820208_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Type of Visit: Q<071iance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 6 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: -(l County: S _f0/V Region: E_
Farm Name: ,F
nI �—n
o Aty
Owner Name:
1 •d
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: LicwL*15 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: in t?--5
Certified Operator: E-t.11 , f IaAr Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Design
Current
Design Current
@oultry
Capacity
o Finish
La er
Dai Cow
to Feeder
(p
" 0-`
Non -La er
Dai Calf
to Finish
7Boars
Dai Heifer
to Wean
— ��
Design
Current
D Cow
to Feeder
D , P,oultr
Ca aci
P,o ,
Non -Dairy
to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
_
Turkey Poults
Other
I
10ther
Dischar¢es and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
_�
c[�'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man -trade?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[5N
❑ 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
[3-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[] Yes
El"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Z - Ds ection:
Waste C2ection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ff Yes NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes Va o PT- A� ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes 5J Ko ❑ 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
O Yes Ra 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
0)o any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
es io ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[:]Yes a No ❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes r 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.
D Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): G /5 YG 0 C Gy 13
13. Soil Type(s): /V o
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0fNo" ❑ NA ❑ NE
l5 Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? es ,j'�i�' ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes T� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ZINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E5�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available'? if yes, check
❑ Yes
Fj"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather
Code
❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[2,l
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
❑ Yes
' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Z 6 Date of Inspection:
24:,Did tiie facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [�Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Q�Io ❑ 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 E3,DIa• ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [D-Ntr- ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [] Yes [solo ❑ 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 EfNo ❑ 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 Fe]�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i_e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ 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 ❑moo
"eso
❑ Yes �0
❑ Yes [a-. O
3 . 3, r 3 7 %
E V�IYt
VxA
e Spit
`A Let Odic
(,&lL ollo- 3ot�-bps(
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA [] NE
Phonegjo—g33 3 3 i
Date:
21412015

- / D __::Z�
4
Type of Visit: fO'Compliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine Q Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral p Emergency O Other p Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: !J7(7 County: Region:
Farm Name: 6r4 z6i/l la:�Zrfi�
Owner Name:Lr�»kI1 6z
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: j fi-s�1 Integrator: � �- J
Certified Operator:~" T/Db• Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
t
r g esi. n �.
[psi n Carrent _ D g arrant • Design Current
5wine Ca act P: h' 1'0 Ga Pa_o AMC Ca aci Poll.
Wean to Finish La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
4.
O
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
nt
D . P,oult , Ca ac Po
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
Pullets
Qtber
Other
I 1
n
Turkeys
Turkey Polets
101 10ther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 ® 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: - Date of inspection: 9 /2—! %
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _ G -
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ 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 Eg No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? 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. A -Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[� PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Outside of Acceptable Crop Window
lWindow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift /❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): XWmt V4 ���/c�/`�rYid /_"F37h /L!/h3�/3 T' �
13. Soil Type(s): �nl/—,p J k ,
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? Ed Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes E ] 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
[X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records &Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21 _ Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes S No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [—]Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

` Facility Number: Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 15-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes u No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e_, discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface 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 CA WMP?
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?
C] Yes
,M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
QLNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes nNo ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ffjNo [] NA [] NE
Yes No ❑NA ❑NE
[:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes
JNo
❑ Yes
Eg-No
gLYes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Use drawings. ',oi;iarrtity to:better,explain:: situations•(use'additionalpages as:necessary).
1-7
n .4-r� � � a ���s -3 674
7;;/- ' — P Face ©i d ���15 iJ% � jG�i c � �f �✓' /'T r�/ S �< �-
` �f/
73
8;t;: I�
_ r-
62 elo';
� 1.1
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Phone:
Date:
2/4a015
Page 3 of 3

Facility Number: —
Addihonal4Coatltients a►�silor Di
Date of Inspection
l
,S e Tfa V ���
d3�-'err
� �0,
-
P
1
4�0' V-U Cain
-74
34, �u�R
l�
7/25/97

ivision of Water Resources
Facility Namber - ® 0 Division of 1-0H5Ud1W10r Consvation
her Ageny
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine O Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: / bj Arrival Time: c7 Departure Time: ; / County: Region: L?G
Farm Name: 6rU_Rn- Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ ?S'z1 `f -mow L; Y { 1,� S . Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator::�)1t1�
Certified Operator: ,r�j�`t lT � Certification Number: e;' i3
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish I
Wet Poultry
ILayer
Design
Capacity
I
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
11
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
arrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Dairy Heifer
D— Design Current
D . P,oultr Ca act P,o
La ers
Dry Cow
Non-DaijX
Beef Stocker
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
QtherI
Other
Turkeys
ITurkeyPoults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
l . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 29-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes CEkNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection. c /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? 2§ Yes � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes JZ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �j /7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 15� No
[] NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ]-Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? 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 C!jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
WasteApolicatlon
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes C�jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes jC -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): ,-%j2.- / �%ycr �t �� ICOrs-r %zU—% 6Y.r s
13. Soil Type(s):���
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes C! No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes JE[No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes E�J_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes f!-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes fo1Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Jallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [:]Yes allo ❑ NA 0 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 RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis 0 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 I'�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes kT' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - I Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
CE .No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
[] Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fait to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
[:]Yes
[KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[:]Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
Lallo
❑ 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
54-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
. ❑ Application Field Cl Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[�J'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
E4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #):::Explain any. YES answers and/or'any additional recommendations or asy other:coiiiments.
Use.drawines of facility to better explain situations:a(dt
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 2�::* ZA _04_�/
Date:
21412015

Date of Visit: 1 '/�� Arrival Time: (9.' 0 0 Departure Time: ; 0— County
Farm Name:f-f�- 1IC�r' _ - Owner Email:
Owner Name:r'f'"`'/7�i�"6 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �y/�fl���,-,- , Title: 1
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone:
Integrator: 1I
Region: Z�59___ __0
Certification Number: 2�.3
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
;Design aCurrent
Caaci Pop.
Wet Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Desigurrent
Cattle 15%nop-
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
jp1,700
1 jNon-L2yer
I
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
--O '
D P,oultr.
Layers
Design
C aei
Current
P,o ,INon-Dairy
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Qther
Other
Beef Stocker
Non -Layers;
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
t',
Turkey Points
rjOther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[:]Yes 21 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[—]Yes [—]No
❑ Yes w No
0 Yes 0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ONE
Page I of 3
21412014 Continued

r Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: /
{ Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):f�—
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
�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
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
C?4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ®' No ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):r /fJyrr!/
❑ NE
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable [—]Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes f�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [] Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Ex 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 JZ�No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes LNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 214120I4 Continued

Facili Number: - DoInspection: /—f
i 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ®.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E3,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes JK No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 13� 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/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 2kNo ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes [.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E5-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [&No [DNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes [, No
[:]Yes ®'No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA [] NE
Comments (refer to uestion #)- Explai any' -YFS1ffihs*efs and/or any additionals&omr- Use drawines of facility to better exalain situations fei a ddition 1 oaees as neces aryl mendations or any othecommnts.
I, - 7Y"� Y� _,, .z 1� -fL.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: //� "4V.-y-
Date: /S
21412014

I
ivi"sign of Water Quality
=Ntmber ®- ® © Division of soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agegcy
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine O Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral p Emergency 0 Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: /3 ! Arrival Time: 0 Departure Time: 1 p ' j a County: � Region: �Z
Farm Name: ' "C6� �Q ��' `� Owner Email:
S
Owner Name: z,_rOrt- i+ a6ds Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: IA -.C-- I
Certified Operator: fri1 _hI" _ �r7 II JS
Back-up Operator:
1716D e r Title: G.
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design- Current
Design"
'Current
Design
Cnrrent
Swine
Capacity` Pop.'
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
-o—
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
- 'Y`
' ` '-
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
'Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
—o —
D , Pronit .
Ca aci
Pao P.
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
I Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
M'-
Turkeys
Other
TurkeyPouits
Other
Other
Dischar es 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 [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [—]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ERNo
[] Yes [gNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

ti
Facility Number: - jDateof Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): / 9 1 C} - 19� 9
Observed Freeboard (in): �e� - 117 z--
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes Callo ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
[]Yes
[a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
[-]Yes
[allo
❑ 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
[allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?,
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
1 1. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s)=/`
13. Soil Type(s):p/" f fC
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes CR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes [MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes Dj�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [] Yes CR�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check Yes JR1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes [ No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

