820022_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

/I
Z_
(Type of Visit: (YCHance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit:Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: r0H Arrival Time: 4p t! Departure Time: Dd County: Region: �+
Farm Name: f"15 rrPAe, -5- Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: C6r.w�t'� AI'C,/I�c�Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:,� Integrator: _ /A/5` S
Certified Operator: cr(s- 1 W 4l�. r Certification Number: Lo Z 36 -
Sack -up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes EJ '`'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No E?NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No l 7 1q ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes C2 -No
[:]Yes [JNo
[3,<A
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
y Pop.
777
La er
Dai Cow
Non -La er
Dai Calf
o ?�
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , LOUltl,
Ca aci
l?o P.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ars
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turke Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes EJ '`'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No E?NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No l 7 1q ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes C2 -No
[:]Yes [JNo
[3,<A
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page l of 3 2/4/2015 Continued

Facilit Number: W Z- Z Date of Ins ection:
Wast; Collection & Treatment
j Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ NoNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3..-2,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
U2, -<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat, notify DWR
QDo any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
&Yes
U O
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit'?
❑ Yes
[Ei o
DNA
❑ N E
(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
(ZINe—
0 NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[317o`
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): (f Is /0-P S16 O /X 4
13. Soil Type(s):..-
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes lo''`'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [!I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'? ❑ Yes [LKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes LW""❑ NA E]NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ YesE!r<o­
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers D Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes F31No❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Q4 4
Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q.Nc- ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
[] Yes
Q ❑ 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?
0 Yes
2<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
hd"`' o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues ^!
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes pr<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) /
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1E ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/[nspector 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 to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to guestion #.) Expo_I . Y ' 'v Y ti.,. Y o ments
lain an YES answers and/or'an additional recommendations or an other comments.::.
use dra vines�ofrfacillty `to Bette ezplain�sltuatiMs (use additio`nalfpaees;:ns necessary).
3, 3 F 10-3/ l I 70(v
G S y a b i Gj �l Qa y (> G�`�� eve v �' LA
vo {30s --6 9 '�1
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
Phone; Id
�"337V
Date:
2/4/2013

0 1 Wes WJ
Division of Water Resources
liucfli"umber O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit:,.,ompliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: cp/Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: X7 9AA I Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: _vim
Farm Name: L�Ic�i ►-a`LCy1��rJYk-S Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
a Q
Facility Contact: 0a4!, i1J4~� & Title:
Onsite Representative: e4
Certified Operator: �'1✓44- 1044111
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Region:l--- Tv'
Phone:
Integrator: M 15-5
Certification Number:
Certification Numher:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Appiication Field ❑ Other;
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If ycs, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heiler
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beel' Stocker
Beefl,eeder
Beef l3rood Cow
❑ Yes -f►Ida ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes [-]No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑'No
❑ Yes CjNo
[3ANA ❑N
ffr-NA ❑ N E
ffrNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 214/2015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection: Vf
Wase Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Q ,o--aNA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No F 'ice NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats two the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [2(:Vo ❑ 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 �_eKNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes !['No [:]NA —] NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Q 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 ❑ YesNo [] NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes EJONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. [] Total Phosphorus [] Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind
Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Cd'" S G U [9 .IL�Q� r tfYi
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? []Yes ❑r o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[f Ngo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres detennination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[ff"No
❑ NA
[] NE
Required Records &_Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[✓]T�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[?"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall E3 Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
E�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:Xzt
24, laid ttie facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes @2,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
01
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ONE
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:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
(.la r i I o''L 1-7-1�
5 5,,,r- 3 a - « ®- �,� F1_3 r
7 tv-3D8'6 $SI
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: L �k
Page 3 of 3
❑ Yes �No E] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [?*'ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes F?"N"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E? No
❑ Yes [21'No
❑ Yes F7No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Phone:71Q • 13 3`"`�j 5 `T
Date: !-� 1-7
2/4/2015

S 3 b 3iJ
VolIlVision of Water Quality
Facility Number ®- ® O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of visit:Co liance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: C5 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: r-0/ Departure Time: County: fir`— `
Farm Name: t mac- vY ��� Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Ct.< i Title:
�r
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 94n�V-9- 1A )` 4111,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone:
Region:
Integrator.,
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer -
Non -Layer
ory rouitry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Fieifer
Dry Cow
,Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [9 'Zo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes L No
❑ Yes ZfNo
[3<A ❑ NE
dNA ❑ NE
le NA
❑ NE
C] NA
E] NE
❑NA
❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [3440--❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No � ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [3'4o ❑ 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 []Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes E24 ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 2/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 FDOONoo [] NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [;Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [310 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [] Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs: ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 96J4- W44A 96 0 'i ay441
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAMP?
❑ Yes
[,101�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
E544o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[__Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
ZeNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code '
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[214o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
EZ/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2014 Continued

