3/0 y
vision of Water Quality
Facility Number �,� /3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit o-ro'm pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (}fZo—utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: : 26 Departure Time: 3%3r County: 5� Region: r
Farm Name: - "L' 70 7 F3 --- S Owner Email:
Owner Name: /y! /J Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: EaAfdy &U&yC rNeX— Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Bach -up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ o =. = Longitude: ° E__1 ` = u
Seine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
El Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
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)?
Number of Structures: IT] .
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 [R o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ElNo E NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No L A
❑ NE
❑ YesE<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes lO ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: �j- /3� Date of Inspection Fy -/Z-,1
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
O<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑"5-o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): / 9 of
Observed Freeboard (in): ZL?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
__
LENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-5 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? El Yes 3No ❑ NA [IN E
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 11No ❑ 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 El yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 3-fro ❑ NA ❑ NE
11.
is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind/Drift []Application Outside Area
12.
'�' /off
Ss
/Swtst�( �-a:.v �O, 57 .
Crop type(s) ernfLts/
13.
A_
Soil type(s) we, Q NZ
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CA WM P? ❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
ETNNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
L�7 NNo
El NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
E�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 9149' f.3.3 • 33Uy
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes BIL ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Og-o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists [I Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes D-K ❑ 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?
Cl Yes
❑ No
[R<A
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
B'9A
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
El No
,,E�,,
El NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
El No
�L7NA
LI NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[3<A
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[14A
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
D<A
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
El yes
El No
��,,
L. <
❑ 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
M<A
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
B<A
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or
12128104

ivision of Water Quality
Facility Number 83 /3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
--- 0 Other Agency
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 ZsQ Arrival Time:% Departure Time: County: �Cp7Ta�lr d Region: r2�
Farm Name: Q ZYS - Z' Owner Email:
Owner Name: �lidLJit/ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: RcoN ) !j '9 (A &L 5 cx r-/" e'r _Title: F-VI" i Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: `�'�"� g ff
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Rack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [� o F-I ❑ Longitude: ❑ ° = d
-
rt
` :�'etPoultry
Desegn Current
Dsegn CnrrentDes�
Cati
Swore Capacity
Popula n;
Capacity Population
e- Capacty�Papulatton
❑ Wean to Finish
is ❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Non -Laver I
❑ Dairy Calf
® Feeder to Finish Z=
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
D'ry Poultry
'� y.
El Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
{
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
M
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Beef Brood Co
—Turkeys--
-
Other Y
'En ,� a
Y yF w
❑ Other
Number of Structures
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
❑ Ycs
% No
❑ NA
❑ NF
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
[4 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 ves, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge'?
Pt(ge 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Y3— /3
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 9
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes 7`'' No ❑ NA ❑ N E
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Ycs F 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, notifv DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
8 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
JA 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
El NA
[I 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 of Wind DDrift+ El Application Outside of
Area
12.
El Evidence
Crop type(s) r13e -ote. d _ (h+�x �'1 L/ (9 iu..✓ C ..5 . J
13.
Soil type(s) 6 A , No
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes
No
ElNA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
fA No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA ❑ NE
11
Comments (refer to.question #I) Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or, any other comments. �
Use drawings of facility to'better explain situations. (use additional pages asxnecessary) t,
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name IZ B _ Phone:
910,V33. 330 0
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3-2s- z ao S
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

3-.? s--O 9
Facility Number: $3 — 3 Date of Inspection 3 zS
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWW readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes p No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ Vy'UP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 14 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? El 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
[31 No
❑ 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
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CA WMP?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29_
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
R 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
P 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? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ZI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional,Comments andli r Drawings: *,� �'' k._ 4sP r
y,
Page 3 of 3 12128104