F
[Facility Number: Date of inspection: / r
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ER -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ®, No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
§A�' 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
[a 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
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[5j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[!.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers andlor.Rany=additional recommendations`or'any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as:necessary).' 7'
a. sew �v
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date:�Jl�
21412014

M
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Dunne O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: /� j Arrival Time: �: v D Departure Time:l n County: Region: I�
Farm Name: Owner Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /Lane/- /'yp0y-r Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: �1� _ Integrator: Ctlh-
Certified Operator: /�Y���``� r/ da6S Certification Number: ! ��
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
A,..;
Design Current, Design 'Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pope WetPaultry #' Capacity Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
�.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
on-Layer]Dairy Calf
;, Dai Heifer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
v
- Design Current Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
©, rP.oult . Ca aci P,a Non -Dairy
Farrow to finish
Layers Beef Stocker
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
l7ther
Turkey Pouets
Other
Other
Dischar es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at; ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
[] Yes
❑ No
[] NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E. No
[] NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[] Yes
rUl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - IDate of Inspection: /
y
Waste Collection & Treatment
I
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
lFgNo
❑ 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: 2b
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):_ �} — �� _ Z 2`
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Callo
❑ 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
14 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
allo
[DNA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
QNo
❑ 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
SNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evide/ncelof Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approt ed Area
12. Crop Type(s): /yr� /�d�d S dial / �►�� /��Scs
❑ NE
13. Soil Type(s): of_6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CA WMP? ❑ Yes 0 No [:] NA ❑ NE
Airo 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fait to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ELNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes fun No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
CK No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
allo
❑ 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.
Cig. Yes
Ro
�❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis 54Soil 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
[Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

F"acili Number: p Date of Inspection: ZZ2 — /3
i
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ®,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes C,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Cg No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes Ca 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
CR 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
allo
❑ 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
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZLNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
2✓412011

Date of Visit: d- / rrival Time: Departure Time: -V D County:
Farm Name: Fy�' rL Mo A, le=a rA.v Owner Email:
Owner Name: M L ; K— t+DA Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 6;r � Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: S ti Integrator: zgs L •-�/�y
a
Certified Operator: ��j�� t��1h� Certification Number:
Sack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
-
�.
Designs`"Current
Design Current
Design ►urrent
Swine
�Capacrty * Pope
Wet Poultry
CapacrtyPop
tittle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
F 1
DairyHeifer
Feeder to Finish lop_
Farrow to Wean
—o
FDes�gCurrent
D Cow
to Feeder
'' D . Pooutt ,
aci
„Farrow
Po :
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
— Turkeys
-
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
.h
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 Callo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) [—]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? [—]Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [—]Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 9 jDate of Inspection: r /
Waste Collection & Treatment
�4 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �R_No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): f % r�,�
Observed Freeboard (in): .3 O 3 —I �3p2 13
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑Yes ®No [DNA ❑NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. 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
R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
Lallo
❑ 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):!'►,1`�7yr ����! (��,n ZWA,— _��•SiS—s
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[8 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
S] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
O WUP []Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other.
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Eallo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes ZNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes KNo
[]NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

• Facility Number: yg, - Date of Ins ection: / — — /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes 2,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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 R'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[3-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E31No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
®1Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional; recommendations oi- any older comments;
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). .R `� _ a
�frPa�wt, .� 5 11 h�Nvrs1
�i �ti �arr►'� /�`�� G�.az" _ _
Alll�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone:
Date: /0 �.�%��
21412011
Page 3 of 3

BIMS 17--09 -2_db9 no �_
Type of visit (kCompliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: VZ-e8-0411 Arrival/Time: Departure Time: O County:Region:
Farm Name: �u %�' ^� h�h�- F �' ___. Owner Email:
Owner Name: f`�j��"`� hrb&s
Mailing Address:
Phone:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: �`r' '� ' Phone No:
Onsite Representative: r t-c v—�Y� _ Integrator:
Certified Operator: e j�` "1-�'b Operator Certification Number:,
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = ` = " Longitude: E=1 ° 0 ' = u
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pvpulatioa
Wet Poultry
Design Current n Current
Capacity Population CattleE�11��iilllll
Capacity Population
FEWean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
to Feeder
A1190
'(N �
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
PWean
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ersPullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Humber of Structures:
S9y
s
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Gilts
PE113oars
Uther
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�
[3"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at; ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[]Yes
❑ No
ENA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
f 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
,.,�
I3 NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Q�N(o
El NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El Yes
LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 82,-2-0
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?
❑ Yes E NNo
El,
Yes ✓� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1
Structure 2
Structure 3
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): /
19
Observed Freeboard (in): 29
23
.2 Z/L
26
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [3No ❑ 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? El Yes l ?No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes DIo ❑ 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 ElIJ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes D<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? /
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L°I<o ❑ 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) C P-tit (A [ lL.L.r �W�G��� f�r ;rc�� wi id �S. G C 4 wj .5� LAI k L _
13. Soil type(s) No /
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 L� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'[:] Yes
ElNA
ElNE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
�IT1,4o
LJ NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
[3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/inspector Name " �" ' � " ' ° V_3.3 , 33o o
f'GerV 1.S Phone: 9149,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: SZ —20;5 Date of Inspection rz -t8
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? El Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes (ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
13No
❑ 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 El
Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[IYes
3/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
L�� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[3Io
ElNA
ElNE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
El'*NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
ET -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
D o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
Ej 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
B N
❑ 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
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
�,..,,//
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
B o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

r� 3r^ s I -o 8- 0 9 ,L>.R_
Division of Water Quality
Facility Number .Z d 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: V1-/7-p Arrival Time: 1t7; f`O Departure Time: //.�3O County: w� Sanl Region: F�
Farm Name: F ��✓ 104h_V i'. Owner Email:
Owner Name: �!f^J t11'��S Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �r`-� a 0aV,0.. Title: _ 1Gc. ZPw._ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: a o a { =46 Longitude: = ° ❑ 1 = U
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
f $0 a I
❑ Non -La et
❑ Wean to Finish
121 Wean to Feeder
ElFeeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
,S
El Farrow to Feeder
ElFarrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
ElTurke Poults
ElOther
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ElStructure ❑ Application Field ElOther
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Curre
Cattle Capactty',Populai
❑
Dairy Cow
El
Dairy Calf
El
Dairy Heifer
El
Da Cow
El
Non-Dairy
ElBeef
Stocker
ElBeef
Feeder
ElBeef
Brood Co
Number of Structures:,.)
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No L3 NA ❑ NE
❑Yes El No D A El NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
El Yes ,�,N'No�o ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes L3❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

r y
Facility Number: SZ —2 Date of Inspection /2-/7-
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 3-5'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0-156 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: L Q: ,L4 0Z ve3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes B- o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes 2igo- ❑ 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 aNu-❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes CT5o ❑ 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 El< ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application �,�
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ElE Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �o . ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ FAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
3'gTo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ yes
[EtNO
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
B-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name R c 1Rppe✓c.I5 Phone: Wa V33. 333D
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: !Z --/7— Zdo$
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: gZ -20 Date of Inspection IZ —/7—D$
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 BINK. ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropiate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
B o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain inspections ❑ Weather
Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes:0�__01:1
NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facilityfail to calibrate waste application equipment as re required b the permit?
PP9 Y
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
3<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[FIND ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
to ❑ 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
E3 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
�,
E4 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
L-fi' o ❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
E No ❑ NA
ElNE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
—❑ NA
01Q0
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Frac�HtOlqumber
I$ Division of Water Quality
�Q 1b
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation bW
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit ,* Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit IRRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ISlul Arrival Time: � Departure Time: �� County:
Farm Name: 'Q-L tiY1 S jIV\ Owner Email: .
Owner Name:
,�!�s 6 D S Phone:
Mailing Address:
Region: Pe
Physical Address: {�(�
Facility Contact: Galff4X�!,wn;. Title: Phone N ��
Onsite Representative: Integrator:"_ �
Certified Operator: ��� b 6 S Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Latitude: = O [= Longitude: [� ° [= s
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
C7 ❑ Non -La er
❑
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
ES
-Farrow to Wean
S
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design-;.:. C
Cattle Capacity,',,-,.o
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[A NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
OFNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
03 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
yPNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 1— Date of Inspection 0 i
v
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ! lot
Observed Freeboard (in): a2 2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes P3aVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes 1,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 �4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes PNo ElNA ElNE
(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 Aoolication
I0. 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 [�ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ElEvidenceof Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop typef
s} '. �Z1 hA '3:5YYZ
13. Soil type(s) 1 vO 101 k
14. Do the receiving crops PTer from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
()a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
(P 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
[5ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. 1_
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): I
9 ", cxu� tkP6
:M (t' MV CL lorlgcS ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name i NU " Phone: 10 n xiJ
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 0C.-T
12128104 Continued

