820151_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Quay

►NL S" f i
ivisioa of Water Resources
Facility Number ��� - h'_ OO Division of Sail and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
F
peofVisit: ompliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistanceason for Visit: crRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: iiE Q� j[� Departure Time: County: 54IV u t� Region:
Farm Name: Sa �Q.h �� o fJ,e Se t't Owner Email: ��—
Owner Name: *t Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: Facility Contact: C-L} a l f (� �F Lv 1 `L Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: t t Integrator: Got. 15 d o✓ o
Certified Operator: y, fv4c _ Certification Number: Z 714 0
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. WeE Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
3 So
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Design Current
D , Paul Ca aci P,o
Layers
Dairy Heifer
Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[3-KA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[] No
Fj'NJA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
eNA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
C3'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - /5l Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [{].M— ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No +- A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes I_-1"O ❑ NA D NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
Kal�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
CTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes F 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): e SG (7
13. Soil Type(s): L0
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? [:]Yes ❑ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [:]Yes to ❑ NA ❑. NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
l..Q3'<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
l4NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
El Yes
TNo�oNA
❑ 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
D1q;__❑ 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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
�10 ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued
L\

Facili Number: gZ- 5 Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
B < ❑ NA
"
❑ NE
Y
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check _
❑Yes
[No [] NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[] No ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[3-No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ERI�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the [:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge,_ freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field' ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E3'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
EJ�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
P-9mMents (refq' itiesttong#) t�Egplain any YES answers andt-or:any addttional.recommendations o fan 6th"er coii( meets " Y
Use_drawutgs.af facility to _better explain situations (etse:add�hanaf pages as necessary)•
2- l3
y
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
Page 3 of 3
Phonelft)-
Date: f --: u
21412015

V-1 a- Miw 17
Fa
• - � Dir;isiun of Water Resourc s
c%lityNamber - ®Division of Soil and Water Conservation
_.
Other Agency
Type of Visit: Com fiance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: GrRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: l{a County:
Farm Name: p r ac P.Vx Fc t--, _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: S" , Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��u-'7-C yA�cytGt i Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:J
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
'7 ,f
Certification Number: z7 q�y
Region: F—(ZZ
Certification Number:
Longitude:
�I ll gn Current�Deslgn Current
Design Current
P Swine Capacity Pop. WetiPoul#ry+,Capacity op.
Cattle* Capacity P.
5y. ,..
Dairy Cow
Daia Calf
Wean to Finish
La er
Wean to Feeder
p
Non -La er
=
...
Feeder to Finish`
Daia Heifer
" Designer Current
r.yo Ca acP,o '.
La ers
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I Beef Br -
Turkeys
Turkey Pouets
Other
_
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [3'll ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No FTITA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No [3'IGA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑Yes ❑ No [T NA ❑ NE
?. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes E3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes [�!o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facif4ty Number: - , Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Q_No— NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No D ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z 7
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?
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
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 [T N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ 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
pp❑
12. Crop Type(s): &_Lolb
13. Soil Type(s):
14_ Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
lzfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[d]"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EtfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
N
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
I__I 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_ 0 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 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facitity Number: - S Date of Inspection:
.24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes,`check ❑ Yes [5,?<' ❑ 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
El o
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑-Io
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
e No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
f 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?
to q
any Y r,b answers
ie drawings of facility to better explain situations (use ad
- 7- r s
- ru — iE_ C � Cf
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
p
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE.
❑ Yes [�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes [ ''No ❑ NA ❑ NE
any additional recommendations or "an
pages as necessary).
(C�— �j%—, rs S' j
Phone:`U �_1YI IL
3
Date: 93 1 1
214415

I ype of visa: (ikcompuance inspection V Vperation xeview V btructure Evaluation V rectimcai ASslStanCe
Reason for Visit: 04outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: �'�,�j �a,/Jl(i Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ZZ g Q && J"(A Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: - IN t!ft:4 _qic�4
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
sr
Integrator: an ! 11-1s.
ma`_- _
Certification Number: �7__-r ef 0
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Ponttry
Capacity
Pop.
ggn
Cattle city Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder r c2 O
Non -La er
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
"'
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . l;ouI
C•a aei
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
jBeef Brood Cow
f -
Turkeys
Othe.1
ITurkeyPoults
OtherFlother
Discharges and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
M-Nu`
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[:]Yes
[]No
[al -A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Eq-KA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
i
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: I Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Ea<
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
2-11A
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):.�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[3'Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[2 Ao
❑ 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
[kllo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[R 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
®Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [!f<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): n2 cl-" _
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [ 44o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes C244o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes (j?rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [4o ❑ 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 OrNo ❑ 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 Inspection ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes M. 0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Faa
ItyNumber: - Date of Inspection '
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ZL>je ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ©.M6 ❑ 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 [jj4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [3 o ❑ NA [3 NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
[Ri4o
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[�(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
'
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
2/No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
13<0
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [1] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [ ?No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to -question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any, othe is -- en �
Use drawings of.facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
xx _
91-- 0 ,''1
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: '[
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit: L} Crompliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: (� County: c7)`j V`L Region?~7gh.
Farm Name: ) o t D�� d—tj" �� Owner Email: �—
Owner Name: 2—D e- {��r}� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: r_'U A' 1 i 9Q ✓Cy tJC Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Phone:: ��j
Integrator: (VonIDS e, lc-"y
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current .. "''
=
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity` Pop. , .;'
WetPoultry
Capacity
. Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
�
Non -La er
- DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
� `�
" - -'- -
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Gurtent
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P,ollltr
Ga aci
P,o .,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
jPullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
..
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes E j ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[]-NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[
❑ NE
[::]Yes
[:]No
B" A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�frNo
❑ NA
[] NE
❑ Yes
allo
[DNA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciti Number: - Date of Inspection:
Vfaste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [3-Ne--❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No EE hTA ❑ NE
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.)
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 0,No-- ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[EJ_Nis-� ❑ 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
D- Mo ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
O-Nut ❑ 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
[E Ko ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
[Jo ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L=7 1"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) -
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus [] Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s). _� e✓vtal VLa _Sr,7 0
13. Soil Type(s): -To tl (�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes- ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes �tt ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [A -No- ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [E'1/ ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [;J<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes E'er ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes C7-No [] NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists []Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes tj,?W ❑ 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 [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 2/N/o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciii Number: jDate of Ins action:
214. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [E[,??o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ©-N- ❑ 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 E -w ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [3-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Stomge 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?
D Yes E3 1VO ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Eg'No_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ED-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes EJ Mo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[aJ h o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
] Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to;qu"estton #)• Explain any,��Y S answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawin of faci[t_ �totbetter ex lain_srtuatri& . use additional ages., as'uecess
h' P ( P g alry
�--� 3- r
s1�s�
ro
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ( ii Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:
�V,4014