arMs, 311alaco) TVf
-- ®Division of Water Quality
[I=FacitiNumber 83 3 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
��T 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: 6: 3v County: 5COi-1 d Region: �RF%
Farm Name: K S _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: u V Bira%,.�nl
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ROLWJ B4 a rea Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
integrator: & >� N
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ET =1' =" Longitude: = ° = I = u
��.;� - fit, -�.� .
Design @urrentc'
Design CurrentKI
n Curret
Swine
Capacity Populatin'Wet']Poultry
Capacity Population
Wesig
C1pacity Popnfation
❑ Wean to Finish
f ❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder,
❑ Non -Layer
❑Dairy
Calf
Feeder to Finish
SZgO j{_ aI',' P DairyHeifer
Y^� h�1r �L N 1� - ❑
❑ Farrow to Wean DryPoultry,
_� o� ❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
t .•'..:' :r't"Jieou f+!
F
Y., d- gyp.. .'
❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
El Farrow
�_ Layers
El Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
PIOD Boars
ElPullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
Othe
❑ Turkeys
ur ey Poults
k t^
❑ Other
❑Other ua.-�Numtier of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[�6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0 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 1 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?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 2 19
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes �0No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes [' No El NA El NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes E4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [A 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 [N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes CyNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes. check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes
IN No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 101% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) R j.."a.
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
[M No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
® No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ElYes
M No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
EN No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
,Comments (refer to gpestion #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings (if, facility: to better explain situations. (use additional pages:as necessary): y _
Reviewer/inspector Name r I,%iit
(Z.�� c_ [ S
Phone: 9/0, µ33 .3 331>
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: Z-1 3 — Zab }
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: g3 — i3 Date of Inspection Required Records Records & Documents ��gg
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ICI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 1!1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 'No ElNA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22_ Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
rZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
t4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26_ Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
EMNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments anipor Drawings:
Ak
I
Hw
Page 3 of 3 12128104

M
a
ty Numtier
� 7
n
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 9;0 Departure Time: County: 5C4r#QA.-C1 Region: /-149
Farm Name: III AS � 7079 — Z _ Owner Email:
Owner Named �D _.— �� /J _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: 46;`
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:l,�� �f'6L�Ia✓
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certircation Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ e 0 i = IS Longitude: = ° 0 6 ❑
CA
Design Currents ' Design `Cprrettt Design Current
swineCapacity Populatt',oi , Wet Paultry -apacity Population Cat#le Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder do Non -Layer ❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish Z $t7„�1 y°` `4� r ❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Dry Cow
El Farrow to Feeder "cDry Poultry g
1 `' ElLa ers Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts i, ❑ Non -Layers
�'�_ ❑Pullets ❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars ❑ Beef Brood Co
< ❑ Turkeys
Mher
NO
x ❑Turkey Poulls
❑ Other I j
" ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3_ Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes l�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
§a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

lj
Facility Number: T3- 13 Date of Inspection
' Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
DgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
1$ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
lL r�
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 T
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[)6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
1PNo
❑ 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 [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes CM 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 Vj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) LSC�CYq,. a# 4;nJ _Z' d
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
C�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
lb. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[�[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
'Comments (refer to question #). Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any, other commii t R Fl
',Use drawings of facility to better explain' situations. (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/lnspector Name r KhG 1 Phone: km) W4— 1-5 4//
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 6—o ZDD t`o
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 10— j3 Date of Inspection
t
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 VNo ❑ 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
[51 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
MI No
LP
❑ 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
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
D Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
( No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: Y ,
Page 3 of 3 12128104

� Division of Water Quality
=FaRtymber $ 3 — /3 Division of Soil and Water @anservatian
- __ - __ J] 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Jt'zZ-oS Arrival Time: Departure'rime: County: s,-,41CW Y
Farm Name: AfU'-Di44 &=AfAl "L�_ 70 79 —I Owner Email:
Owner Name: NU � RkmLJ A/ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: gAN{ L4 OLrWt 944
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Region: Fi�
Phone No:
Integrator: _.�/�% _
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = , Longitude: ❑ o = i
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La ei
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
5 2
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifej
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: Ely
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
e. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ofthe State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge'?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
[51 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: $3 —13 Date of Inspection 11-7-2 -05
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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): c 1 Af��
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 s i
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
MN 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
CA No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
IV No
❑ NA Cl NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
(9 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
,Window
12. Crop type(s) Be, Ll da � �/L1Ql�Gr�ti til (&wSeeJ)
—
13. Soil type(s) ix g , V o A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
I] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination` ❑ Yes
09 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name R' LI k. !Z! S Phone: (910) ��
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: // — 2Z
12128104 Continued