Fac, ity Nutuber:1 Date of Inspection hel Irl
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes rgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp [l Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes fj 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32_ Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
jAdditional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
bgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
DO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
FNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
F1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ELNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit WCompllance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ;Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Lp OLD Arrival Time: Departure Time: County Region:
Faris Name: _ -l�i'�Y���s�- - Owner Email: �}
Owner Name: _�drl _ Hip ugS Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Y-f,. Title�eC
Onsite Representative: ve-u yc
Certified Operator: r- A k e jAu b b S
Integrator:
Phone No:
'_4Y
Operator Certification Number: 121 3 ai
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = = =4 Longitude: = o =1 = u
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Dai Cow
©'Wean to Feeder
S-0 a
❑Nan -La er
❑Dai Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
arrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Dry Poultry. -: ,c
❑Dai Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
;. ❑ Beef Brood Co
,, N'umber of Structures:
❑ La ers
❑ Farrow to Finish
ElPullets
PE3Gilts
Boars
❑ Turkeys
-
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
-
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
1 J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E 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
A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E3,<o
ElNA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
U
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: ',k AQ% Date of Inspection l
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No )�] NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 S cture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: nn
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Vil
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? []Yes JXo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes J*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 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 01 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 ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes R<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No [:1 NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% or ] O lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Aj�}re�a��
12. Crop type(s) ry) fQA'11A 1 0 5 W S SiDJ-
13. Soil type(s) �Q(' 0I L -
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Ej. <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes a1q'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes B'_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes 521,J0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P-NO ❑ NA ❑ NE
'Comments (refer to question 9): Explain any YES answers and/or any; recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): °
Reviewer/Inspector Name I Phone: 10 3��3 30D
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: tp loo(0
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
t
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes h No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Q-N'o' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ MonthIy and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
IgKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
RigA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
ONA
❑ NE
25_
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[,To
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Q'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[B1A
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
fJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E(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?
El Yes
,�
E 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
El Yes
,�/
L� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32,
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
02rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:'
a
Page 3 of 3 12✓28/04

Facility. No. `b D Time In �U Time Out Date
Farm Name �cSY1I'' �hS Integrator � c-r� S4 j _
Owner `'e h5 Site Rep
Operator ,cN�S No. a ��
Back-up No. -
COC ✓ Circle: CGene or NPDES
Design
Current
Design
Current
— F d
Farrow — Feed
Wean — Finish
Farrow — Finish
Feed — Finish
Gilts / Boars
rrow — We
Others
FREEBOARD: Design
Sludge Survey
Crop Yield
Rain Gauge L� s
Soil Test PLAT
V
Observed
Weekly Freeboard Daily Rainfall
Calibration/GPM / —
Waste Transfers
Rain Breaker
Wettable Acres
r�
Spray/Freeboard Drop
Weather Codes ✓ 120 min Inspections
Waste Analysis:
Date Nitrogen (N)
t (D_
2� l7 r.7 3..o
1-in Inspections
Date N Nitrogen 9 ( )
Pull/Field
Soil
Crop
Pan
Window
N�Y K_
5b
�o `
i.49
1.
too
3 -
L"
�. /,?3
s
Ce
o

f
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date ofVisit: - 1$ -070 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: i
Farm Name: er fe,l6an H,445 __ ___ Owner Email:
Owner Name: frifitD_R mm AW9S_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: s
Operator Certification Number:
Bach -up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o ❑' [� Longitude: ❑ o = ❑
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I❑ Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkev Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
Cattle
Design Cu-rrent., . ;.
Capacity .:,Population ,k'
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
QDairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures::
r
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?
Ees El No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
BIN
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[2No
❑ Yes
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Eal) o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —
I Date of Inspection I d'/
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
DINE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
the appropirate box. ❑ wup ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
0"NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E]�NE
23,
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
DNE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
�E
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
eNE
Other Issues
,
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
El Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
R NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
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
3 1.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
aNE
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
ONE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
®NE
Wssle was #rVv0%a1 I-. Aare lwoj RppA'eol av1s,dv pA -,,°/°%e,��•�q r�•�%.l
Was �a was jo
enn�G.,� �., ic►.,,, Pa �� ....� wri
nod i►ra i ,S, 9 .
%%�
XJ�.io�v�.r.
�h ��1 k/�1 Hdr
ar�ldwt� b7,Rrr
G+.s cuss e,�
""'7-C
14,
f
P t i i� rlj ij
i Ftdw 1 �I K/�tn, n1 Li�er ��.t
n9 wdrA w,'
Farms,
Qwa d/aAre
Of
Purr v� f� t irr,''on �I b.— /
J II Goa lC C(/� a pool u'� '✓•rt� G,..�I `�/iG
T'►�IMsr r�lie3 9d: w' �1 �rII r e k Svr.t/o ^ •. 0 M&(
la�oA�.
12128104

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA P TE
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
❑ No ❑ NA
E
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
U 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 D_W__QQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
El No El[7 NA
NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
U 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
[!I/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
ONE
❑ 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)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
L-NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'
El Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
P NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
Q tl/d S�u7� a6se"e -Pear .',g CVeirf 7�a1�%t9 0/*r=, A✓064 w 0A0.0 ,.P,,/ 7'b 6t
-sP'ar; ? o ✓><s `c% o X any. h ­/, `" P:'s- v 4w Q a ia. f e a �s�� u/ f. V'L. /*
4 3PrK
rrt _too e �, ', Gt/,1 vps.1 '.Isec7�i.te) tprq i 1Cia'or
Reviewer/Inspector Name /7a�! Phone: y'ky �g.j. e�f7sp
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: g- rg
12128104 Continued

10
Type of Visit 4P Compliance Inspection O operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ORoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7 - 11 A s Arrival Time: I ,00 Departure Time: County: Sea�+y4�Q�
Farm Name: fo/fay .66s 6g , Owner Email:
Owner Name: 4& Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: fe-#a,I H 4s _ Title:
Onsite Representative: Fee
Certified Operator: Fe /la., Ho66s
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification lumber:
Region:
Latitude: E--] o El, E--] " Longitude: E—_1 o ❑ , El
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
Design Curren#
Cattle Capacity Population.'
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
e. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes EJIi o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
0'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
G,&o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

i
Facility Number: g — p Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2 fvE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 011 E
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
❑ No ❑ NA
D<E
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NI,
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
EKE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
ONE
(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 [__1 NA
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
❑ No _ ❑ NA
maintenance/improvement?
]]_ Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
[2 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)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑-KEE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[JOKE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Q� E
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑' iE
Contuments (refer to question #): Eaplaitn any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name t Phone: e/O• —/ o
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

ji
Date of Inspection
Facility Number:
Required Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
aNE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[NNE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
aNE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
9'&E
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ORE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ffNE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[�iE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[2'IqE
Other Issues
28_ Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 21 E
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
aNE
. 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
❑'1�_E
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
ONE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
2"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
011y, es
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
_ ,
A"ddit�onal Comments;an. Drawtngs M _.. t :. ... Y-
D W Q S ra'r7 v,s lj la e..ft 4r*' r no�; c.'�y SC✓Pra noble ans LoiVoh -'
{
1J
a YSiT� U f/rr Hp 4i► rMr/1 AF : iit ?!:�Gr1P, SC d�rCt / pT lAe S�'O'-
n 0 IL
4rac13 iv t re ra I
Sp / r 1[l�,- 4 "1e!S w«e
`rarlxon� ar oq�
C ou s�,„ I b c�,� �a(a a � etc �a66
At irr ; / / s
k/i.,,7
6/US le lo /a h Gvu s W U S � - f +�1/� 1II pPi �rr n� �o��O w ✓ r 1
&11 S✓"t 12128104
Syst�r�+ wr„S �'.'xe�,

e
Type of Visit 46 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit a Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �. 7]-ep Arrival Time: p:?S~ Departure Time: County: S9_-to_ n Region:
Farm Name: Foe / Owner Email:
Owner Name _�G(l�a., HD64� Phone:
Mailing Address:._-r%�S% Cha/ 1 A&
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: lio.,.r;e Al-11"_ s — Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Avnej,;o"A., s &ee, W~e, fol& /y&s Integrator: Poc,.,.'.._;
Certified Operator:, Felton /YoS Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Dumber:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ n = & = 4i Longitude: ❑ ° = I =
Design Currenta F' �Dresign Current Design Current
Swine Cap�ac�ity Popul� aan'Qu1tryCapacity Population€ Cattle Capacity Population
can to Finish IL p ElLayer ❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Non -Layer I ❑ Dairy Calf
❑ t Feeder to Finish=` z` `'" ❑Dai Heifer
El Farrow to Wean ''D Pouf ' M ❑ Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder L O� ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Gilts " ❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars ❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys: ❑Beef Brood Cowi
Other
❑Turkey Points��..
❑ Other ❑ Other mlaer¢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 2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
["To
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