Type of Visit: ��om nce Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
r
ea Ad 11Z
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: _� Regiod:
Farm Name: �p-� Q� � -� !Eai Owner Email:
Owner Name: VW /yn Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _(:�:& L' ' � �X ��} (' 'Title: PhonE'a
•
Onsite Representative: �1 Integrator: M
Certified Operator: J{� Certification Number: � / (" 6.
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current .
Design Current
Swine
Capac�ty� Popp
Wet Poultry
Capacity
.
Pop
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
G.0 - 'ent
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr P.oultr
Ca aci
Pop.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
=
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
'x
-
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes WKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No E3-N- - ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No [].N* ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑>16-
❑ NA
❑ NE
[]Yes
[D/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - jDate of Inspection:
Wiste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ®-lqo�_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No O-NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): �_
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
. to
❑ 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
E3 _"' ❑ 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
E31vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
❑.#tr
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Q^ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
I I. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes[�lo
❑ 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 WindDrift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C—.7 [a
C7
13. Soil Type(s):
TT
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�.AdT
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[2r l�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[�T<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for Land application?
❑Yes
[y]"'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[3 Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
L],X0
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑VA P ❑Checklists ❑ Design [:]Maps [:]Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Flo ❑ 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 Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes Pj<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
24: Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
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)
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?
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
[❑ NA ❑ NE
D_Ne � NE
❑ Yes 2-1Qo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Eq'<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes L"J 1"O ❑ NA [:]'NE
[] Yes [Zjo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [r]'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[]�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Q1lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
EB 6o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3

Wawa
Type of Visit: OCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: e outine Q Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: L /x l Arrival Time: J p Departure Time: %.'3.0 County; l M _ Region: 'Ro
Farm Name: 'Got DA (V yn(pF_ i oSbn AARr�6 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 4ATA,7 5 M-7 h Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: wR11.5 RL�uc& Title: reh &E C'.__ Phone:
Onsite Representative: L1gf►'tiIntegrator: l-36_056F"' �k,2� rAR(.'.5
Certified Operator: �Z(zA to Certification Number: a-NIt0
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
T
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
C►attle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
S i "700
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish''
,+ l'._
ry DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
`'
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D ,$aul
Ca aci_ty
Pao
Non-Dai
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Broad Cow
1-i All
=�illilllll 4
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
IN
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 [264o [:]NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
E�rNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
[:�CiA
[:]NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No E�(NA ❑ NE
?. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? [] Yes CdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [:]Yes FVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

r
lFaUlity Number: 3 of - /, ` / Date of Inspection: y /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes [2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No E3"N' A ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 31S
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ 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
[v�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[5No
❑ 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 [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need 0 Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes dNo ❑ 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): OE R rA up A Lqp zi
13. Soil Type(s): 11kfl ro
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes [ "No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
1$. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes [gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [0rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes [ (No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes dNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
[;�NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

• t .
Facili Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[ rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey 0 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
[E f No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
[:]Yes
gNo
❑ 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:
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 CE�No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo
[:]Yes EtNo
[:]Yes © No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A Date: y } "
Page 3 of 3 21412011

I ype of visit: (OCompliance Inspection V operation Review V Structure Evaluation u 1 ecttntcat Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: /d Arrival Time: ' Departure Time: County: /)') Region: ► �`-'�
Farm Name: 'a`� Owner Email:
Owner Name: iJ r1 C�1�1 �+�n l Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �Lt�-tS r4ca ILL . Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: ep Integrator: cCrj 1 un
a
Certified Operator: k_} L S iI 1 Tv L Certification Number: 02 e7 (p �
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design�CurrentDesign
C«urrent
Design Current
$wine
Capacity Pop.
Wet P,oul#ry, . Miacity Pop.
Cattle Capacity P.
Wean to Finish
La er Dairy Cow
Non -La er Dairy Calf
`F' t Da'y Heifer
Wean to Feeder
3
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
;©esign Current Dg Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D .P,oulCa aci P_.o P. Non -Dairy
La erg Beef Stocker
Non -La erg Beef Feeder
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other �" , _. =
—.Turkey Poults
NJ I Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
�A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[—]No
P-14'A'
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[]Yes
L o
❑ Yes
U.kn- o
fA
❑ NE
[]NA
❑NE
❑NA
❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

acili Number: - Date of Inspection: p
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes to ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No [9-11A� ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3$
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
LE "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
E]�
❑ 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
[ /�<
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�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
[}2Q'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2-110
❑ 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
Dri.[ ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): TW.1( rV4,14161t 1_ ') / %5 + 6� . —0,
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reuuired Records & Documents
Yes
Ill 1V O
❑ Yes
21Go
❑ Yes
r. <o
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[::]Yes UEr o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
LS'""
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
g-N-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.
0 Yes
[LJ 9 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[E No
❑ NSA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
IAA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

`"7
acili Number: - S Date of Inspection: 110 /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes U l�o ❑ NSA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 0 Yes La"'No P14A. ❑ 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes [—]No F&4-'1qA ❑ 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:
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 iJ' 1 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes g�3 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []'�lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Cj 1F o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
lam°
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[e�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
©4fo"
❑ NA
❑ NE
K
omments (refer to question ft Explam any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any%otliie comments.
se,rdrawins,oi;facility to better explain:situahons(use;addiibonal pages as necessar}} A,
Csz�c O�r�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector
Page 3 of 3
Phone: .*V —
Date:
2 A011

vision of Water Quality
iFacility Number SZ ® %sl 0 Dro".ffl WE
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit & tompiiance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit elro—utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2S- I4 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: J-4 Region:
Farm Name: �d ` baN Po e i SoN Owner Email:
Owner Name: Joe- b • Ro P -_ _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��, Si+^+ Cuvr43 "`fitle: �rC �T�i . Sic Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: �ao/,s4u'0
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ o = I E Longitude: ❑ 0 0 I = u
Swine
can to Finish
Design
Capacity
Current
Population Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Curren# Design
Population Cattle Capacity
Current
Population
❑ La er I
I❑Dai
Cow
Wean to Feeder
3Z
1/4,40 ❑ Non -Layer I
I
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
❑ Pullets
IONIC 01
Other
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
111111111011
Discharp,es & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
to_
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
BN-A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[M_
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
0-NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ET? o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3, Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
❑-Ko—
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

r
Facility Number: 82- /S! Date of Inspection 2 - 2 S-/O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E two El NA El NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes B o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes L] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
T Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes 3 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E3<oo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 0-Ko- ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application �,
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes LTlvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ©-fq'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) Be�4u.�i` lfky�4� �rol�,/ �O►S.
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
El NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[I[I[TNo
E Noo NA
NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
E
NNoo ❑ NA
El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
,
Lf,<0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refewn
r toiquestion #). Explain any YES'answers and/or an yr'ecommeniiatronsar+any other comet nts. ill
Use drawings of faeilit to better explain situations (use ddlit�ional pages as necessary}r�
Reviewerllnspector Name E /�iCk-y Kw .s r Phone: i/0, �{33, 3300
Reviewerllnspector Signature: - /Qz...Q�� — .. Date: Z Zd/C7
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: QZ -- J,5/ Date of Inspection 2S- /Q
Required Records & Documents �
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes E oo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes L7 Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
[--]Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections E] Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
El NA
[I NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
,I.�, or
L1 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
ElYes
CTNo�❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
014 ❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
io ❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Ehqo- ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
N�o ❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
3 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
EfNo ❑ 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
B< ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
]o ❑ NA
❑ NE
A'"ddrtional"Camments andlar Drawings
12128104