Facility Number: tyK jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes EZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes EZ blo- ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes EjAo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑Yes ETN' o ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes P<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [3"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2'fqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [3 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
2/4/201

Afs
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O—R'outine O Comnlaint O Follow -UD O Referral O EmerQenev O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1,1,tio I W1 Departure Time: =( U County:
Farm Name: �,�.} dJ��� 5f'0 C L,,, a Owner Email:
Owner Name: I I Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _ CC: Q4' --S !� 0,AW ` e Title:
Onsite Representative: i
Certified Operator: _
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:: j_
2PA� t...)
Region:tJ�--�
Certification Number: %,Q � L b r
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Non -L
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [3-1qo__­❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes [] No
[D Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [2�140
❑ Yes eNo
E�XA [] NE
[]AA ❑ NE
[� NA ❑ NE
❑NA []NE
DNA ONE
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

r
Facili Number: -7 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [?I-3v—D 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
❑ NA
Identifier:
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�o
Spillway?:
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
tL -N`6 ❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[ -Ne'❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
6"No
❑ NA
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
[3 -No ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[D -Ne- ❑ 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
[]-K6`_ ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�^ ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 16lef`S �, 4
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ fr6m 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?
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes [B -No- ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑< ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
(E 'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
6"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/412011 Continued

acili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes aio, [] NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [5 -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
E3 Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0,11D ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
C:] Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[3'14-o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
©No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[] Yes
G -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit Or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
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
❑rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
---'---•--•---r----- ---•---• -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2014

Type of Visit: V,"impliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ou'"ne t) Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Y' { Regim r-R–b
Farm Name: 0174;0 5 61-0 51 Z—&J Owner Email:
Owner Name: ' Phone:
Mailing Address:
t
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: u ( 01U"C Atle:
Onsite Representative: 1
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:�0
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
a
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Design Current
Doig
@u rent
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
:'Vet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
[Dlq'A--
❑ NE
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish WTV
[] No
❑<A
❑ NE
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
E Io
Design
Current
RprGqw
Farrow to Feeder
D .. Poult ,
Ca amici
1?o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Tukez Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[R111A__
[] NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Dlq'A--
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[] No
❑<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
ED'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/412011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
%waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ NA
Identifier:
❑ Yes
7].N✓o
❑ NA
Spillway?:
O Yes
[2 o
❑ NA
Designed Freeboard (in):
the appropriate box.
Observed Freeboard (in):
[] WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
li�_�s No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
[gAk,9-0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
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?
[a -Ms— ❑ 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
O-YLT- ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
YY s—f ] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, []�� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): I ,< G b
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designate in the CAWM
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
4EI) -)lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
7].N✓o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
jAN'0'
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
JEKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
O Yes
[2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ZNS
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
[] WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes 13No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes F2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
X24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
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)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
[�'1Qo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No D -NA-- ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Erf
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes L2-1qo_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Cy No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ° ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes LD"'"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes [2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes �io ❑ NA ❑ NE
ICornrncnt§::(refer to .question #). Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any. other comments.
Use drawings afacility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
5 A ,a ,_Sej
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
IdL 3,o
3e 7
Phone:
Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2011

1.1�1
W"Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ®- ® 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 016ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 6x6outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
I 4SP fiQa
Date of Visit:in
Arrival Time: Departure Time: + County: oSA� $Uri Region:
Farm Name: lj m�2 ZRC_ � Ulc_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Wm�£ i3(��Lcs ag Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Q,)RV_-'s r_�3P RV-rCK Title:
Onsite Representative: S(:f N
Certified Operator:
Phone:
Integrator: _Kutzo'.4 lkot, r.
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Poi). Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I E� I I Layer
Non -La er
t.ory rout
Layers
Non-Layf
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes E34o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]No
[9"NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[IIA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
HYNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes [� No [DNA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

lFaLcility Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is heavy less
storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus rainfall) than adequate?
❑ Yes
[2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�6 A
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[DNo
❑ 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
E3"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markcrs as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
U"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
EyNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
dNo
[DNA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[ /4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [] Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s): 2 0
�
`
v
13. Soil Type(s): t),6j'x ...._
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[Z]'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[:]Yes
[fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes E;KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes © No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 8 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gaugc? ❑ Yes [E�No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
YA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili plumber: - Date of Inspection: 21
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E)/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [2f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes EIZO ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes [ /o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes [ /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
FOo
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
lComments.(refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments: I
Use dtawinas of facility to better explain situations (use -additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name: -��pL\ 'c4' d �tidJ� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:'9%Date:
Page 3 of 3 oil