•
r
Facility Number: 81 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E;Mo
❑ 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: '9 3 -
Spillway?: _ n o hn O
Designed Freeboard (in): .2p, S
Observed Freeboard (in): 715-'# 97,E S y
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0,1�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ Flo
❑ 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
l._I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
21�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
[?No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[,;'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pond ing ❑ 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
SO ,y y 1ao a-v7
12. Crop type(s) Sm, // /�.o.:, �rY/d p IQYe /"1. /lei
_ -
-
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
01.10
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[]'<o
❑ NA RII1 E
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination`
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA 2—NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Bl o
❑ NA -0 NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
DNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
ES`ansv ers, and/orra
f
�is:;(ase:aiiditiionaI;p
'^t
pleS,9rJ
AOI 1-4e
7s14. Z6seM CGllj
or
;to• ''
!/+e C/Aer4rre
4,9ewS at'e
I(p✓L
L[ Q/L►wrw.f
Orn FIle. 6V41veor
CC4"
e.n/Ad/
'�+• vsd'- VRCS �or
irror0 017,
Reviewer/inspector Name `! Phone:. Qp-KYrt,r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
.01 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: g :�t — Date of Inspection -o t
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 3-go ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes. check ❑ Yes ❑'Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box_ ❑ r ❑ C❑ El O fh 'ts ❑ D
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [2'�o ❑ NA LINE
, a.yo
❑ Eld ❑ ❑ Saj_66 is ❑ Wasie Trftrtmferr� ❑ Annual Certification
❑A36 4 2H ❑-&t�l ❑ "r4p4+ d ❑ 1 L ns ❑ ❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than nonnal?
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
P-Ko
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
D-KE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
D-,'�E
❑ Yes
❑ No
6NA
94, E
❑ Yes
U-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes ER No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes I_,_7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional.Cotnments and/or Drawings:
Ppedtle rr A/u u /a reel, & .5�-h,s
Lp, 3 hqy 04G Jf.eiG M f f ieS.�C W 'Ne /age.., :Na- 4as sasre eres,i1,
4/04/e a e res a re Le r1^3 A/-Vs.r/ F'o, fie -VI � ., g , 6✓.1s •/c /114? w1w 6 . �� � � f.� 'lest,
12128/44

d
Type of Visit compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 04 outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency NotjpcAtjpr)_•Q Other ❑ Denied Access
F7
Facility Number O $ Date of Visit: Time:REM `d:-30
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted 13 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .....
Farm Name: ..... ... She �......_ —' _.....n ... -• — -- -_.. _ b County:
Owner Name:
�[ II 1 CAS i, Ph -
..-�.�....�_-�-.......S W... .... 1.�_.......�..,....�.......�..........�......�_....... one No: 4 �........ a3 , o a
-Mailing Address:.. �G .. _._. _ _... --��kob, itjC ----- `�83�8
Facility Contact: ..•-.-. _ .._ __Title:-.---_D t.� heQ Phone No:
sOnsite Representative* Integrator•. ---r .n=•�+�.., �✓.....
Certified Operator:.._.-Me-asC ^ _ S t� Operator Certification Number:__—_--_
Location of Farm:
R Swine [IPoultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �` �" Longitude • ' «
Swine
ean to Feeder
%� t)
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
ow to Feeder
(potsow
to Finishsrs
E
al•u�! Cf/f _--. •_ 4•• {..Ya
rPouitry-� Ca-3ECl Po Blatian Cattle _ •.Ca' aCi APO" hon;.
it Layer Dairy
F =: ❑ Non -Layer
[] Non -Dairy
l
Other
- Total D C. r al 4
r
T SSLW
otal-iT
Number ofLago�o s � � F � `
Discharges & Stream Imaacks
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Gr&o
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 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 C No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [�io
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes GNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 S eture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ........_...I._ ..........._........_3.__ ..... .._..._._. __.. --------- --------------
! qq
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

VF
Facility Number. — oio $ Date of .inspection1*493/cfl
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes [Rf10
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ONO
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 dNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes 2<0
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes 2<0
elevation markings?
Waste Aoulication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑4o
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes LKNo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type t)r_S`iu rhla� l `n C
13. Do the receiving crops differ with thod designated I the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes EkN0
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑-No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes [-1Go
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑'No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ERNo
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [jkNo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑moo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Milo'
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes L9 No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes Er&o
Air Quality representative immediately.

Facility Number: gg _ Date of Inspection L xL�r i
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, ship questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After i " Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes 9190
❑ Yes ErRo
❑ Yes glgo
❑ Yes Olio
❑ Yes 2No
❑ Yes B-6o
[:]Yes @ Ko
❑ Yes O-90
❑ Yes [moo
❑ Yes io
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
12112103

r
Site Requires Immediate Attention: _ /4�17
Facility No.. g2 - zag
DIVISION OF ENVIR014MENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
J
DATE: , 1995
Time: PJ25—
Farm Name/Owner:
Mailing Address: z�
County:
Integrator: Q. / d Phone:
On Site Representative: .a it Phone:
Physical Address/Location: [-4 S 70
f
Type of Operation: Swine —Ae- Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: " ee',-.t Number of Animals on Site: �m 4o,,4.
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: " Longitude: 0' "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon h ve sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) or No
Was any seepage observed from the la n(s)?
Is adequate land available fors ray? e or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Actual Freeboard:,L-c�Ft. Inches
Yes or Q Was any erosion observed? Yes or No
Is the cover crop adequate? Ie or No
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? Ye + or No
100 Feet from Wells? Y or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or 0
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map BlueVine: Yes or(p
Is animal waste discharged into water of estate 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 recguds (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? We or No
Additional Comments:
Ab
Inspector Nam
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Signature
2.-
Use Attachments if Needed.