8-/i-Zdin
tTm s
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: -23-/4 Arrival Time: /O Departure Time: County: S��prO Region: r2b
Farm Name: E/1well Labe. Owner Email:
Owner Name: 6V+<-s' 4 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: G/,_,vN 0+ rj- Title: Fit' N -'^j6S 1Lir Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:41
Certified Operator: ��fN �O r�'� 5 Operator Certification Number: _���
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [= e [= , = i, Longitude: a o 01 0 u
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ can to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
13zoo 1
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Farrow to Finish
Gilts
❑Non -La ers
El Beef Feeder
FE0Boars
❑ Pullets
ElBeef Brood Co
El Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other I
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El NA
❑NE
❑Yes
El No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 (if 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: S2 — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier: i
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9_ Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste 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 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application` Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) .//���u.�. < SyK4 Grr.; W �D •S . J
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?
t8. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
r ..;
Comments (refer to queshod #) Explain an} YES answers andlor any recommendations or -any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better-'explam situations {use' additional pages asmecessary..)
f
Reviewer/Ins ector Name 3
p Lr.«r �` 2.V` S `w
Phone: 9b. ot�
_ _
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. ?�T /�
Date: -Z3 — ZOI d
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 2 — /Sfp Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [I 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 ❑ Desig
n El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32_ Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments andlof.Drawings ,V y -
:, ... �. r. :.
Page 3 of 3 12128104

at`
Type of Visit �D Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit %Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I I Ibd n_lArrival Time: Departure Time: County: S f Region: F P_0
Farm Name: Zb-e & POoe g- SQ'] Owner Email:
Owner Name: 3c)- e— X) Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 81"lOi1 Title: bone No:
r�, M r P
sn'I7+1
Onsite Representative: _ r 1 Qn SM Ljr� ___ Integrator: 6D1djh&'o
Certified Operator: Bt l /b► SM I Operator Certification Number: 07 q60
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = g 0 " Longitude: =1 o = I = "
Design Current
Design Current
Design Cn ent
Capacity Population
Wet Poulty Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
ean to Finish
❑ La er
p ❑Non -La er
❑ Dai Cowean
to Feeder
❑Dai Calfeder
to Finish
❑ Dai Heifer
rrow to Wean
rkOF
La ers
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
rrow to Feeder
rrow to Finish
Non -La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
ts
Pullets❑
❑ Turkeys
Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
ars
Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other I
plum er of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
19Yes ftNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: 21 Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance than -made?
FYes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
J'Yes 'gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes JgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes tR'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes JW No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
IRNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
C!�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? IR Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
N[No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
19 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El
�CNo
❑ NA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes
CR-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I 0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Window ❑l Evidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of Area
/A�cccepta�bleCr�op
�-.
12. Crop type(s) N�1.1I_a
j.12
I_
11
yr, 17�1X . Sm/7�� &cakes 0yW.S
13. Soil type(s) A(jA
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
W No
❑ 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 acre determination ?
❑ Yes
tT No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
NrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Mo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question'#). Explain any YES answers and/or anv eecotntnendations or anv other comments ,
,Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (usiadditioual pagesia necessary)
Reviewer/Inspector Name SC �� Phone: Q T�-33
Reviewer/inspector Signature: —%DA-.1 4CA-In"- Date: -Nov
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: a — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes EkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 5�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
E"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[RNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ERNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
®'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
RNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
CRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
(g'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
CRNo
❑ 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
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
EtNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additidum Comments and,10 Dravrnngs ` - ��a
,: ,. �._.rs-.+v �sa:"1w_ mod! "'�''r� ��t".q: Oyu
I, Ye sma[i leak new in -lake- e mr �' uJ�'' .�� I^ dAth nWf um .
f ale caP�1 o�'f-cr rf �dce a �� ch �c� ✓.a►��2�
La oa, har goat cot,* 6h i'hflore
pV add -jo s of j seed a rn �� �-o ba�e s� j � +oe b#4
d is 5-5
-` v of�h'ea l-F-�orr�.y,e. S14eF44S��% , �lanr��nha4/
� 9^
sfvl�q t
ar ll o�abo�,e 9®alcC t,,, 4
12128104

0 1 K a1 IIitg109
Type of Visit ®:Compliance Inspection O Operation Review U Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit *� Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �....-sue Arrival Time: 1313oAfflDeparture Time: County: S&" S Region:.FAO
Farm Name: S _ �} Owner Email:
Owner Name: - f D _ - Phone:
Mailing Address: qU tea Per PA a 8
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: DI {jjn a ii b Title: Timm Hai Al#^ Phone No: 9Q6—in-77q (C-
Onsite Representative: Integrator: 60Idiieye
Certified Operator: Of I a3 SM f :" I Operator Certification NumberA*14 Qi. yb o
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = 0 0 4 0 Longitude: = ° 0 S = u
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine C**specify Population
~
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle C•ap�ac+i�ty Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
on -Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ DairyCalf
Wean to Feeder
a
3
El Feeder to Finish
Dry Poultry
DairyHeifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑Nan -La ersPutlets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
ElBeef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Farrow to Finish
FOGilts
Boars
- - h ,:,
Other, 1
_,. -
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
fRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does 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
CRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number:ga, — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[_-]Yes
QgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: f
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
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.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
allo
❑ 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?
WYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures 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 Dd No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop WindrowEl Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C0611a i �Y_/�t�iJLC 4441) ' .SG Q3
J
13. Soil type(s) M&A k
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes tR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ 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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
W No
CR No
� O
QTN o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name j SC I Phone: 91p 433-,3333
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: viyavo g
Page 2 of 3 V 12128104 Continued

'Facility Numberg Date of Inspection FN�
Renuired 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 (9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 ° Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes DiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No [XNA [:INE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
R] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[5 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
CRNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
t@ 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
IN 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
IRNo
❑ 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
ERNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
JR[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Addttonal.Commentsaadlorg
lDrawin s:y z Y'
14# "WOrk byres ems, Still ,� S - - lm-'I � 114 /*-f of
n on ba-e J'
17, Acfes 7r ma9�aI -POI hMCI &re_fh 7 OdefW+e -8%'- Sanme11 ,
P a obiiql Co So; ] -fe- - 4 P_f o+h rye rards ,
aS.Sl�d e serf"e hay bee, 01 M -fQ' aarm4 aody
elf. limt�- '10 H 4X4.
M A674 ~Pater 4 records.
Page 3 of 3 12128104