t ype of visit: kv Lompnance inspection V vperatton tcevtew u Ntructure r vatuatton V t eenntcat Assistance
Reason for Visit: autine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: &.1-Y1111 Arrival Time: CaG ,,.,Departure Time: County: J Region: C�
Farm Name: Lo �, 1 �j Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ljv—� 9 Ial.,n j_j A_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Clit•Vr Title: 'CL Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:r
Certified Operator: 6. Le " Certification Number: 0
14 29 �� V12 1
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pap.
LEFa
Finish La er ; Dai Cow
Feeder Non La er "� Dai Calf
o Finish ' °�; ' §� `''kr t 'i , ' €r' �,'�° ," ^14 �� } Dai Heifer
' Y( IIAV`.I I all IL`I IAGV�r1 R�rlj
o Wean Design Current D Cow
a�73�r�J�€
to Feeder „ D��{'Aoultr ;;I�Ca act,;Po Non -Dai
I
to Finish :'` Layers a Beef Stocker
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
' Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turkey Points
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
[:]Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
JBINA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
F_Z�A
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes []No Z.3QA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes E<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: - jDate of Inspection:
Was% Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No 0;.W)i' ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 2<o [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [j�W ❑ 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 E34o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0] o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 2io ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence'of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes G3<o ❑ 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 Windrow f ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift [] Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): f t hN�t_. i L a --r'. / J_Z' CS
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWNW
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 �o ❑ NA
[—]Yes r3Ko ❑ NA
❑ Yes
C <o
❑ NA
❑ Yes
[R<o
❑ NA
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ Yes [✓]'rNo ❑ NA
❑ Yes FZK ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [] Maps [] Lease Agreements ❑Other.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes [2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [] Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? []Yes Eal�0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No lidA-; ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of inspection:
24. Ilid the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit [] Yes 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 021�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [] No � ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Q']Qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
D-115
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
[] Yes
[D.N6"
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond [] Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q1/
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with anon -site representative?
E] Yes
031/1'
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
0,Nc
0 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).
Uva i n� c�-L l"� o
cc,lnca4A't"'p
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
&1A
Phone: q`o — m —/
Date: /
14/2011 Of

wrs 21.2 / z ado RR
13"D'ivision of Water Quality
Facility Dumber U 2 02 Z O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit (DeCo"mpliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visile outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2-18_ /O Arrival Time: Departure Time: / : zSAu. County:
Farm Name: W&:f u/'S LLC. Owner Email:
Owner Name: k)a`; < +' 'S $'p'DS . LLC Phone: _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: S+C'h e,.► wa-6-V-5. Title: 0 W tje-4— Phone No:
Region: F�
Onsite Representative:
2!4
2<A
Integrator: &ur�4tz ` [�rau✓�s/
Certified Operator;
(2'Ar-{
w If_.
_ Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude; =0
=1 0ds Longitude: =0=1
°=1 = 4i
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
U Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
0 Non -Layer
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures, EDI
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 NA ❑ NE
[--]Yes
❑No
2<A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ fA
❑ NE
D'lvA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
2<o
C1 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
m
B
B<[]
[]NA
C3 NE
12/28/04 Continued

V ,
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
Facility Number: — 022 Date of Inspection
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s) ��r�.r,.da. �(�a,C/6raS-9,R41 Grwrnr f!D.Sj
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
El Yes
, �,%
(� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
E9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ NA ElNE
E�
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
Spillway?:
��Io
o ElNA
El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
[I Yes
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑ NE
Observed Freeboard (in): 2 9
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
Cl Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
,.,,�
2<
❑ 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
O
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Milo
❑ 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
10
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(s) ��r�.r,.da. �(�a,C/6raS-9,R41 Grwrnr f!D.Sj
4AAn-4,/f
13. Soil type(s) WaQ, L yn,eti buva
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
BNo Cl NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Io ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ NA ElNE
E�
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
��Io
o ElNA
El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
[I Yes
,B
M<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
I'll]/. UI'11\\Ill!
4tV-V tom'' r
Reviewer/Inspector Name rG�[; �l S F Phone: 910, 433, 3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: IQ /Q+�-�-Pe� �^ Date: -Z-19-2-4>10
12/28/04 Continued

a. 1
r
Facility Number: 82- 6 ZZDate of Inspection 2~/T-/70
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 3<o ❑ 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 B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
DIN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
-23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
D o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
[:]NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Yes
El[
..�
91; o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes DTo ❑ 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
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
LI 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
G o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04