PSCHRy Number: S3 -/3 Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20_ Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 50 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
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
CK No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
CK 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
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
19 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
(9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (WRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
i acilin- lumber
Date of Visit: Time:
13
... - .-. lot O erational Belnry Threshold
❑ Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or above Threshold:
Farm Name: 11ssVS TZd z CQ En C County: _SL3+16z%,rA _ C7 b _
Owner Name: 'K_ 2—CsEn W- Phone No: _`110 -- 2a(o
Mailing Address:?, a . _19( \ [�, — —U-'r-c4 "i I4_Z' -g'9 3,i 8
Facilit-.- Contact: ,y . Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: LVU-47 n� f.��-r Integrator: cli.(r1 U
Certified Operator: M Aek -e" .'� Operator Certification Number: SrU
Location of Farm-
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �' �• ��
Design Current
Swine (anuritc Pnnnintinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow- to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca achy Po uladon
❑ Laver ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver I j Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 L2eoon Area ❑ S rar Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps _ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 8- Stream Impacts
1. Is anv 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 ves, notify' D WQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
Identifier --
Freeboard (inches): _ _�-
05103/01 35
❑ Yes FV.1 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes IZI No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: $3— =2 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes q 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 No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes JKNo
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [�No
12. Crop type (2474h, .w A e- -(;"— . C'.� i .-, O 4 3,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
P No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
Q No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®,No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes V9 No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ic/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes P 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 KI No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes W 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 W No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes E] No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes Q No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
(>atanmentg (refer to questio #i): plain any YES answeis 8nd/or auy'recomm ndittans or a Bathe comments.
y
. e _
Usedrawwgs of factl�ty to better edam s�tuahons."(use adsl�honal pagesras,ttecessary) �. ` 3 .,. ❑ Field Copy ❑ Firtal Notes
Sul Y '
e �I� _
. , `C `, .4.
l cl�j rr Le o , *.') r2 a,-� -4-- 41-rL, r o 31 0 k- Sin
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A,[_. Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 23 — 13 Date of Inspection O
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
FJNo
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
W No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
�] No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
121 No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
Q No
32.
Do the flush flanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pi=anent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additional Comments aita/or Drawings:._ �.:-..
Ak
05103101

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit ®Routine o Complaint C)Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit- Time:
Facility lumber
r\ot O erational iSelnw• Threshold
Permitted P Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: County: n r- rza
Owner Name: _ C-u-M1::0•jL-8 LAA" i- 2 Phone No: '_'3 -
Mailing Address: a Olc 8_S lr l,sf [•rsC�t.i hf �.• zgs SP
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Q Intecrator:._ __ cL.r COiV
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: _ L a ?�
Location of Farm:
® Swine ❑ Pouhry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude r_�' 0` �� Longitude
Design Current
Swine Canacity Pnntitatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
$ OH�]
❑ Farrow to %;-ean
❑ Farrow- to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Ca acim Population
❑ Laver I I
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver I I JE1 Non-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons TI 1 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ❑ Sprat' Field area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps E== ❑ No Lis uid Waste Management System '
Discharges & Stream imparts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
❑ Yes L No
Discharse orininated at: ❑ Laeoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? El Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed- what is the estimated flow in eallmin.)
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 5 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONO
Wage Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity- (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 3 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 13
05103101 Condnued

Facility lumber: v.? - 1 3 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues,
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28_ is there anv 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. «'ere an,,- major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts. missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters. etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent+temporary comer?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes © No
❑ Yes [B No
[] Yes ET No
❑ Yes [R No
❑ Yes ❑ No
O5103101