I.bifqs 1�, �t3(o-)
Facility Number a��23
OrDivision of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Wcompliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit W Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: `i r(,�' Departure Time: ID. County: Region: EAQ
Farm Name: Dim Lm Nos 4Scn Owner Email:
Owner Name: MS—D., P O. Phone: TO 533-3a78
Mailing Address: 4 Ou � _ ,1 .1 , NC,
Physical Address:
{� t� o 1G�
�"D'l
Facility Contact: t°3/'�' g�_JmTitle: �f� S�l Phone No:
r `" -
Onsite Representativ : ,+N L�q S( ,Lh Integrator:
�j011lsbd'Q__
rl�
Certified Operator: S' Operator Certification Number: a7 ;I jkO
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [= e = L = « Longitude: = ° =1
11
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I d,
MIM 1 1 ID Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ 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'?
Cattle
Design. Current
Capacity Population
_ 6
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
[TDry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
- '�ET
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 IRNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
El NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CK'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: $ — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): q
Observed Freeboard (in): c4 &a
❑ Yes 52 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
&No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
RTNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any ofquestions 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
C'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
WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s) Dermaa y Small
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
J'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
CgNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑
Yes
IRNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
i
Reviewer/inspector Name fit. hn Phone: [phone]
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: a 111190d7
V 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection �Q
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ®'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the approprrate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n ❑ Maps
p El other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes C'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22_ Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
5�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
C?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[:1 No
]RNA
❑ NE
Other lssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
IgNo
❑ 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
D9 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
19No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32_ Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
per,
IL! No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
NrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
seed a - m,[ci ba•esfob cn kriVe oI#9°o' �� S'�r`r� ,1w�1I-Mowrct
al" a00(O skid rvrve
pitee-d o aoo� s tr e .Svrve b �d ey'e4l-
77
wr I j need. c4 li brd�&) n 3008
12128104

® Division of Water Quality
tl><Numl;ter-
(0
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation-
0 Other Agencyr
,
�Facty4S
Type of Visit ®Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date
f501
2
Owner Email;
of Visit: Arrival Time: 7:
Departure Time: � County: I Region:
Farm Name: G Sbb&ii t"ndD ����
G
Owner Name: .� b a- �atN 1 Po p -[1 � Phone: /I0 5.33' Z78
Mailing
Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ,., Pow Title: OWnJeAi Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: jg�­�c�____��;`�-'Z� Integrator: c c+►-v
Certified Operator: 84—...ganJ .. Operdtor Certification Number: -02-7 #60
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [--] ° = I = 11 Longitude: [� ° = , = 'd
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ [I Laver
3 ?S01.. DeD � ❑Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑Structure ❑ Application Field [I Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
Type of Visit ®Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ®Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date
f501
2
Owner Email;
of Visit: Arrival Time: 7:
Departure Time: � County: I Region:
Farm Name: G Sbb&ii t"ndD ����
G
Owner Name: .� b a- �atN 1 Po p -[1 � Phone: /I0 5.33' Z78
Mailing
Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ,., Pow Title: OWnJeAi Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: jg�­�c�____��;`�-'Z� Integrator: c c+►-v
Certified Operator: 84—...ganJ .. Operdtor Certification Number: -02-7 #60
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [--] ° = I = 11 Longitude: [� ° = , = 'd
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ [I Laver
3 ?S01.. DeD � ❑Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑Structure ❑ Application Field [I Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow,
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)'.'
Number of Structures: �?
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 [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
CgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[,gNo
❑ Yes
[R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[$No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I2/18/04 Continued

Facility Number: 82—6 / Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4_ Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes QFNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I? Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes P4 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 [VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [V 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10_ Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
E)YNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window� ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside ofArea
12.
/
Crop type(s) '8t V A4 vl c/� fi+s. -, 5Aj4 �1/ Ci a.1 tV CplG V eVYe e! 0 J
13.
Soil type(s) jL/A
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
OrNo
❑ 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
99No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
(VPNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name l K e. V e S Phone: q10 f%x�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Zn6&CA21....e.Ly Date:
12128104 Continued

w•
Facility Number: Z Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [% No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WIJP El Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[$No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ 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
rtl
yuNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ 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
[ONo
❑ 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
[,TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
VNo
Cl NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit A Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
r
I Arrival Time:
Departure Time:
County: Sp^rsa
N_ Region: 77"�o
Farm Name:J
o D E
Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �� S1`^` �� Integrator: GQr.CL> 50,0esz)
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: Z7 `It 6 i5
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [:] o ❑ ' =" Longitude: F__j o =' 0 «
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer 3'S9 Z 3 A Non -La erI ,
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
ElNon-Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle ` Capacity Population
❑ DairyCow
❑ DairyCalf
❑ DairyNeifej
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
l
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
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 of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes1z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
'21No
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:- 15i Date of Inspection z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3z
❑ Yes .2<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
�TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
ZNo ❑ 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
dwo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
VfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ElHeavy 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) C' aEQM %rop,G-
13. Soil type(s) do'�-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
4No
❑ NA
ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination: ❑ yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
1:�_ j p a s!_ er— ve- to A•1
Reviewer/Inspector Name. n, o .S J .s.w '; v „�` Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: w. Date: Z mp`
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CY*�(P adily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g ❑Maps ❑Other
21, Does record keeping need improve ent? If yes, check a appro riat box below, ElYes 11No ElNA ❑ NE
El Waste �plication ElWeekly/reeb and ❑ W to Analysis [:L 2-I]Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Ra�&ll ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute It pections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ElWeattKr Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
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
.
Additlooal Coiuimeot's=and7oi'.Drawiiigs� ;. qOiAk
U —S—' 50L-."4GU
12128104

(Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit • Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 0 denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: !/- o-o Tune: .:3a
Not erational Q Below Threshold
Permitted 011 ertified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Aviar, o„d__.S a n - .. County:
Son•, saw /1
ee Pepe
Owner Name-- •, Joe _'Q&', _J. Phone No: ! O- 6-33 - 3 �'7 8
Mailing Address: �g� _ B>R.�e r .._ JQ� --- CA'o T0, N_L .293
----)G,,4/0-5-31-.25-i17
Facility Contact: __ Title: Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative:....,,ff9aary,-Sw,.'� , ---• Integrator; 4,,, • Rio hero F/o�FG.,,�
Certified Operator:---- .G Operator Certification Number.
Location of Farm:
Wwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • " Longitude •
Desert Cent aDesiiga cnrrmt:
Swine Camity Poitraiatton ;Pon##r9 .Camay =Popalataon: awe
can to Feeder
33S0
-r`- Layer
Z Non -Layer
eder to Finish
to Weanrrow
[Farrow
to Feederrrow
to Finishltsars
z.�
Discbarges & Stream Impacts
otW 'SSLW }
Ctiiieat -
R:P " iioa' ..
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RIG
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [3,90
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [] Yes BNa
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin? -1
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes B$to
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ErTgo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 2140
Waste C21 ection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (fi-eeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ['io
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: - -
Freeboard (inches): 3 S"
12112103 Continued