BrIOS e_,Jk*-,_� 10-02-- Z.00 y
vision of Water.Quality
Facility Number SZ O2Z 0 Uivis onoo Soil And.Water Conservation.
Q:Otii Agency
Type of Visit aTo� ce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access jI
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: .3: 00 Departure Time: 3:.3� County: d -J
Farm Name: WeLkIr,.S Bra Owner Email:
Owner Name:_ W&+W S 0rDS, LLC, Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: S'�P_A4Al--S Title:. _4Qw.vuw- Phone No:
Onsite Representative: S -kA Gt t,,ej W zL4e Integrator: e�� A?1-&�N
Certified Operator: Cu +-
V4') gam&a"'L. Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: =0 =1
Longitude: =0
=c Q
I)esign Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish SOfl
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ La er I I :::::]
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Coyd
Number of Structures:
K 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 g o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
HNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
" NA
❑ NE
LINA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
to ^
D NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
915o`�❑
NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 2 —QZZ
Date of Inspection A_0 -0/-O
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): 39
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?
Cl YesZNo
NA El NE
❑ Yes C3NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA EINE
❑ Yes B<_❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat otify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?❑Yes No ❑ NA [I 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 E] NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ,��
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need 1:1 Yes EK-
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ffr5o ❑ NA EINE
❑ 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) _ a e/'wlaCdyt s!i x.s��r, J &6L// t�nYh 40,5 Lj1n14-✓ �f S4. -.«..w .4wvua%
13. Soil type(s) WC118 - 4-!l "C -f— 1a.ert
14. Do the receiving; crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
5W gs: ' facility, to la'etter explain Atuatians. (use t ddifii
[''NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
NoNA ElNE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
to ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name / j?�vuCS �s = h Phone: 9/9• fkX3.333
Reviewer/inspector Signature: 4 Date: .2 &09
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection a/�e
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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
2<oo
❑ NA
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
31.
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?
Cl Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
fo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
3 ❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
D'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
2<oo
❑ NA
[:1NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
B o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
.,�
EK"
❑ 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
E Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
,.,_,�
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
E'SNa
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04

&r/#s E,vkrcd - 61/0 y/ z 4 0 8
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 11Z -17 - 0 7 Arrival Time: : 304M 1 Departure Time: S.' 00 I County: 4 • V Region:
Farm Name: PD/f 0- Hy Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ppee_ gro5 . Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: S. PepC.- Title: Dw"i e.r Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _ �►-� _P.8i)41— _ Integrator: V
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
nwtne (rapacity Population
F11—wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ o ❑ i ❑ Longitude: ❑ ° =' =
Design Current.
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑
Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry;Poultry
❑
Layers
❑
Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑
Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream impacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: �l
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
[2f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
�No
❑NA
El NE
[:INA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
FNo
❑ Yes
3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: ,� Z Z Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA FINE
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?; o
Designed Freeboard (in): / g
Observed Freeboard (in):
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.)
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone: %O, 5't 33.3.34a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 12-27-Z007
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
V1 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
�rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
(3No
❑ 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
JE No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12, Croptype(s) 9C1--klIA-Ai.; (A45.4t-D �<j+cf����!IO.-5-
�,..�+c�-r 1.)�uir
xwo'-Os
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes [S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Commeiits,(refer to question #): Explain any YES ;answers and/or any.recommendationssor any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (usejiiddithi'61.pages'as necessary):
w
Reviewer/inspector Name Phone: %O, 5't 33.3.34a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 12-27-Z007
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continuer)

Facility Number: Date of Inspection /Z 2'7-07
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design C3 Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA EINE
❑ 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
[0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
UNo
❑ 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
(P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[3 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
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
.12/28/04

Type of Visit 4V Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 9-18 A Arrival Time: �f�'Of� Departure Time: 3. County: S 6 Qf✓
Farm Name: 0 —D-Mll 1779. Owner Email:
Owner Name: Y OD e— 8✓OS" Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility contact: �`� &U Title: Phone_ 139,3
Onsite Representative: 4 o-P� _ Integrator: M.
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of charm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [=O =4 =" Longitude: =0=6 = i1
si
Design CurrentDesign
❑ NA
FDre-�ncurrent
apapulation
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish OD°
❑NE
❑ Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
EINE
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stacker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
10 Beef Feeder
❑ Boars❑Turkeys
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
Turkel Poults
Other
11 ❑ Other
to 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 1 of 3
❑ Yes 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
EINE
❑ Yes
55 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[INA
❑NE
❑ Yes
R No
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
EINE
❑ Yes
fig No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