Type of Visit (J�C&mpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: c3 eparture Time: County: :L-_ Region: f�X Q
Farm Name: a On-j4joi 14 64ALril— Owner Email:
Owner Name: ll i -%- Phone: i n -- — I O 1
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: -rol - Title: ' W //� Phone No:
Onsite Representative: t�f eert" JrDDI`L 6 !t-n=64 Integrator:
CertifiedOperator:;F� -� — Ho66� Operator Certification/Number: ��L -
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = f = u Longitude: = o =' =
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Design Cre urnt
Wet Poultry C•apaca Population
Design •urrent
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
1 10 Layer
1
❑ Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder L 700
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑Turke Poults
❑ Other
Nurrtber of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure R1 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?
JZ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes
[-]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
® Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
rlocb
rx Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
&d NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 1@ 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. ❑ NVUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. �d 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility posc 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
®No
DNA
❑NE
❑ Yes
tKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
®No
❑ NA
[:]NE
❑ Yes tO No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
X Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes
[0No
El NA
El NE
ayes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/oras�
l;
r Dwin r "
.s"�.5
G�G� �a,9pnns�tavc a-InarfC--r 4-a'U"W IIIQrA"-W pyOj f1�1/� ► n �ro�r a�i n�. •
X',
7i
)5- p •�-._ — 7 = ��sr c �—�Sl o 0 44 a 0�--�
✓� 9rn r rtt Ile ��'� �� r• - D tC�r C_ � �v Gt�s��a� �/�'' � � � ��� �.� g✓ O�
ran ra3 �c-a f- A-4 o v
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
M 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): / 9 / _ / _�} 4
Observed Freeboard (in): z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
M 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?
U1 Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
10 Yes
0. ❑ 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
9 yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
'es
0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l I . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[AYes
[]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
® Excessive Pending P 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
JZ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ®-Application Outside of
Area
12. Crop type(s) or-V_t2l � lov-ee" SYV _
11 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
C9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
Q9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[9 No ❑ NA. ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
;9 Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
?,Coatments (refer to question, 9: ° Explain any YES answers andlar anysrecom eudattons or any other comments. �
t3 _...: P p g ecessary)
Ae,�, awtngs of faciti to better explain situations. use. additional a es as n
7 Z a�?a�c�6'wirr�
`j;5 �-�� yam- `'z�fit-7Jn�sT•,m�. ��afi°��3 N�w�rrhasrrtv��, �.fifl mil,- N�fir�c/
%��; +-. ,,✓ a/' c� �f��. 7►t�.�9rt/�wn �a-s'c. �Lou� � .�fi �9� f���; !"
Reviewer/InspectorName ' �; ��L phone: p"-y33 �330�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ZO —
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection U Operation Review O Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine Q Complaint Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1/5
Departure Time: t K County: r ��'" Region: ��
Farm Name: �f IT rt,- 12 �2 /s Owner Email:
Owner Name: �!I %'�.•�� �/411 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: `
Facility Contact: _�fl�h /�b�s Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �� AXP4 �( rr-ri 1Y11Pvr� Integrator: y47 �,Dc­/+L-
Certified Operator: ,&/9--- - - Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = a 0 4 = Longitude: = ° = I 0 "
DesiICurrent
Design Current
Design Current
Swine ty Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
Non -Layers
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Beef Brood Co
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Ponits
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
® Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes
❑No
El NA
[I NE
L3 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
v�
® Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —
Date of Inspections
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
tHNo ❑ 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): / / q / y` / 2:
Observed Freeboard (in): 2-3 �'� ;}� o7q-
v
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?
[S 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
CVO ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Z 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) gwzet..
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
19 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
(W 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
Comments (refer two question "#): Eaplarn any YES' answersany recommendations or any other comments.
.,�, 'M. s ^v. pie'^ ",+.' .@r �t [ a, L
Use drawings offaeility to better,.explatn sttuahons(nse addttennal pages as�necessary)
7
�i�Ca�-Lt� Wtz� J��lx'd B"'Z /D-/g QED/O (,v]Th*+►P`S 3 7-6 /t'UOv��lt/®/sty
�/'t� ►'` >� G!{ar� y� O�r I rw P 1 / be �� �Il®i t� To �z'r B(�r- ✓�z'a�
Reviewer/inspector Name��T„ _ Phone alp
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: A? _.0_Z.!5/0
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of InspectionIJ
Required Records & Documents
19_ Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes H No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20_ Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ERNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. 54 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
D9 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
S No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
jj� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
04 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Pq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems rioted 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
MNo
❑ NA
ElNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
_
30.
At the time of the inspection dJthe facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
®,No
❑ NA
❑ NE:
If yes, contact a regional Air Q '' lity representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the *egional 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
,. q
Additional Comments andLor Drawings _ ..JA
1;! /'' Pi7dQ3 CUd � l/
//�% TYOj ✓U/V `^ J 7� z-- fayj% /��i"� �Ls.[�� / ��i�G� ��' !/ vf✓
�. fin r �,� -
a-k7a.11-e 7v—
�` I
jYd r•4G� �lDd GjC��fntat fT 7-99 ju-!'tTOE j7:5 SQn-�1
/Yl /'• #ViA3 fL-ac �-ot 7;e�s prrl � `$ P �i `�o Ta .�s
-em;)
Page 3 of 3
12128104

a
a
a
r-I
Id
Lk

Facility Nuumber:...�....... —405FDate of laspection: Iv- — fl
4/30/97

NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins
Governor Director
October 26.2010
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Hobbs
7887 Keener Rd.
Clinton, North Carolina 28328
Subject: NOTICE OF VIOLATION/NOTICE OF INTENT
Administrative Code 15A NCAC 2T .1304 NOV-2010-DV-0385
Felton Hobbs Farm; Facility No. 82-208. Permit No. AWS820208
Sampson Count),
Dear Mr. Hobbs:
On October 19, 2010. staff of the NC Division of Water Quality (DWQ), Aquifer Protection
Section (APS), inspected the Felton Flobbs Farm and the permitted waste disposal system. We
wish to thank Mr. Hobbs and Mrs. Greer Moore. who were present and assisted during the
inspection -
As a result of this inspection, you are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non -
discharge permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 15A NCAC 2T .1304,
you have been found to be in violation of your permit as follows;
Violation 1:
Failure to apply animal waste at rates and in accordance with your permit and Certified
Animal Waste Management Plan. That in no case shall result in excessive ponding or any
runoff during any given application event. (Permit.No. AWS820208 Section U 1, 2,and 5)
Dee Freeman
Secretary
On October 19, 2010 during a routine compliance inspection of your farm DWQ staff
documented that waste was in a ditch located on your farm- During inspection of your application
field, it was documented that waste was ponded excessively. DWQ documented that the spray
gun was disconnected from the 3 inch above ground pipe that allowed the waste to flow freely
from the pipe when the pump was operating. The spray gun was located outside of the soybean
field in an area with no active crop growing- You stated during the inspection that you had placed
the s�prpayy gun at this location a few weeks prior to this event and had land applied waste prior to
AOUir x rrty" i t�'s ION SECTION
225 Green 51., Ste. 714
Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301 OI3e
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]V Customer Service: 1-877-823-6748 N orth C��olzll�
Intemet: www.h20,enr.state.nc.us
An Equal Gpporturnity ' ?AfFtmiavve Adon E ,iployer �Vlla" u ' " llff

Mr. Hobbs
October 26, 2010
Page 2
Required Corrective Action for Violation f :
If you have not already done so; immediately cease application methods of animal waste that
causes or contributes to the described violations above and take all necessary steps to insure this
violation does not reoccur. The steps could include but are not limited to recovery of all waste
that ran off or is ponded in your fields, record the amount of waste recovered From the ditch
system and field and repair and properly maintaining your waste application equipment before
you pump waste in the future.
Violation 2:
Failure to inspect the land application site as often as necessary to insure that the animal
waste is land applied in accordance with the CAWNxP. (Permit No. AWS820208 Section 1I
17)
On October 19, 2010 you stated that you were not present when the land application events took
place. You stated that your son was doing the pumping and had not reported to you any problems
with the land application events on October 16 and 17, 2010. During inspection of your
application field. it was documented that waste was ponded excessively. DWQ documented that
the spray gun was disconnected from the 3 inch above ground pipe that allowed the waste to flow
freely from the pipe when the pump was operating. The spray gun was located outside of the
soybean field in an area with no active crop growing.
Required Corrective action for Violation 2:
In the future, please have the OIC or the person under the supervision of an OIC inspect the land
application site as often as necessary to insure that the animal waste is land applied in accordance
with the CANVMP.
Violation 3:
Failure to record all irrigation and land application events including hydraulic loading
rates, nutrient loading rates and cropping information, in accordance with your permit and
Certified Animal Waste Management Plan. (Permit No. AWS820208 Section III 6.)
On October 19, 2010 when asked during the inspection who had placed the spray gun at the
location in the application field, you stated that you had done so a few weeks prior to this event
and had land applied waste prior to this event. Your records did not show an), pumping at this
location but did show pumping at other locations in the same field in September.

Mr. Hobbs
October 26, 2010
Page 3
The above ground pipe has soybeans and grass growing over it and does not appear to have been
moved for some time. Your sovbean window for application was closed September 15, 2010 and
as of October 19, 2010 the soybeans had not been harvested.
Required Corrective action for Violation 3:
In the future record all application events and the location in accordance to your irrigation design
and CAWMP.
Violation 4:
Discharge of animal waste to surface waters and/or wetlands as prohibited by your facility's
permit (Permit No. AWS820208 Section 1 1)
On October 19. 2010 DWQ staff documented that waste from your spray application field
reached a ditch system that reached a pond on your property.
Required Corrective action for Violation 4:
If you have not already done so, immediately cease application methods of animal waste that
causes or contributes to the described violations above and take all necessary steps to insure -this
violation does not reoccur. Recover all waste that has left the spray application field and return to
your lagoon. Record the amount of waste recovered.
Violation 5:
Failure to notify Division of Water Quality of discharge of waste to ditches, over applying
,svaste causing runoff and failure of waste application equipment within 24 hours. (Permit
No. AWS820208 Section III 13 a, d and e)
Your permit specifically requires notification by telephone within 24 hours and a written report
within 5 calendar days following first knowledge of the occurrence of a reportable permit
condition. The Division of Water Quality has no record of receiving the 24-hour notification or
the 5 day .vritten report.
Required Corrective Action for Violation 5:
In the future, please notify the Division of Water Quality of the occurrence of any reportable
events in accordance with your permit.