` Facility Number: 8� — ► S
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes l440
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑yes [To
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 maintenancefimprovement? ❑ Yes O�No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ETNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes [CNo
elevation markings?
Waste Anniication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancerimprovement? ❑ Yes [214o
11. is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ETfio
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
3 0 Jr 5-0
12. Crop type .- r.►�R� S,. // Gran Oc%'speel
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWIVIP)? ❑ Yes EM
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes 91qo
I6. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes e'er
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 2WO
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [-Nb
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 2'90
Air Quality representative immediately.
❑ Final Notes
Plea -se Gs
fie., rr An� SP�a/. �Oi tvtrd/S ,'-I Splo/, L,'elal -(00;
Ala/l V,J/A /YLi A vor in�UlMw�,'o� vh w/L 't,tIs
Reviewer/Iuspector Name -j
ReviewerAWspector Signature:
Date:
1L/1L/U3
Continued

. Facility Number: 8.2 — jrI I Date of Inspection
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Epid
22. Does the f ility f .to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie!WUP, ch ts, d506, pafs, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑-Ko
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[}No
❑ Ddeste Ijrr_sa _ ❑TTeebeard ❑ AL"M Aeelym ❑ pl
7LI-/3—>.77
10-
24. Is facility not iz�compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑YesEKO
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
21go'
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
BNo
27_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
MNo
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
9No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes E 3w
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does retard keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ 120 Minutz Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: i C Time:
� "
Not Onerational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 7dZ T+n 7�pt_ i ScQ County: Sez...D �r► RC,
Owner Name: -Toe_ T),rx Cps Phone No: 63'?t, — ao `7
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: �Oe— e OIL, pe-=� Title: Ownt _ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: --70'e `1)an !O_m Integrator: C.
,✓�
Certified Operator: �yOt- �. �o4t Operator Certification Number: (0-13 C)
Location of Farm:
%swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �� �� Longitude
CrrenCCDesign tg
- _
_..
i_ Cattle, =Cii auto'= Po lat:on
Caacity' Pa uton='PoacvmPo tin
Wean to Feedertj. 5cT ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Lavers. ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean -.,
- ❑ Other 3
Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish _ To#aC5! Cg aGt#1
Gilts _ z=
El-TotalBoars — = SSLW
-- _ _
e:.
Ntimber,of Lagoons ' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La con Area ❑ S rav Field Area
i Holdmg�Ponds Ir Solid Traps �_� m ❑ No Liquid Waste Mana ement Svstem
i
Discbarses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes M No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
f
Fceboard (inches): �1
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 1?0Z — 5 r Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11 _ Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [4 No
12_ Crop type--eJ"m"Ja } Srn�t tl Cac rt: n
13_ Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 3 No
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
[A No
(ie/ WUP. checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
C9 No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
W No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
- _ _
G mz' n nts (refer tc question #) Erpbdo aioy 1'FS'anstrrrs and/or ao� recamQtendationsior eny tither mments.
[rse;drawtngs of facility #o better t=phun srt>3atsoas. (use sddthon pages as necessary] ❑ Field Conv El Final Notec ,
C-crj re.ev rrls Sc,; i tzS " acts _�e_eun 141 t- 4-ne' Dine Gppl,'ErP a.- 4.--,
I
rt.[omrn"eP f2t t.
1'4-11A10T 0VCP—S0 ' 6c. �eOn olalecQ c,a is Corr+r`nv, 1'rl,
Reviewer/Ins ector Name C
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 02
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: $,� — jrj� Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. R'ere any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s)• inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or-Drawin
•
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes PV No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [X No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes [9 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
- IgVI
03103101

of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 16Routine O Complaint. O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other I ❑ Denied Aocess
Facility Number Z Date of Visit: / —b rune: �
Q Not rational O Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..... ... „
Farm Name: ... S.Pr'^ :....d . ¢....0 ....................... County:
Owner Name: ...:,1 La ,1.1.E .... _.�,Q Q........................................... Phone No: ...._3 3 z78' ._
Facility Contact: ..........0 ! GA.Ef......................................... Title..................... ] ............. Phone rNoo:
Mailing Address: 0 B ecz v e r }..._.. - L :..�G11 w� . I v
_.
Onsite Representative: [ C.J rt e...................................................... Integrator ...............4�
Certified Operator: ..... .... ,p.--,-,•,••,••••,---„• .. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �° 46 Longitude �• �9
Design .; Cnrreiiit
Canacito Ponulation
Wean to Feeder
=
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to'Wean
=
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
El Boars
Nuutber of lagoons
Subsurface Drains Present jpj±gwnArea 10 Spray Field Area
- No Liquid Waste Management System -3=
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other , l
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes} No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes /WIG
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 ENo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes j 10
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes , 5-0
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier......................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 37
5/00 Continued on bank

Facility Number: �Z —�S� Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
1 I. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ex5essive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type ge,- '1 U J CL- Yl C:L / 5m, • gra I. -
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
I& Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iet irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�'Vo yiQlati�>gs :e - def cpepci� 44re 'hWd duf g thjs:vispti You will > ee�iye uo iu>�•t�gr
rorresporidence abotiti this visit::......... ................:::::::.:. .
❑ Yes )KNo
❑ Yes )No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes )No
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes fipo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes two
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes )�No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes j�No
❑ Yes ,?VNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes )No
❑ Yes J '"o
❑ Yes 940
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes

Facility Number: Sz '/SI Date of Inspection
Odor issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes A�o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes Po
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
lAdditional Comments andforlUraw�ngs•.
ALI
J
5/00

Type of Visit p Compliance Inspection p Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit p Routine p Complaint O Follow up p Emergency Notification p Other [3 Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 12/1312000 Time: 3:00 Printed on: 12/20/2000
p Not Operational p Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified p Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: doaDaa.P.flpe.&.Soxt .......
Owner Name: Jur-Dan...................
Pope .
Facility Contact: J0.e l?.apt.PQpA.................................................Title:
County: Sampson ........................................... FRO............
Phone No: 53.1317.8...........
Mailing Address: 4$8.Beaver.Rd...................................................................................... CliWORNC
PhoneNo: .......................................
Z8328.
Onsite Representative: dote.Daa..Rope............................................................................. integrator:Getldsbore.Rog.)farms-----------............................
Certified Operator:dne........................................... P.OpLe ................................................... Operator Certification Number:lf7al].............................
Location of Farm:
Hwy 403 East to SR 1904, turn right to SRI 740, turn left, firm on right approx. I mile.
® Swine ❑ Poultry p Cattle ❑ Horse latitude ©. ®� ®« Longitude ®• ©� ®K
Des
Swine Capp
�rrent
ulation
Ig Wean to Feeder
3350
p Feeder to Ems
p Farrow to can
p Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
„Design F -Cu
_ -. Capacity Pop:
Design J Current =
n Cattle Capacrty Popdiat,on
❑ airy
Lz
O
�.
Total Design Capacity
.: 3,350
Total SSLW
1001)
❑ u Sur ace Drains
Present
O Lagoon Arei 10 S pray F jeld A rea
o
Liouid Waste
Manaeement Svstem
_ ..
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Ig No
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes Cl No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) O Yes ® No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 11 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? © Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches) ..33..................................................................................................................................................................................................
5/fit) Conlinuvd an hark