J
Facility Number: F2_ —Z Z
Date of Inspection�O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus hcavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure i
Identifier: # /
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
�r
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
C% No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
ReviewerllnspectorName i'� 1� a �/ S ��
Phone: [phone]
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
[7�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
Crop type(s) 1s�tr�un<.. l �t.. ��vM SG� . strwa� ✓ �%i�r�e,I ,�lt/iytid�s
13.
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
(!4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Cp No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
❑ NE
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
;D No
❑ NA
❑ NE
mai me nance/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.)
ReviewerllnspectorName i'� 1� a �/ S ��
Phone: [phone]
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Date:
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) 1s�tr�un<.. l �t.. ��vM SG� . strwa� ✓ �%i�r�e,I ,�lt/iytid�s
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application`? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`? ❑ Yes
Ex No ❑ NA
❑ NE
:Comments (refer'to' question)#) Explam:any YES answers nna%o .�iny:recommendations on4any`other comments f " .
} � ,
UseArawings of facifity:to.better:explam situations. (use;a(tdittonal pages as. necessary):
ReviewerllnspectorName i'� 1� a �/ S ��
Phone: [phone]
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Date:
Page 2 of 3 12/18104 Continued

Facility Number. Sz —ZZ Date of Inspection
Reguired 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 [S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. []Yes [)fNo [INA ❑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
[)I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
CRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
EINE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[B No
❑ NA
EINE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NF
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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
rta
Jw No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
$9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ad�ditinna 1:l,p'a-1, ? a Cim menfsandorD awin ��;s 21
12/28/04
12/28/04

R
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
its
Date of Visit: 9 qp-' Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Sac�ASon Region: _E0
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:�av a.,.i Tem _P,ae Phone:
Mailing Address: �(S Gn. It1�,'ahwri,.' .-� NC _ 9
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:� A".. Title: Phone No: ��a� 990-%39 0✓ %?9„2
Onsite Representative: ? �x Pow+ Integrator:
Certified Operator: _ _ 7��.� ��»� _ Operator Certification Number: �B8$
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
'feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other.
❑ Other
Sack -up Certification Number:
Latitude: =0
=1 Longitude: = o = l
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Papulation
❑ Layer
I❑ Nan-Lavei
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑
Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
FC
urke Poults
ther
Diseharp,es & Stream Impacts
. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made`?
Design —Current I
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl I
Number of Structures:
b, Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters ofthe State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes D'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
EINE
❑ Yes
9 to
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

y
Facility Number: —a
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
D'Ko
❑ 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?: O 1
Designed Freeboard (in): ! Al
Observed Freeboard (in): -ti'3 t'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
3 -go
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
E No
E3"
❑ 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
2-fgo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Dlo
❑ 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
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
mai ntenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
D -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ liydraulic 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) I�P�.H...4, /�a�. Sn,,,,(/ �. w.: .., ,B.^,, .,�% Pa s>�e
Sa..,
T /9NMV6�
r✓.�r �.L.
13. Soil type(s) l/„ ,8 , 4
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
EK
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[9 -Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination: ❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
2'5E
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
lITAO R YT OVarSel-cl C_.-ap IS 6/4 ar 1-4c- N C dWS
^Q�f I>l 8r�:tc� p�Q�//7 O�/� !'R� /QY/Y /J 4S u�!*s/i�� d�fOL:Irrl9 Q��(Iri1, 71��t Ofd!/✓CPr
P�a�S 10 re-o✓e �Ae RYI �P; 40 faejkl,
M, /f, I A -r41 .%, r`t Aiv R j -E "C 4el riPzv fife%
Reviewer/Inspector Name �'' "z : Phone:
u �. X730
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5-9-0,7-
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 9.2 — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
El Yes ❑'l':o 0 N El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily availah ? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E3 -<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ fe� n
El ps ❑Yle❑C�c/lists ❑ D
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, k the ch cap ro riate box below.
�- S,
El Yes
to
El NA
El NE
29.
�eiris rWaste-I"�a�s€er�
❑ ❑ a8Seikis
❑ Yes
❑
❑ NA
n
[}E6WL%4- ❑ ❑ s ❑
nss Weath rC-ede
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
/❑
9<o
El NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q -Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E?<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Q'>'l*_
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
9<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
El -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
[}leo
❑ 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
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit'? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative'?
❑ Yes
9-11;To
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
9<10
❑ NA
❑ NE
AddiIt' lonul Coinmenfs andlor•Drawii gs K t }}n
hV t4v 3s Y.. .*.OM1.
Pro d✓cer
rls a�ca/J�9
1�a�sal�� 40
5y IJ 12rd" el %a9oen 7Lv es�oL/1f
9 �ecl g/psf
'A— Couler
/'o Po -e ve,-1
12/28/04