Facility Number: g 3 — j Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 0 No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? [I Yes [I No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental tbreat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [lNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ YesNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes allo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes Q No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes P No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
[� No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[LNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[A 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
P No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes [S No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 4 No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes W No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes EP No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection 0 operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ®Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Dale of Visit: D Time: r PO
Facility Number
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted ■ Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 707R County:
Owner Name: �/"� 4 +� Phone No: S
Mailing Address: /� �. �C ,. 7S9_ Os.E f&12-1 ///C1
' Facility Contact: / Title:
Onsite Representative: ^� X.
Certified Operator: d fie, l­ A-_
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
% JJ
Integrator: ��—+ ,f..7�///
� �O�•�
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' �' �" Longitude 0
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Po ulation
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population _
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer ❑ :Dairy
Feeder to Finish
❑Non -La er ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
T
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design CApacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons Q
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
- —
:.MoldingPonds /.SoldTra s
❑ Liquid Waste Management S stem i
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Struclure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 3$
05103101
❑ Yes ]�No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes bfNo
❑ Yes
M No
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ Yes
IxNo
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: 3 — /3 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
A No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure
ElYesNo
plan?
(if any of questions 4-6was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N5No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
9. Do any stuetures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
*o
Waste Application
6140
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
IL Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
P No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
tNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
KNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
15- Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
)1 No
Required Records & Documents
111
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
RNo
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
ISNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (i irrigation, eeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
XNo
20- Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
PNo
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
1 No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
F1 No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[i�No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
allo
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cotrinients (referA ues on,#)'iEipl n any YES answers and/or any rncoimm n s or�any a#her comme d.•y i
Use drawni g, t better e � tpahoas.'b(use addrtional'p as necessary
xp. -
5ofto M1 . .ges �r
-
„ :. El Field Copy El Final Notes
.� ., . ....
r
Ale '- /vim A C,lAsA,94 R,E
J V12s, /C;��
4 J5:f 1wt1, r4..a 0.✓ r deZ
U,,
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ZZ=LV a Z,
05103101 // 1 f Conti ed
C 0 �h�O / C O M�iF��p�' l �ee7 r'¢�' Al 4 Cam- I/�G��

Facility Number: 3 — 13 1 Date of Inspection
Odor l
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 11�qNo
Additional Comments-andlor Drawings._ �;_ c�.'.. an
05103101

Daty or visit. �� �� Time: � Printed on: 10/26/2000
Facility Number
rO Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted 13 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Ab ye Thr hold : .........................
Farm Name: 7o r 4 "L `— County:......��.�...�....................................................
u t
/I
OwnerName:.....t . % .... .../.......5........... ......... ..`................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
r.............I..
Facility Contact: ...(�5?`c,......a�.��........ Ti le:i.......................... Phone No ...................................................
Mailing Address:
OnsiteRepresentative::/ .... .................... .........................../............................_.......................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:. Qt-d�V .. ..............L.(Jl,; ,aAez.......................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm: 777
I' T
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �� ��� Longitude �• �� ���
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry CapacityC2paCity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im acis
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. II' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min''
d. Dees 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 Na
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 Y No
Structure I Struc:turc 2 Structure _; Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 —
Identifier: ...........................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

7
Facility Number: — 3 Date of Inspection =Z Printed on.• 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes KNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? XYes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding )kPAN ❑ Hydrau fic Overload Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type !Dervn u ri a ham / J)n , r-A ©-trews eP.d
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those dgignated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes [D No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes[No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yeso
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes RNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes JNo
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?
❑ Yes &No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes o
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes o
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
�No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes 'R�No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ffX,4o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
yipfiQns:or defeier�cie5 mere pgted d>�rring �itis:visit Yoh wit! i eceipe Rio fu;-ther
......irs deike',about this visit: :.:.: :
Comeats (refer to -to #) Explain any >DiYFS answers and/or any recommendations o-any.olfier comments: _
Use.drawtngs of facility to,lietter. explain sisuatiotis (use additional pages as necessary)
4,
-�—" -
evef-a fp fic*e+ 1" &czv ez/ /?& A� CGr� fol4s for ��rkno..,-d
,Pr w a s
A.
ds--I,
>TIP�� (,JDrl /j�0 lcz qc 7� �vo 'CIr!r era s
©lJ5 i �!
e4cJ
.- f
Reviewer/Inspector Name _� l Cs PL-1 ervit _
r� _.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: tll Date: 2 ��� S/00