5100 Continued on back
Facility Number: 82-151 Date of Inspection ® Printed on: 12/20/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? []Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? p Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? p Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? D Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? p Excessive Ponding p PAN p Hydraulic Overload Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes p No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? p Yes p No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? p Yes p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 0 Yes ® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documcnis
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc-)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
U-NO'Ni61itions•or'dde 'deu'c1es4ere-io'tedl-during: thisvisit.'Yau'will-ire ceiveno. further.'
•:•icor�es�vadeace aboir##his:visit:•:•:•:•:•.•.•:.•.:•:•:•.•.•.•.•:•:•.•:•:•:•:.:•.•:•:•:•::•:-:•:•:-
D Yes ® No
p Yes p No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
0 Yes p No
p Yes ® No
Cl Yes ® No
p Yes N No
Reviewer/Inspector Name a s
ILcky Revels � e �.
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: Cron

I Revigwer/Inspector Signature: Date: 51001
Facility Number: 82_151 Date of Inspection ® Printed on: 12/20/2000
Odor 15sues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below p Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? © Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, © Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes R No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) []Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? []Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pernianent/temporary cover?
D Yes ❑ No
-
qxjr
AEC
F
L
F• ....Y ..T. "k. -'
S'.1»:
,9 tom..
4
'.�
'Y"
-01
ig
Y. V.
,.="
Y
Z.-
,z r�'?S a
tt
_�.
3
A a %.
$fie
��'
- _
M.—
MObk.
P
�`°."�".
Om
"zsY'r
.�;zaF ss'' 4�P-,$- cr 'xs. _'" �rwa' 3 ,� "-za-• 24 s.
r ..':" 7 ':. �`--J-
ii.
�fn.
Off—
�,s
9�. fie. b"` Y � ";x '
--�-• a.'� r sa
s
[ i-C'E J^ 4. ..i t• F `{{t« >�
.FPQ .
4
5100

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 23, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Joe Dan Pope
Joe Dan Pope & Son
488 Beaver Rd
Clinton NC 28328
Farm Number: 82 - 151
Dear Joe Dan Pope:
1 � •
NCDENR
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
l l U
OCT 2 5 2000
l✓A(a- TEw/ILLE
REG. CF�=1!GE
You are hereby notified that Joe Dan Pope & Son, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.1 OC, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sixty (60) days to submit the
attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular
Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application.must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subject your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must he returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Theresa Nartea at [phone] extension 375 or
Jeffery Brown with the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely, f
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Fayetteville Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Facility Number g Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection o0 24 hr. (hh:mm}
❑ Permitted l Certified Q Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Q Not Operational Date Last Operated:
FarmName: ................. �--0 G------ &A/........-�.... ...............................County: _ .......... ......... ` p..r....................
OwnerName: ............. .. C c.........�...l.R.r: .................................................. Phone No:-.-............................-....................-...............................
Facility Contact: a '" t Title ................ Phone No:..................,................................
1...........I. crnl........... f.....Q....Q ................ ...........
Mailing Address: ....................7"�........'J 9.11. r.......! [ l.. r.I• •11f7�...................... ......a$ a
�...... ................. :.......... f. NC
Onsite Representative: ..................... !!!/. "Integrator:......................................................................................
.....................................................................D
Certified Operator:...............:�..�.P..........l�l..................L i,,..... ��............................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ .SEE
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... • I
Latitude 0 G •1 Longitude • ' 64
- ,Design
Current
Design Curreet,;=_ __, -"
Design Current
Swine . _Ca' city
ty
Population . ;Poultry . -
p
Capacity Po aulatiori Cattle
p- ty
Capacity Po ulabon
+ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
' ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
=
-
ElFarrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
3, Q
❑ Gilts+
❑ Boars
-TotaLSSLW '
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Pres nt ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Fie d Area
.., a Area I
Hiilditng Ponds / Solid Traps , , l ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System r _
Discharges & Stream Imrracts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made')
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
❑ Yes t
❑ Yes I No
❑ Yes d No
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes' ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes VNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes r
o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes (0 No
Structure I
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ................. ............I ... .
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
................. ......... A .' ..........................I.............. ......... .............. .......... -
❑ Yes XNo
Continued on back
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99

i r
Facility Number: Date of Inspection �a-
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes *o
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an \\\\
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes XNo
Waste Application
Id.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
A No
I .-
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
XNo
12.
Crop type.
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
["No
I4.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[ (NO
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
YNO
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
V14 ❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
4
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
o
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
(kYes
"❑`Yes
[I No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
jfNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
VNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
N/❑
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
Yes
a
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Wf No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ YesNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes �No
0: �'Va yiQlatioFis oi• deficiencies were npted- during 4his;visit: • Y:oit %vial •reeeiye no: further
cori-esporidence. about this visit: . :...:...:.:...:. ; ...:.:...:...:... , - . - . - :.:. ..... _ ... _ . _ .: .
ymmerits(refer_to question #} -Explain any YES answers andlor any recortnmendat
—� _ — _ -
CiftA17117,f A.
LAZIG-
Far-* 3350� /C"kVt,1�� /4�r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �ir��� Date. /p1 --8'— `J
3/23/99

y
i

Facility Number: g — t)ate of Inspection
Odor ISSUC.4
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
No
29.
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
Is land intake located liquid
Yes
Co
the application spray system not near the surface of the lagoon?
❑
30_
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
4No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
JJNO
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Addlitionat-Comments--andor Dravv_�ngs
i
s
3/23/99

13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
i0 Routine O Complaint ' O Follou uP_-of DIV inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other J
Date of inspection lz
Facility Number /.
Time of Inspection : a-tU 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered [3 Certified © Applied for Permit © Permitted 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Named! .1�6. ,E /� County:.......--- ...........................................
.......-------...J e Vic...... ..--�--........._R,�-- .............................. _-..��r�-�►,..�
Owner Name: ...............� b.0 ��,v ....,( Gyre. ...... Phone No: ..9w,1. �`33...3z.71�......................
p
Facility Contact .4.! .. Pam.............. Title:.........r...........:......................................... Phone No:..........................................
• Contact: .............. .
MaUing Address h....' ✓
.-.---z ..................................................................
Onsite Representative:...............4r! '.... ..... ................................................ Integrator:.........��°..11..�!.!L.f... ................
1
Certified O erator;........Vo.z�.........:........
p � ,�...................................... Operator Certification Number ..........................................
Location of Farm:
J� J
.........5....C_.. 7 ............................................ _............. .....
Latitude • 04 66 Longitude .0• ' "
"`• Des" .Current'
`Design Current'.. 'Design ' -Current
x . Swrue° �. ;Capacity Population..
Poultry
Capacity4 Population Cattle: Capacity. Population.
51 Wean to Feeder
D
TT rZ
10 Layer I
I
Dairy
❑Feeder to Finish
I0Non-Layer
;:
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean..
❑ Other
: , „, W;
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
,# �TOtal I}estgn:Capacly
❑ Gilts
k
❑Boars
T©tal SSLW�"A
'"'Number of Lagoons / Hold;ng ;Ponds F f °40 Subsurface Drains Present JJ0 Lagoon Area J© Spray Field Area
a h` •.., * No Liquid Waste Management System" v
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
1UNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
N-No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon' ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
ETNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
/G',q
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[5 No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
91 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
[�"No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
Pj No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility Number: Z —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be property closed?
Structures (Laeoons,llolding Ponds, Flush_ Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes A] No
Structure 4 Structure 5 - Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard ft
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes kNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes CR-No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ..................................... .............................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Ndyialations•oc def'iciefides. were- noted -dining this:visit.- You:will recei've•no•furtlier
correspgndence d oid this:visit::::..: : :
uny YES' xns
❑ Yes %No
❑ Yes E<No
❑ Yes )&No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes P�No
❑ Yes ,J No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes V No
❑ Yes ,M No
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature: J' .i 711--- /V/nz-�_ Date: /2 7