-Mr, Hobbs
October 26, 2010
Page 4
The Division of Water Quality requests that, in addition to the specified corrective action above,
please submit the following items on or before November 30, 2010:
1. Copies of all the pumping records, lagoon levels, rainfall records and waste analyses for
this farm from October 1, 2009 to the present. This should include the recovered waste,
(amount recovered, location and method it was applied) along with a copy of your
CAWMP.
2. An explanation from the OIC for this farm regarding how this violation occurred.
3. A list from the 01C concerning the steps that will he taken to prevent this violation from
occurring in the future.
You are required to take any necessary action to correct the above violations on or before
November 30, 2010 and to provide a written response to this Notice by November 30, 2010.
Please include in your response all corrective actions already taken and a schedule for completion
of any corrective actions not addressed.
As a result of the violations in this Notice, this office is considering a recommendation for a civil
penalty assessment to the Director of the Division. If you wish to present an explanation for the
violations cited, or if you believe there are other factors, which should be considered, please send
such information to me in writing within ten (10) days following receipt of this letter. Your
response will be reviewed, and, if an enforcement action is still deemed appropriate, it will be
forwarded to the Director and included for consideration.
Failure to comply with conditions in a permit may result in a recommendation of enforcement
action, to the Director of the Division of Water Quality who may issue a civil penalty assessment
of not more that t-\venty-five thousand ($25,000) dollars against any `person" who violates or fails
to act in accordance with the terms, conditions; or requirements of a permit under authority of
G.S. 143-215.6A.
If you have any questions concerning this Notice, please contact Steve Guyton or ine at (910)
433-3300.
Sincerely, �}
Stephen Ba I t
Environmental Program Supervisor
cc: Keith Larick CAFO Unit
Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy Brown
Danny Edwards FRO S&WC
FRO AP files

y ■ Complete Items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
A. SI atu
Item 4 if Restrtcted Delivery Is desired.
"���
"`���"'
X�QL■
❑ Agent
Print your.name and address on the reverse
❑ Addressee
B. Received by (Printed Name)
Delivery
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mallplece, tj;
or on the front if space permits.
D. Is delivery ad dress dlHer ertt
1 �T7 Ye
1. Article Addressed to:
If YES, eater delivery ddn ow:
3 No t-
CD
MR. HOBBS
200
7887 KEENER RD.
�.
CLINTON, NC 28328
USPS
3. Service Type
❑ Certified Mall ❑ Express Mail
i
0 Registered ❑ Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail. ❑ C.O.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Efts Fee)
❑ Yes
1
f
211------- 7006 2150 0005 2109
7917
i PS Form 3811, February 2004 Domestic Return Receipt - y
102M5.02•M•1940
(t
rrr:f.Yrr.����r��
ir.Ynr.�+rf:rrnr�au�u�:r.r:a:rnivr,r:.r.i
Postage
$
IL
Certilled Fee
N
Postmark
Return Receipt Fee
Hart'
C3
(Endorsement Required)
O
Restricted Delivery Fee
/Q�1(%'/p
(Endorsement Required)
0
L11
Total
_
�J
r-1
Postage & Fees
$
ru
o 1
0
t,
`/ennt
Stree Apt o�Y_S---•-�.---------•----�....-•
orPO Box Na.
......................................
..................••............
N.
.............
C41y, Stare, ZIP+4
�i� . . ..

Report to:FRO - WATER QUALITY SECTION Page / of
CHAIN OF CUSTODY (COC) RECORD
NC DENWDNVQ LABORATORY (check one): CENTRAL l I ARO I I WaRO
For Investigation of: a .. qQ O l
Sample collector (print name)
and D%4-1 forms completed by:
dr /� / t, C-J, G?
Sample collector's signature:
Field storage conditions and location (when applicable):
,Lub Use.Only
'LAB NO.
STATION NO.
STATION LOCATION
DATE
SAMPLED
TIME
SAMPLED
NUMBER
OF
CONTAINERS
4 ,,?" e
7,M
3
Relinquished by (signature):
ld z
Date
L1 !7 ,
Time
- 4 C. -
Received by (signature):
/'a'�
Date
Time
Relinquished by (signature):
ate
Time
Received by (signature):
Date
Time
Relinquished by (signature):
Date
Time
Received by (signature):
Date
Time
Method of Shipment (circle one):
State Courier Hand -delivered Federal Express UPS Other:
Security Type and Conditions:
Sealed by:
Broken by:
INTR LABORATORY CHAIN OF CUSTODY - Lab Use OWN,
LAB NUMBERS
FRO-N•t THROUGH
NUMBER
BOTTLES:
ANALYSES
REQUESTED
RELINQUISHED
BY:
RECEIVED
BY:
DATE
TIME.
i
i
QA1Forms\Sample Receiving\COC form WQ 4110/01dbs

County:
River Basin
SAMPSON
CPF
Cf %ATEq
Sample ID:
0PO Number tt
AB64617 +
10WS586
Report To
FROSP
11 QG
nil Date Received:
11112112110
Cij
>
/t r �T
�y(Z Time Received:
09:00
Collector:
B TODD
Q
Labworks Login3D
SMATHIS
Region:
FRO
1O
Report Generated:
10/26/10
Sample Matrix:
SURFACEWATER
Date Reported:
1012812010
Loc. Type:
RIVERISTREAM
Emergency Yes/No YES VisitlD
COC Yes/No Y. ES
Loc, Descr.: HOBBS NURSERY
Location ID: 6P082.82-208 Collect Date; 1011912010 Collect Time: 12:55 Sample Depth
Result/ Method Analysis
CAS # Analvte Name PQL Units Validated by
Qualifier Reference Date
LAB
Sample temperature at receipt by lab 0,9 °C 10/20/10 SMATHIS
MIC
BOD, 5-Day in liquid
2
360
mg1L
APHA5210B
10/20/10
CGREEN
Coliform, MF Fecal in liquid
1
1700000 Q1
CFU1100mt
APHA9222D-20th
10120/10
CGREEN
NUT
NH3 as N in liquid
0.02
260
mg1L as N
Lac10-107-06-1-J
10/20110
CGREEN
Total Kjeldahl N as N in liquid
0.2
330
mg1L as N
Lachal107-06-2-1-1
10/22/10
CGREEN
NO2+NO3 as N in liquid
0.02
0.29
mg/L as N
Lac10-107-04-1-c
10/20/10
CGREEN
RECEIVED
NOV 0 2 2010
DENR-FAYETTEMLLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Laboratory Section>> 1623 Mail Servico Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1623 [phone]
Fwa deleted description o1 the qualifier codes refer to �t'_'14lli.C�. ^rnmrrraoAvr>ndtu's�t i,(rinfortr�chnKsal�rO�i( Oifyl;figl Owe. noeffoir�weg+wyy ly aN nt:>, t�cna ti
Page 1 of 1