Facility Number: - 3 Date of Inspection S-l%O/ 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 ❑ Yes �&o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes RNo
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes kNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes &,No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 4No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes (QNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? qqYes;cjMWb
I.Addlitional, Comments'an or Drawings:._
J
5100

_ 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation Review
Q_Division kifSoil and Water Conservation Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
Other Agency - Operation Review
10 Routine 0 Complaint Q FolloNv-up trf DN. Q inspection Q Follow-uQ of DS%VC review 0 Other
• • Date of Inspection
.- Facility Number 3 [
3 1,1117k' ill 1nSpLCtlEifl 1149' VU 24 hr. (hh:mm)-
© Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered 113 Not O e-r 77—n—all Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.........C[I7✓Z,-.#p2g�.......... County ....-.-s„C'1►�/:..1� .................
...... ................... . . ... .........
Owner Name:,..... CY' -l[... ...... s.-1.-... ' ......... ...... Phone No: -..-....... 9� a19y i5�3
c� ...........................................................................
Facility Contact:--.----.-�.�1.A ....✓7 .................. TiLlc:... ....... Phone vo:..................... .........
illailissgAddress: ................ `;. DO'...........-��..P..----............................................... ................. !"..f .... 4......C.................... .................... ..
Onsite Representative: '7,I,Ij'7�Yjii....... f XY .. Integrator...,/...�awmil ....... ..r..,, ;-
J A�!'I't71
Certified Operator:, „... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
...................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... �
Latitude �• �' �•� Longitude
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
5,ISO
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 5as0
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)'? ❑ Yes ( No
Dischar-e originated at: ❑ I-aaoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance ratan -made'? ❑Yes No
h. If dischat-,e is ohservcd. did it rcacl7- ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State ❑ Yes No
c. If discharee is observed. what is the estimated flow in iralhnin'.' AI/A-
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systcni? ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes l[ 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 stora(,e) less than adeclttate'? ❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: It
Freeboard (inches): .......... ......
1/6/91 Continued on back

zov
Facility Number: g.5 — m j y��r� !. f)atc of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of {hd structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes P(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? Ix Yes ❑ No
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvetnent? ElYes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Application
W. Are there any buffers that need maintenancehmprovcment'f ❑ Yes [ANo
11. Is there evidence of over applicatio ? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen. ❑ Yes JKNo
12. Crop type ..................... ...............+:....'!......."................................................................__...........................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ( No
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) 4 9Ycs !] No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?Y`` Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? iktiV h& aCxOUA. e4W •%F ❑ Yes KNo
L#,L
Required Records &_Documents "� J����jam__ �
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverageails & General Permit readily avle? 4k El Yes No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of tKe Certificd imal 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 WNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes [XNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes 10 No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes %No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 19 No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes Xf No
0: Nnen.eenoted urn . svisYuwer- fhr .vioIations ordefcwieu.l
corres'D6 ideitce: abbot; this :visit.: • : ; ; • : .: .: •
Comments (refer. to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recoriimendations or any other: cominerits. : T
Use drawings"of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) ''
'�• ..Al.e s ol ran d4e�o . 4& Avid -ideW Ad -&WIA A,,,l aw� ce wp
Reviewer/inspector Name 2 "4100 6 A be S .4041;P6'/9S
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: .S - T— fif