0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of D%VQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
� j r
Date of Inspection
Facility Number �j
Time of Inspection / 3 : o d Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: C Fz Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview 0
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: Vr ° �•o^> ��� _� County:
r
Owner Name: 1/4� �.�-- PhoaeNo: 3-3278 ;33:�
Mailing Address: Y0 13zew"
Onsite Representative: 1D,J r� Integrator: r�r4e�-
• ��'`�
Certified Operator:Operator Certification Number.
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
11Yy.Y.,,as....3'4 '``s�5,`".h-F
Number �€ Poult?Y� r Number � Caltie Number
❑ Wean to Feeder La s R ❑ f
D
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Nan ❑ Beef
El Farrow t0 Wen
�< Farrow to Feeder - ,: � s :: .
s?
Farrow to Finish ❑ Other Type of livestock
�az`•x.a�`« visrs�;,n",�,<., d?M.:.:; ..a1. , a..w «, :�-.°�,, d•. .-s,wr�� r�"k ..�!?43i`�:rs
Num>1er of=Lagooas IHolding�Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present k
4 Rom` .� ❑ Lagoon AreaV Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 11 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Wo
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes PqNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ ❑ Yes A[No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes EqNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Jallo
4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require ❑ Yes No
maintenance/improvement?
Continued on back

6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after I/l/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures {La oons and/or HoldinLPands)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2
ig f, /, —
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
I I - Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancefunprovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
Lagoon 3
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste Abp4cation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
. (If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type '
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management PIan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes i No •
Cl Yes No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes "No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes etqNo
❑ Yes X) No -
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes E�rNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes 4 No
XYes OkNo
❑ Yes )M No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes �91 No
1Y Y E '-• - - - CgrY ^ya;, - - f 3 � f.Y' ,y t 'X.Y 't';
Cammeiits (refer to _questron #) ;.�E�plam�ariy, YFS� �an�.swe,�rs;anfor any momnte �ons ar any Wither co�ents.�� < �� w��k ��£
A p
LTse drawings of facriityato better lam•.situarions �(use,add�honal; a es'asinec �`�� �.� _ �'X w� �� ;.�`� * - �
s..,.w.-�_,-.:,u.e f<s,�+„ka- R t. ...n,. �F«.:.a�,.,..,,...;..-.. ,.�...]. ,w:.�x�wW..'.._.,.....:�.a.0 .,.,.«r.,.:.. n. �,'x� .;w..�,r� Cn'..a•.zxr .� .xh;
Reviewer/inspector Name ` �A��I
Reviwer/Inspector Signature: Date: / f
cc. Division of Water Quality, Wafer Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit
1 I/14/96
Reviewer/inspector Name ` �A��I
Reviwer/Inspector Signature: Date: / f
cc. Division of Water Quality, Wafer Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit
1 I/14/96

State of North Carolina IT
•ry Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources F4 •
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Governor C)EEHNFZ
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P.E., Director
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 24, 1997
Mr. Joe Dan Pope
488 Beaver Road
Clinton, NC 28328
SUBJECT: Annual Compliance Inspection
Pope Swine Farm
Registration No. 82-151
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Pope:
On March 18, 1997, staff from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the Division of Water
Quality inspected the subject swine facility. Please find enclosed a copy of our Compliance
Inspection Report for your information. It is the opinion of this office based on the
information provided and observations made during the inspection that the facility was in
compliance with 15A NCAC 2H, Part.0217 at the time of the inspection. Please refer to the
comments section on the rear of the inspection form for information regarding your facility.
Please be aware that all swine facilities with a liquid waste collection system designed for
a minimum of 250 hogs must have a certified waste management plan on or before December
31, 1997.
The district NRCS office, Agriculture Extension office, or the Division of Soil and Water
have specialist available to assist you with upgrading of existing facilities and certification.
P.O. Box 29535, 'a- FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 276264)5.35 V f An Equal Opportunity/Aiflrmative Action EmploYer
Telephone [phone]% recycles/10% post -consumer paper

Page 2
Pope Swine Farm
March 24, 1997
1f You have any questions concerning this matter, please call Robert Heath at (910) 486-
1541.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Operations Branch
Central Files
Chris Walling - FRO DSW
Robert Horton - Anson Co. NRCS

O Rodtine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-u of DS'VYC review O Other
Facibty Number z
Farm Status:
Date of Inspection
lTime of inspection / 3 : m pj Use 24 hr. time
Total lime (in hours) Spent onReview
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name:. _ ��-E �•oap�-�- County:
Owner Names Phone No:. �3' 3278/533 �S/7
Mailing Address:. - 5' �D ✓��i�d,�s� � - �1.../ .J 1 C d" 32 0
Onsite Representative: Integrator.
Certified Operator: P.4111) Operator Certification Number: 76
Location of Farm:
Lstitade Longitude �• �� U•
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
of Operation and Design Capacity
Wean to Feeder
Fader to Finish
Effm—w to W
UFmTow to Eemqft
F w to Finish
.y
;; 5.'�a.�.I.FR�✓mid �*4- 'T"M�.}`'��.'ti7..'A!Y�F+�'�?.� { ���.�r•y"'.°vi`.•
of Livestock
I. An there any buffen that need maintesmcef] Yes 11 No
! Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes $Zia
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance rnan4w de? ❑ Yes 14 No
b. If discharge is obaarved, did it reach Surface Water? (If yam, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ANo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estitnated flow in gaVmin?
d, Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yea, notify DWQ) Q Yes IgNo
Is there evidence of past discimgc f:am any part of the operation? ❑ Yea RNo
Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the Striae other than ft= a dischwV? ❑ Yes No
Does any part oftbe waste management system (other than legrwntsUlding ponds) require [] Yes '� No
meiateasnceJrmpaav�T
CdAdffMed an An^A-