l
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time; LZLEOiR
10
,,,,,�
Not Operational Below Threshold
Mfermitted 01 ertified D Condittiionally Certified C)� Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm ?dame: ,`BDG &25, Farrf, C+ C/` 5) County: -SaM'V_.0 r, ��1L
Owner Name.� � vx.. %T60tyPave_� Pbone iso: 90e 5__
Mailing address: Sy,SO /r el4AZ AI.`jb..a' Al ,HZ
r
Facility- Contact: 3�y peDP Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �'a - Integrator: 6Q,'ra
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Dumber:%SBg
Location of Farm:
E`3wine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • ° 0" Longitude • �• ��
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Ca acih• Population Cattle Ca acih, Po uladon
❑ Wean to Feeder I I I JEI Laver I ❑ Dairy I
0 -Feeder to Finish I &Af90 16,000 ❑ Non -Laver I I Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons [] Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Sotid Tra No Liquid Waste Management System s
Discharaes & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ yes o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
` a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 10
b. If discharge is obsen•ed, did it reach 'Water of the State? (If yes, notifi' DWQ) ❑ Yes El -Ko
c, if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Q-5-0
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ yes 2+10
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 31�0
Waste !Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: L
Freeboard (inches): rf
05/0.3/01 Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes B-11-6
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes [ 1TO
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 2fgo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes r❑l o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes M -No
elevation markings?
Waste Aunlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes GINo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type er Geyetacd
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes C -No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [ Iqo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes 9NO
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes EWO
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes M -No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [Ilo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes [:]No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes BNo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [3No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes BNo
Air Quality representative immediately.
t :Unita S ,G.. •,L : ,. .[i# llA;r.'nLv, .3r.t�., .,� ,...,.I r kl'9 :V. 6irF3. a a 1 :ltdE: 'rt. �S: L �f ;' .,'d! 1. r�yJ i' ... li li !'. 5. _ rsl: Nh s.i, •Il Si 4NO
1 't, e c iS.,irlit;
Comtaents (refer to;ques6aal#}:1{�F.acpma any`YES answers and/or, a .Yrecommeadationsbr any�other commeflts:'.�i'ii�l� � E� ;.tt 11,
j
i�l:i#iEtF .:.�'l.lN," �i,;�}_'�.AiR`{ai)its�a7uiiSlGl�liu i �:li'E4:° �4P �i9,.v,�� �.i'�!i:f�!iii� " ;4!� #`# :i'afSw.�G!iitE3 �t#..I r<<r �.z:i't: ..�J.�rtl;•i�i� �s,v .w:.r,..�>,.t.,:xe.ea�..�aw-.yr.a,�iu3..tria�C,:� i.,J�IA�,i7t
°Use drsw�ags�of,fa lity,ta better•raGplaYn�situat�ons.[{use aa(uuodal pages aslue>cessary} �[,:11,field Coy ❑ Final Notes E I ('lY.;t
� F, Fit r..ii i IE�."� 4 , 7 i� I s�#i # E.�' t# y,�; ''CS �', i „isi'' i 1 111 s t I �'; i„i,: 4 , , If, l; f
1111.1,, s trt:l,E n.l:..r.l.,�-il',1 �I�[! i }u 5 tt .tl ,. i y j, i! ' 11.,E �.>I .INNER. . r; ... ; s t tit ! € !E F :: ti �i {'E , .f;{r +a "fin ;o^ i, EJyP •q r, M n. El w }3 �Ih
E .I� s .� ,r !�I G... + k w� rsk. r r ,:.�h� . � x„a i.r .4 I�rh r � �� i� i � �1 ...1: b .. A f� ,. �� ,.;.. rl.riHY i�t,t ilk i�1i1. � • .. al.:
1'lP, 00QPe 1S 10 4amn,lnj 7 co Sloro7r T ,ie�ds T �/ wPtr�s To �r�vrvr u�, y �oro�%rrrtif
T rOlh CSC[ urr,'nq
s, ��i i 3> ;- r I r• a l t r r i s
Reviewer/Ins ector NameNil j , (; i1 l s�
p 1JP M _,:lis � i i_ c .16 i .r 1.3.,<.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:Ir
G ] �•O� f
11/12/03 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection ~7
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the cility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ , c fists, dc&igl rrgap , etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑fid ❑ Vaste-Analysis ❑-$oil
.;� • -12 a � 7 3. & 1 1 777 // _/0-> -'2. .1 o
-/6 3r
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
❑ Yes R*o-
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ®+�o-
❑ Yes p'!To
❑ Yes
❑ Yes E?No
❑ Yes U.No
❑ Yes g -No
❑ Yes G- -o
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
©-Ncr
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
MN& -
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
QN0
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
[}No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
9 -Ko
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
991'es
❑ No
❑4tocking+mm [drop Yield Form [344ainfa* ❑
❑+244 n to asp ^'ions ❑
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
tF'i }i: $ N !' } 'tti4 t '?+€� i . (�- ! i.'d6'.''� iFCa x ,{v _
ddtttonaliComments °and/or<Drawsn $ j> E'� ». #u} "1 g' t��y�'..g " ¢Fp P t i!
ikw4<:tH'*d�.Ai:.il'i4if4Cy7F':iG.a::i'+a`�r31'-fii4f421:i .,:, iii.r�;e'{tiW•[b I,p'.:. .I:t:a: tiY,=i.+� w-; �aitlt.`tai..:.:'e�<{�iG�(j�iv�i�,::..P'.�.SNi.:!�. G�i�:':k. .?.�'�:�'1 I.",41.Yik
,..Fa..
35' Rev,'e4.,.1 Crop
Me, I ofe 4eOS
Mf.
12112103