C 0 C/ of 580
Met ow
i
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY '
Chemistry Laboratory Report I Water Quality L�Number
' ` _ � SAMPLE ['YPE 1]ateRtceived: Ip, �p, tq
COUNTY PRIORITY Time Received : q
0
RIVER BASIN: CA PIC ElAMBIENT QA STREAM El'I--Lur.N-T Received By `�O
RF.PORTTO ��_r Regional Office COMPLIANCE' ® CHAIN OF CUSTODY LAKE INFLUENT
Other EMERGENCY VISIT [O �• ESTUARY Data Released
COLLFCTOR(S) : �r I ,y� Date Reported:
Estimated ROD Range: Station Location. I/ohb /uu��e.Q(p
Seed: Chlorinated: Remarks: 1
Station hocalion Code Date Benin (y mmldd) Dgte End ( I d) Time Begin Time End Depth - DK DR, DBNl Value Type - A, 11, L Compasite-T, S, B Sampl T? pe
UOD 310 m
COD I li h 340 mg/L
COD Low 335 ma17-
CoEform: MF Fecal 31616 1100m)
Califumt: MF Total 31504 /100ml
Col ifurm: tube Fecal 3) 615 1100M I
Colifunn: Fecal Stre_p 31673 II00m1
Residue: Total 500 m
Volatile 505 MPA.
Fixed 510 m
Residue: Suspended 530 nVL
Volatile 535 nte/T.
Fircd 540 nta/L
11 403 units
Acidity to f l 4.5 436 ma/L
Acidity to pf 18.3 435 mvR.
A}kalinitvto pi18.3415 me/L
Alkalinilyto pi14.5410 m L
i'OC 680 mEJL
'Turbidity 76 NTU
Cnlifonn Total Tuhe /11i0 nil
COMMENTS :
Chloride 940 meA,
Chlorophyll a I -PA 445.0 modified option ugfL
Color: True 80 C.U.
Color. (li) 83 PH. c.u.
Color. PH T6 82 C.U.
Cyanide 720 ma11.
Fluoride 951 me1L
Farmaldchvde 71880 mLIL
Grease and Oils 556 m giL
I{ardness Total900 mrJL
Specific Cond. 95 unthoslcm
MSAS 38260 rnnft.
Phcnols 32730 uSIL
Sulfate 945 M10,
Sulfide 745 m
Boron
Tannin & Lienin ug+l-
HexavaicntChromium u L
Bicarbonate mo-
Carbonate MA/1-
Total Dissolved Solids mall.
NH3 as \ fi!0 mq4.
TKN an N 625 met[.
NO2 Cius NO3 as N 630 mg/l.
P: Total as P 665 m 1.
PO4 as P 70507 m
P: Dissolved as P 666 m L
K-Potassium m n.
Cd- Cadmium 1027 u ,
Cr-Chrom ium:Total 1034 u
Cu. Copper 10-12 up/L
Ni-Nickel 1067 ugfL
Ph- Lend I M I ug/1.
7.n-'Zinc 1092 uel1.
V-Vanudium uu9-
Ag-Silver 1077 unJL
Al- Aluminum 1 105 ur,11-
Be- Beryllium W12 u R.
Ca- Calcium 916 m rL
Co- Cobalt 1037 u
Fe- Iron 1045 ucll•
N10-Molybdenum u+ ,
Sh-Antimony ug
Sn-Tin u01.
'I'I- Thallium 08,1.
Ti-Titanium uei1.
He-1631 n
Li -Lithium H32 ua1L
M • Magnesium 927 ITIVA.
Mn-\•fan ancsc 1055 ug/L
Na. Sodium 929 in .
Arsenic:Total 1002 u L
Sc- Selenium 1147 u
li g- Mcrcur� 71900 ug/l.
Ba-13nritrrn uvA
Oraamgchlor'rne Pesticides
Or ano has horns Pesticides
Or annniuo cn Pesticides
Add Ilerhicidcs
ilase(NeuirnMAcid F,xtmcmhic Ortanks
TPII Dicscl Rant
Purgeable Oreanics (VOA bottle rc 'd)
TPI I Gasoline Range
T1'lVBT1:X Gasoline Range
Phvro lankton
Tem drama: on urrival (°CE �: t

County:
River Basin
SAMPSON
CPF
�0. w° rFyQ
Sample ID:
PO Number N
AB64618
1OWS587
Report To
FROSP
Q
G
r
$
Date Received:
Time Received:
1012012010
09:00
Collector:
B TODD
C
Labworks LoginlD
SMATHIS
Region;
Sample Matrix_
Loc. Type;
Emergency YeslNo
COC YeslNo
FRO
SURFACEWATER
RIVERlSTREAM
YEAS
YES
Vi5itID
`U
Report Generated:
Date Reported:
10/28/10
10/28/2010
_
Loc. Descr.: HOBBS NURSERY
Location ID: 6PO82-82-208 Collect Date: 1011912010 Collect Time: 13:00 Sample Depth
GAS # Anal t� +te Name POL Result/ Units Method Analysis Validated by
Qualifier Reference Date
LAB
Sample temperature at receipt by lab 0.9 'C 10/20110 SMATHIS
MIC
BOD, 5-Day in liquid 2 43 mg/L APHA5210B 10120l10 CGREEN
Coliform, MF Fecal in liquid 1 170000 01 CFU1100mI APHA92220-20th 10/20/10 CGREEN
NUT
NH3 as N In liquid
0,02
14
mg1L as N
Lac10-107-06-1-3
10/20110
CGREEN
Total Kjeldahl N as N in liquid
0.2
20
mg1L as N
Lachat107-06-2-H
10/22/10
CGREEN
NO2+NO3 as N in liquid
0.02
2.9
mg/L as N
LaciO-107-04-1-c
10120/10
CGREEN
RECEIVED
Nov 0 2 2010
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Laboratory Section» 1823 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1623 [phone]
for a detailed descnplian 011nd quaiifiw codes relor Io lilu�!:l�Ul,j;j4 nWe�Si.nn si w.+tz�Wg1�n�9In11� ;�eCnAc};s�Ql+:e Qudl.�fx &r.^_i^:? h;1?�i�v,L,^,al�„cJi gyp(, !wit a,
Page 1 of 1

d
„ �s 7
M �o
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY r„L�
Chemistry Laboratory Report! Water Quality .ab Number l
q ElS[ F Date Received : 10. 2 0• J Q
COUNTY ti� /n qi P_RIQRITY Time Received : n
RIVER BASIN: ( ❑ AMBIENT QA ® STREAM ❑ EFFLUENT Received By C1
REPORT TO /' Regional Office COMPLIANCE 12a CHAIN OF CUSTODY LAKE INFLM:'NT
Oth<r EMERGENCY VISITID ESTUARY Data Released
COLLECTOR(S) : f % 2> / Date Reponed :
Estimated BOD Range: Stat[on LoeadolV 66 .w
Seed: Chlorinated: Remarks:
Stat' pll,ocation Cole Date Begi (yy mmldd) Date End (lmm! d) Time Hegira Time End Depth - DM' DR, DBM1I Value Type - A, If, L CompositeT, 5, B 5ampEe Type
BOD 310 m
m
COD Low 335 m
Coliform: MF Fecal 31616 !loom]
Col iforTm MF Total 31594 11 DOml
Col i form: tube Fecal 31615 1100nd
Cali form: Fecal Sirce 31673 1100m1
Residue: Total 500 m
Volatile 505 m
Fixed 510 mgfL
Residue: Suspended 530 m
Volatile535 m -
Fixed 540 mom•
11403 units
Acidity 10 1145436 m gJL
Acidity to fill1 8.3 435 mg(L.
Alkalifih), to pli 8.3 415 ingfL
Alkalinity to pH 4.5 410 tne/l.
TOC 680 mg/1-
i'urbidiry 76 NTU
Coliforro Total Tube /too nil
COMMENTS:
Chloride 940 mSIL
Chlorophyll a EPA 445.0 ntodilicd o tion u7A.
Color: True 80 CAL
Color: (PH) 83 H— c•u.
Color: pH 7.6 82 CAI.
Cyanide 720 mg[_
Fluoride 951 mglL.
Fonuuidch ydc 71880 me4-
Grease and Oils 556 me%l.
Hardness Total 900 me/L
S ecifc Cond. 95 amhos/cm
M13AS 38260 1110L
Phenols 32730 u rl.
Sulfate 945 mejl.
SuLGdc 745 m '1-
Buron
Tannin & Li nin
Hexavaleni Chromium UFA.
Bicarbonate m
Carbonate mg/I.
Total Dissolved Solids rngfL
143 as N 610 mall.
t
TKN an N 625 1ng/L
NO2 plus NO3 as N 630 m i.
P: Total as P 665 me1L
PO4 as P 70507 rn 1L
P: Dissolved as P 666 m_vl.
K-Polassium mg!l,
Cd-Cadmium. 1027 u4r1.
Cr-Chromium:Toml 1034 "yA.
Co- Capper 1042 ug11.
Ni-Nickel 1067 uen-
Pb- lead 1051 ua11.
7n- Zinc 1092 411,
110,
AS- Sil,cr 1077 ULLIL
AI -Aluminum 1105 u
Bc- Ben kum 1012 awl.
Ca. Calcium 916 In ,
Co-Cohalt 1037 u'R.
Fe- Iran 1045 ug1l,
lvto-Molybdenum u
Sb-Andinorly u1JL
Sn-TIn u
TI-Thallium ugrL
f i- I-ltaniuta ugfL
lig-1631 no.
Li -Lithium 1132 uell,
M . Ma Vnesium 927 rn 1&
Mn-Man anew 1055 u -
Na- Sodium 929 m L
Arsenic:'IotalID02 ogil.
Sc- Selenium 1 147 11::1[.
I IS. Mercury 71900 uvJL
Ba-11anum ual1.
Or ganochlorine i'csticide%
Orpnophosphorus Pesticides
Or nnonitruecn Pesticides
Acid 1 icrhicidcs
Il: se/Nelnral&Acid Intractable Organics
'I'I'l Dieul Ranee
I'urecablc Organics (%'OA houle rcq'd)
TPH Gasoline Range
ITI rill IEX Gasniine Ran e
Photo tnnkton -
Tent -laure on Arrival ff ): l