U. ja AUMry not In compliance with any applicable swim* criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a cartified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after I/1/97)?
S. Are these lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Raiding Ponds)
9. Is structural fizeboard Iess than adequate?
Fzrxboard (ftk _ Lagoon l lagoon Z Lagoon 3
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maint enancefimprovement?
(H any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Immediate public health or environments.1 threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste ARP11cation
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
IS. Crop type
16. Do the active crops differwitb those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acmage for Ind application?
I S. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipruent?
For Certified Facilities RU,
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Aaimal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way)
22. Does record beeping need impmvamol?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by satne agency?
X Did RcviewevInspector fail to discuss r+eviewrinspecdon with owner or operamr in charge?
levkwer/Inspector None
xviWeranspector Signaturr
❑ Yes No. •
13 Yes No
❑ Yes JVNo
❑ Yes ,allo
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes ,MNo
❑ Yes tV No
u "res XNo
❑ Yes (IqNo
❑ Yes A Na
jb Yes O No
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes N No
E] Yes A No
❑ Yes Na
XYes No
Mea ,MNo
❑ Yes ANo
C! Yes )QNo
etc: - 2 &
. Ds Wsion of Maur Quality, Water Quality Sec lore, Facility Aasaament Uxft
11/14/96

%e
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
December 21, 1995
Mr. Joe Dan Pope
RE: Joe Dan Pope & Son Farm
488 Beaver Road
Clinton, NC 28328
SUBJECT: Compliance Inspection
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Pope:
On November 15, 1995, 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 21-1, Part .0217, and that Animal Waste Management is being
properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact me at (910)
486-1541.
Sincerely,
x4z�' 04�'r"� -
Ricky Revels
Environmental Technician IV
Enclosure
cc: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville N FAX [phone]
North Carolina 28301-5043 An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 910-486-1541 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention • /V o
Facility No. Sz - 151
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGE.M qT
ANDiAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SIZE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 11 - 15 , im
Time: 1500
Farm NameJOwner: -ro p­ Dam Pope 5 S•,., / 2- o e t�&14j Pope -
Mailing Address: _ 499 .3,,„, Rd. _ C Nc -ZS 3ZO
Integrator: U 61d5 bolriioa For c =NG • Phone: L'11q) -T 7 9 - 3130
On Site Representative: _ -Zl t-QN ae, Phone: (910') 533- 3z7$
Physical Address/Location: ass ►'✓d _ _ -
Type of Operation: Swine ✓ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 3350 We-.►.-,r,-J ' Number of Animals on Site: 3350
DEM CertifiCation .Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Iatitude• Longitude: • • 11
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of i Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes No Actual Freeboard: 3 Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the la oon(s)? Yes or pWas any erosion observed? Yes or®
Is adequate land available for spray? or do Is the cover crop adequate? (tP or No
Crop(s) being utilized:�� £ oafs
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings') or No
100 Feet from Wells? or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes orb
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes ordP
Is animal wash discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or® If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? (e br No
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name
tc: Facility Assessnvent Unit
G-4s6%►-o 163 Fsv—S y '_'.rc
Signature
Use Attachments if Needed.

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
Joe Dan Pope
Joe Dan Pope & Son
Rt 2 Box 393-A
Clinton NC 28328
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Joe Dan Pope & Son
Facility ID#: 82-151
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Pope:
IT
®F_=H"FZ
NOV 19 1996
FAY � 1 i LVtLLG2
�t-riLb;
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 91gn33-0026.
Sincerely,
A. Preston Howard, Jr., P ctor
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Fayetteville Regional Office
Water Quality Files
IM YAW P.O. Box 27687. W 4
Raleigh, North Carolina 27611-7687 N�� An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 _ 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Plan Amcndmcni to Inchide S&V4rCC Chronic Rainfall Practices and Standards through March 31, 2000
1. 1-1-this f cility can comply with its existing pc,„7it and CAVIIIAP it must do so.
2. Temporary Addition of New Sprayfelds (`) (Ohrk arnropriate boxes.)
[j A. acres of cropland. Irist crop types used:
B. acres of hardwood woodland n 1 n0 lbs PAN ! acre added.
[j C. acres ofpine woodland added L4 Ga lbs PAN l acre:. added.
?. Summer Perennial Grass (Check appropriate box.)
&k.'Application window extended for e--ac:cs ofpercnnisl grass ur.:ii first killing frost,
() B. An additional 5O lbs of PAN applied to acres of purcnnial grass prior to killing frost.
Z. PAN Application Increarod for Small Grains S. Wintcr Grsses to be harv�-sicd. (C_l)cck fir propriate box.)
j?< PAN application increased up to 20D Ibs per a. -re for 5- acres of small grains nr winter grasYcs to be harvestcd-
�] t3, PAN application incrc_acd up to 150 lbs per acre For acres of ovcrYccrled summer perennial inclucicl in "t. 13-
1
5. 11-mne Analysis (Check appropriate box.)
Prior to Dcc=b r ix, 1999 the calculation of PAN wiil be based on a 35°/:, rcduction of the last analvsis taku.
prior to the first 25 ycar 24 hour storm event. (Cu.:c: t waste nna',-. roust oc uscd after Dec- 1" .)
j] B. Ltse current waste analysis to determine PA;r.
G. Rcoulred - Maxim}:m Niriogti t.tlii7atior, ,Mca;urLs ;or Small Grains and `k-inter Cr7[;1•s,
A. UsL- of higher soiling rates,
=. 'Timely haves: of forage to incr_ tse yic.td', en;:
C. lrr igating during p: iods of wan:)er w_atller.
7- Rcnuired . Irrigation M=a-T.mcnt'I'achniaues to Run,c.i sn,d F'o: din._ ?otentiai.
Making fre;uen% light ir; igtltit'i applications, and
B. Nut irrigating in1M2:diit[C1V ncfsl- praaic., 3i^;wli.
S. T117e own_: ! Mar,zyc: 15 -cat:i,..d to maltase the pi a;}iatals :a a::d ::one !]te :3C1iITV l0 Fn7IIF,::ice- _:r._:-,r. t�crtlll
irnp?vs' ensum con ph--nc! W itll i n Z=nded CAW -.VP, and avoid c:sznarn: to SLr:az_ walNrS
9. rti'. I1C:iZJ'IILn to :S: &-G a:aaiiCnal i1r}{C[]LC5 ... i.'Gte in =a amen :yncnt:xpirts ii 8 rACallty
Any dES.l7ar��L' is d VloiciilCn and`Tsuh to an C :IiY=^_"sue,'!! am'icn- -
I0. Toe own,-r lopzraior is recuired To ke-o r-:ory of all Ls:. aooii.ations.
!I. iais revision rnUS: ircindc a map Or sk;:Ica of jnrw?:r;= a:!Dli_atiOn !17-cas.
50 E- D AIL> fi C) P'i-=
tdC:'Iii Owneer nagtr Nanie (PRINT)
—7
lily Owns.-;' JM'a .a2 r Sicn_r=:e
Datt
30Eyhrs_PapE +_SO j
Faciilty Narric
RNA«._` wi_ —
TechnicFti Specialist IN me (NMNT)
i eChnicEll {�C..:tiist Sic -ate::.
17r7TC�_-i� �
This document must he fled at the SVYC'D and he attnened to the facilities C'AV,"VA
and be available for inspection at the. fscii1n-.
3i)1'8v71Ciw5 ..: Sl .iirtt app:icaci: CU _"I1G.':(1Uif iA':SIC 77}L'3i not is «p; II._^ ii7 x �!i,'�n5.