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
gj Division of Water Quality
Routine 0 Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection O ZI
Facility Number �� _
Time of Inspection � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
D Registered Certified [3 Applied for Permit © Per [3 Not O eratinnal Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: % u n T 2— K, County: SCE � ct. .. .. ...............
..........._...7........... I .............. ..................... 1- ............. y..................................
...... _ I ................. r c.C�
Ownerl�'ame:......�C. .C.r.Q....�s. ! ......�Cil rl�c'.,�.�?.t.P........ Phone No:...........��.17....:...........
Facility Contact: ...,. .eS.! r Sfi�t;( .. Title. �r ;. ! ................ Phone No:......�. �.. .d 6.. ..
Mailing Address: ..........6...6.......8s`�....... � �� Q� %U C 2 �3.��..
f.....................................
Onsite Representative:.... .e,.„..,s- .. Integrator: ................r'4
Certified Operator:............................................................................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 9 it Longitude 0• 6 "
a
ign,.
we w'Capacity-
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
nt `Design: Current Design "Cui
zon " - Poultry ,. `Capacity Population . Cattle .... ,Capacity„YPopii
:JU Non -Layer
1 ❑ Other
fx:Tt
❑ Dairy
n ❑Non-Dairy
on
c
Number'of Lagoaiis (Holding Ponds ,L 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
"45' x. _�yo.x tm ,„�..^^777�- - .... . .... .. .. .. .... caw, rrs, `R,
4 y� ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
ems' +9 .•;;> rc .�
General
t. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require
❑ Yes
1�'No
maintenance/improvement'?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
RNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
KNo
7/25197

Facility Number: 492- — 13
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (L.agoons,Holding, Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes *0
Structure 5 Structure 6
Freeboard (ft):........1.9..............................
...................... ................................... ............ ........................ .................................... ........... ................ .........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes . �(No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes JUNO
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ONO
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes P(No
Waste application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes *0
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering Oters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......get�.rma .-... ..'............................ .........
.... .... ........................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with th se designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes VNo
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes P10
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? P�Ces 0wo
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes �fo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes Of No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes 7No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes MO
For Certified or Permitted Facilities QUI
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes MNo
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes M No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes 9(No
No.vialitions-or deftciencie's;were,noted-during this.visit.. You:will reeeive'ito ftirther .
".correspQndeacealiout�this:visit:': :.::-: •:• ':•:: :�:,. : :• -.•::�.-:•:-: .• •.•:: ::.: .
t\J
Coettts (refer <to question} Explatn any°YES atasrvetrs and/or ariyrec�prnendationsor any other c nts
,a a .` r
[Ise titawangs. of factkty to betterYQxplam situations. (use uddttional�pat;es as;necessary} Y
', tsa?'✓�,f .fie„eiw:6.a.e53:c Q.ah.-�- ,. :., °"'i.Y-,ce y .�3 r �.>. <�, 'y..,`tti,:<s-.3>tr�a;, a ate°".,,'. ,.•,�.,s _
/ ! s aw :x era
P� -lo resprr G'�r/rt - I ���- a"0/7` Wag
bli f cry g�'5/1, s� wdl.
/j�ew &pLlla 44 �7 CQrrD�f s r
/
7/25/97
F
eview-er/Inspector Name " a F k�r w °s
xt .y tu 14 "z< ':2xx , Si a °+
eviewer/lnspector Signature:/klnr Date: 2-