. ..... .....
k ❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation ReviewMA
f
® DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
e Routine 0 Coni laint 0 Follow -u of DW ins cation 0 Fallow -u of I)MC reviem• 0 Other
Dale of Inspection
Facility Number 2 2 Time of Inspection : 7G7 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E3 Registered [3 Certified C3 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted [3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Fat•tn Name 1t1�......,.....County°:....,,.. a.r.,1 ........................ .
fi7,IQ.�!•rj....... vG..,,. /.... -r
Owner Name:............. ��� p, . ,.r .r��,� .. iavC......................... Phone No:. /, ......r.?..�.o.rt..
........
Facility Contact: ............. ; ............... Title Phone No:
Nilailing Address: r, �. . l ��...2. �2d:
J......f...�+�3.�cd
........................
.r........... .......... Integrator: Representative :.............................................:.........................
.. ..,�G•
Certified U erator,.............V..fe..Sd✓ -
p .....�........................�..+............................... .. Operator Certification :Number...... d, SIX
Location of Farm:I Sc+i�-- ��,.�i4r�✓ ,Qp����r ���..,� ,�E,(r,�r�vr�J,,,,j(�
I
..........�...................................................................... �' ...,.......�
..........I......
..........�.,��........ �.........� ,��+�.�.........................................,..r,���...........
Latitude • , 0 G{ Longitude ' 6.,.,------
Tr—en t
Swine . Capacity Population
❑`Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish 00.9d
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
-Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
❑ Layer 10 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I0 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity',
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Laguna Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
I.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2.
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
A:X 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? (Il'yes, notit'y DWQ)
El Yes
JR No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? ( If yes, notify DWQ)
C1 Yes
AkNo
3.
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
t'No
4.
Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
�j No
5.
Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
JM No
maintenance/improvement?
• C.
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
R No
7/25/97
Continued ns back

Facility Number: TZ T �2 2
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lai-goons,Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes V No
❑ Yes )SF No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft); h�f�...... 3.Z....................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes tK No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? , ❑ Yes X No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
allo
19.
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
❑ Yes
� No
Y
20.
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximurn liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
I Dd No
WasteApplication
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application'?
❑ Yes
X No
23.
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters ofthe State. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
®No
15.
Crop type .....�jt/4s! `fire.. Ott.ll/!�T....................................................................................
❑ Yes
..........
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW,MP)?
❑ Yes
AKNo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
eK No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
� No
Y
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
R No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
Wo
For Cerlitied 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
09 No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the. Permit?
❑ Yes
P No
Cl: No.violations.or. d'icieineies.were noted-d,urin ' this.visit.•.You4i11 re'cei've no further
correspondence A out this'
Comments (refer 6 question #) Ezplairi any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any,other comments p
Use drawings ofhfucilk to better explain situations (fisc addttibnal pages as necessary): � Y
hs..
duo /0 .. !
7125197
Reviewer/Inspector ]Name w ...
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: F-2 Y12