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
WRoutine /QContnlaint 0 Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
,_[f Facility Number
® Registered 0 Certified 13 Applied for Permit © Permitted
Farm Name: ... .K1..__5....... �.
. �!'.....-................................................
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
113 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ...................
County:....c..J.�f=� �...t:.....................................
Owner Name: ......Me. r.�L? .4 . ............. Phone No:.......... 7 ..— 3L1.........................................
�j.f �—
Facility Contact: ... (�/�le�'r.. . . II rr�__................... Title: _. � Gt.%,(!L. 1�....... ........ Phone No:..... Q - ` .............
Mailing Address: .... QQ 64�-...�.IC�.+1CJ �. .................................................. c �u..... �....... ..........................
La...n..- ��...�.. 2t3
OnsiteRepresentative: ............ . ............................................................................................. Integrator:...... STY'QL.._.......................................... ....
Certified Operator: ..................................................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:................
Latitude • 6 64 Longitude ' 6 4&
F"est
CE
x,
I%6es 1DE
rre�notnCa
p
I 5
p%,ulahan apcjtyP;>nCpuida
„, xra�,,•.:f0ffi1
t
-Wean to Feeder
❑Layer V„ ❑ Dairy
g 'Feeder to Finish
10 Non 1 ❑ Non
2-
fo
-Layer -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑er Oth
❑ Farrow to Feeder
W—o
..w.aaM
Total Deslg�i Capac>ttp
❑Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts„
❑Boars
�8
'§°4
.. .......
,. ...,,_-. ..._,.. ... -_
:.... ..
,<.. .... ywah�a`b w..c2krv�3`*6,� $El
.xn ""`un..a...:.: :- �•'Y-.pTx �R eev..ns,.w kr _ Ye^"
----------------
Number of Lagoons l,Holdutg Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains PresentIO Lagoon Area 10 Spray Freld Area
T
- xi- axa�u-
�� ❑ Igo Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is obsen.ed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
4 No
❑ Yes
ko
❑ Yes
ANo
Continued on bank

Facility Number. 3-
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes KNO
Structures (La oons Holdin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ]2No
Structure I Structure 2- Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: ........... ...........................................................................................
Freeboard(it)Z........................ .............................. ..... ........ ............................ ... .................. _............ ............................. ........
.................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes XNO
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �No
12, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes AN 0
Waste application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes �No
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ) 11
15. Crop type ......1.Lj ..... .......... ra.s.S'...--.--......---.----.--..----.--......................................................................................................................_.....
16. Do the receiving crops d ffer with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWN4P)? ❑ Yes o
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes jk�No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 9No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? PYes -sko
22. Does record keeping need improvement? /❑_Yes ONo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes ;No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ,o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
No.violations•or' deftciencies.were.noted during this" visit. You:wiU receive -no further
::-correspQndencealioutthis:visit:-:--: .�. .�•.�•.•.. ..•��.•��.-.�.-.:.��.•�-: ...:.�-.•
4 - ,:� � _, � K,sy „cam
Comments (refer to question # .� ta> t an YES answers andlor any recommendations or anyloil;er catirmxe s '
Use`drawtngs of factlttXto better explaui sttuattons E(use pa tr additinal ges as necessgy).
;.,, 'tea. „aKe '2:_ a i
Ak
7/25/97
_
Reviewer/Inspector Name
v120i?�ho'ww
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

leRa
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
July 19, 1995
Mr. Gib Jones
K&S Farms
P.O. Box 1663
Laurinburg, NC 28353
dft
�EHNR
MANAGEMENT
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
SR 1615 North of Hasty
Scotland County
Dear Mr. Jones:
On July 14, 1995, and inspection of your animal operation was
performed by the Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find
enclosed a copy of our Compliance Inspection Report for your
information. It is the opinion of this office that this facility
is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and that Animal
Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any question regarding this matter, feel free
to contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ricky Revels
Environmental Technician IV
RR/sc
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 1096 post -consumer paper

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTbWKT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH & NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Form
R & S Farms/Gib .Tones f July 14, 1995 1 N/A
P. O. Box 1663 910 276-3800
Laurinburg, NC 28353
All questions answered negatively will be discussed in sufficient detail in
the Comments Section to enable the deemed Permittee to perform the appropriate
corrections:
SECTION I
Animal Operation Type:
Horses, cattle, swine, poultry, or sheep
SECTION II
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? [Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system))
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period?
4. Does this facility have a CERTIFIED ANIMAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN?
S. Does this facility maintain waste management
records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
OEM

SECTION III
Field Site Management
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Map Slue Line Stream?
2. Is animal waste land applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a USGS Map
Blue Line Stream?
3. Does this facility have adequate acreage
on which to apply the waste?
4. Does the land application site have a
cover crop in accordance with the
CERTIFICATION PLAN?
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
6. Does the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(BMP) of the approved CERTIFICATION?
7. Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately 4 ft )
B. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SECTION IV
Comments
ee
mom.
IN=
No=
IN=
mom
is=