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
Jason C. Pope
Pope Bros Farms Inc 1-9
PO Box 2020
Clinton NC 28328
Dear Jason C. Pope:
Q J70LA
dL
�EHNR
RECEIVED
August 4, 1997
AUC 06W1
FAYETTEVILLE
REG. OFFICE
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS820022
Pope Bros Farms Inc 1-9
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment, Storage
and Application System
Sampson County
In accordance with your application received on July 25, 1997, we are forwarding this Certificate
of Coverage (COC) to Farm No. 82-22, authorizing the operation of an animal waste collection, treatment,
storage and land application system in accordance with the State's General Permit (attached). This
approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management of
animal waste from the Pope Bros Farms Inc 1-9, located in Sampson County, with an animal capacity of
no greater than 6480 Feeder to Finish and the application to a minimum of 51 acres of land as specified in
the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until December 31, 2001. Pursuant to this
COC, you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and
limitations as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of
wastes to surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data
and operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater
than the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to actual
increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
In accordance with General Statue 143-215.10C, Animal Waste Management Plans shall include
the following components:
- A checklist of odor sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- A checklist of insect sources and best management practices to minimize these sources.
- Provisions set forth for acceptable methods of disposing of mortalities.
- Provisions regarding emergency action pians.
Your existing Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must include the above elements, by
December 31, 1998. Documentation of the certification must be available to inspectors onsite. Submittal
of the amended certification statement shall be required upon renewal of your permit coverage in 2001.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC.
P.O. Box 29535, Raleigh, North Carolina 27626-0535 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual. non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on chis process:. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject -farm is located in the Fayetteville Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact J;R Joshi at [phone] ext. 363.
Sincerely,/.
-/A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E.
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Sampson County Health Department
Fayetteville -Regional=Office; Water Quality -Section,
Samps Con Con ounty Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File

,
State of North Carolina - -
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources r • •
Fayetteville Regional Office j .'�
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan 8, Howes, Secretary ID E H N F1
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Pope Brothers
Route 4, Box 163
Clinton, NC 28328
December 6, 1994
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
Sampson County
-- - - - Dear Mr. Pope:
CTf'Decemiief=1=,'-1994--'an' inspection of your animal operation was performed
by the Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find enclosed a copy of our
Compliance Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this
office that this facility is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part .0217, and
that Animal Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact
me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Mi D.
Environment 1 Technician
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opporknity AffirmatNe Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMU OF BNVIRONIOERT, HEALTH A NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF AL KANAGERE TP
Fayetteville Regional Office
:' Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Form
Brothers I December 1, 1994 1 1 - 9
I Rt. 4 Box 163, Clinton, NC 28328 1 910 -592-3011 (Home)
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 bueration Tvoe:
Horses, cattle, 6ii;)POultry, or sheep
SECTION II
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217)criteri Cattle (100 head),
horses (75),es`rine (250) sheep (1,000), and
systemy]{30,OQ�l� rw3th liquid waste
w r _ 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
WASTE MWGRM?
5. 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?
Inn
111M
-mom
no=
11

Field Site Management
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Map Blue 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? (Millet, Rye)
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
Doe the` -animal --waste ' management Wt -this =T--
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(BMP) of the approved CERTIFICATION?
7. Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (Approximately _5 feet }
9. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SECTION xV
Comments
Y N CONKENTS
X
X
X
X
X
X
X

"DRAFT ­
i ►
i AMevat of WAS*@ Pr deood Poe rear(rallos s, ft), toast *too)
animax dam#,} wa►aee/animal/year - tamt,t
vaste• ysar.
.. animal Ibb. FAX/aniaul/gear 4,. ibs, PAO/years
FAR &IOU No C. Te
Applying the above
time an .have appy
manner.
she followingaar®
the crop to e wron
VI
'raat yield sell
# No. Type
h. auida Me 932
am ount of waste Sea biq job. Yo sh�ould.pLat
Dria►te- squipment .to appy the waste is a t mal
_
ge will be -needed Cor waste application based
and surface appliaatsoat
ejo i I ACAS# ONM at vXODUCIit
Crop Lbs. m "roe LbIt N Month of
Year U. lutilised .Application
Toti