1111812010
RECEIVED
NOV 2 2 2010
NC Dept, of Environment and
DENR-fAYETTfVILLE REGIONAL OFFlCE
Natural Resources
On 1011712010 the tailpipe of my irrigation gun blew out, causing
ponding on my farm. I did not realize this, and it was found on
10/19/2010,some lagoon watergot into a ditch. When it was found I had
dirt hauled in -and blocked the ditch.A Honeywagon was called to
recover the water from the ditch and field. I spent approximatly
$9000.00 -in the clean-up.
My son had started pumping on this spot by mistake. I was out of town.
I do realize this was totally my responsabili ty and my failure to -check
on this was my fault.
Thank You,
Felton F. Hobbs
7887 Keener Rd.
Clinton NC 28328
Page I

Notification of Wastewater Spill in Sampson County
The Hobbs Hog Farm of Clinton had a wastewater spill October 17, 2010 of an
estimated 40,000 gallons from a spray field. The untreated wastewater spilled into an
unnamed tributary that [lows to Hoe Swamp, leads to Six Ruts Creek in the Cape Fear
River Basin.
The Division of Water Quality discovered the discharge during a routine farm
inspection on October 19t", 2010 and is reviewing the matter. For information contact
Hobbs Hog Farm at [phone].
INDEPENDENT
www.clintonne.com
Jules Molenda
Publisher
303 Elizabeth Street • PO Box 89 [phone],Ext. l l
Clinton, NC 28329 Fax: [phone]
jmolenda @ heartland p ubl icat ions.com
10i-,>,-t.I (c)

01/02/2002 16:12 9105646680 HOBBS HOG FARM PAGE eg
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
-COUNTS' OF SAMPSON
JULES MOLENDA, PUBLISHER, of the Sampson Independent, a newspaper published in
Sampson County, N.C. ,being duly sworn, says that at the time the attached notice was
published in tbe6ttM�SON INDEPENDENT, said newspaper met all of the requirements
and qualifications prescribed by North Carolina General Statue ] -597; that said newspaper had
a general circulation to actual paid subscribers; and was admitted to the United States mail as
second class matter in Sampson County, N.C.; and further, that the attae}aed notice was
PuPsled in th ,SAMPS N INDEPENDENT on
2010.
Publisher
Sbzn,lfq and sub ribed before me this the day
of X44Ut 2010.
r iL�
NOTARY PUBLIC
My`commission expires-
_
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
OENR-FAYETTEViLLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Notice of Discharge of Animal Waste
The Hobbs Hog Farm, facility number 82-208 at 7164 Keener Road, Clinton, NC had a
discharge of swine waste of approximately 40,000 gallons. The discharge was first
discovered by DWQ on October 19, 2010 during a scheduled site visit. The discharge
began on October 16, 2010 and lasted until approximately 11:00 a:m on October 19,
2010. The untreated wastewater spilled into an unnamed tributary that flows to Hoe
Swamp, to Six Runs Creek of the Cape Fear River Basin. The farm ditches were
dammed, waste was contained on spray field, and no further irrigation will take place in
this spray field until irrigation system is updated to better aid in the prevention of any
future system failures. This notice was required by North Carolina General Statutes
Article 21 Chapter 143.215.0
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
OENR-FAYEfTEALLE REGIONAL OFFICE

01/02/2002 16:12 9105646680 HOBBS HOG FARM PAGE 02
11/181MY0
A CDept. of Envftnment and
Mtunol 0ee-wUrces
On 10/17/2010 the tail pipe of my irrigotiongun blew outcausing
ponding on my farm. I did not realize this, and it *w found on
10/19/2010,some lagoon muter got into a ditch, when it was found I had
dirt hauled in and blocked the ditch.A Honeywagvn was called to
recover the water from the ditch and field. Ispent appmvinatly
in the clean-up. f '�, !�
My son had started pumping on this spot by mistake. I was out of town
I do realize this was totally my responability and my Milk" to check
on this was my fault.
Thank You,
Felton F Hobbs
7887 Keener Rd.
Clinton AC 28328
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEM1LE REGIONAL OMGE

Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste
This plan has been prepared for:
Felton Hobbs Farm
Felton Hobbs
7887 Keener Road
Clinton, NC 28328
09-29-2005"
This plan has been
Greer Moore
Private
PO Box 338
Harrells, NC 28444
[phone]
Developer Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
AM Q
teed bv:
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal
waste utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the
Required Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with
this plan.
r Signature (owner)` ate
Signature (manager or producer)
This plan meets the min
Agriculture - Natural R
adopted by the Soil and
Plan
Date
standards ai
yfspecifications of the U.S. Department of
es Conseq4tion Service or the standard of practices
consolvation Commission.
,!f ,
F-k lJJ
894157 - - - y Database Version 3.1 —Date Printed: 09-29-2005 Cover Page 1
:. .r" w—.! b♦--�Y' 1 �Fi R.` �� �.. - f�rr �� 1 \�i/V \,�1.s�'�' `- P� � ���''� / '

:yam
yX.
R� 1
Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
., following source(s):
..r
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
Si 1
Swine Farrow -Feeder Lagoon Liquid waste generated 2,316,600 gals/year
by a 600 animal Swine Farrow -Feeder Lagoon Liquid operation. This
production facility has waste storage capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
3575
Incorporated
6139
Injected
6761
Irrigated
3 886
Actual PAN Applied
(Pounds)
Actual Volume Applied
(Gallons)
Volume Surplus/Deficit
(Gallons)
Year 1
6,105.64
1,901,591
415,009
Note: In source ID. S means standard source. U means user defined source.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 03-19-2007 Source Page I of I

Narrative
USED ON FARM RECORDS FOR MODIFYING CAWMP (AGRIMENT SERVICES USED ON
FARM RECORDS ON 1/21/02).
--------- -
Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 03-19-2007 Narrative Page I of I

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres a,,
cropland needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements
and proper timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure
other by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the q uantity of so lid and Iiquid waste that will be applied on each field
order to supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included. A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is
included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the manure generated by the operation.
Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
ID
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic,
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
RegV
(lbs/A)
Comm.
Fen.
Nutrient
Applied
(iWA)
Res,
(lbs/A)
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(Ibs/A)
Liquid
ManureA
pp6ed
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Flea)
N
N
N
N
1000
gal/A
Tons
1000 gals
tons
5842
A
S 1 I
Norfolk
2.75
2.75
Small Grain Overseed
1.0 Tons
10/ 1-3/31
50
0
Q
Irrig,
50
29.81
0.0
42.81
0.0t
5842
A
S11
Norfolk
2.75
2.75
Hybrid Bermudograss Hay
6.5'1'ons
3/1-9130
•325
0
0
Irrig.
325
193.76
0A
533.03
0,01
5842
B
Sl l
Norfolk
0.62
0.62
Small Grain Ovaseed
1.0 Tons
10/1-3131
50
0
1 0
Irrig.
so
29.81
0.0
47.581
0.01
5842
B
Sl I
orfolk
0.62
0.62
Hybrid Bermudagrass Hay
6.5 Tons
3/1-9/30
*325
0
1 0
Irrig.
325
193.76
0• N
309.24
0.01
5842
C
Sill
Norfolk
1.95
1.95
Small Grain Overseed
1.0 Tons
1011-3/31
50
0
0
Irrig.
5
29.91
0.00
19.82
0.0(
5842
C
SI !
Norfolk
1.95
1.95
Hybrid Bermudagrass Hay
6.5 Tons
3/1.9/30
•325
0
0
Irrig.
325
193.76
Ud
128.85
0.01
5842
D
S11
Norfolk
1 A2
1.82
Small Grain Overseed
1.0 Tons
10/1-3/31
50
0
0
Irrig.
50
29.81
0.00
51.54
0.01
5842
D
811
Forfolk
1.82
1.82
Hybrid Bermudagrass Hay
6.5 Tons
3/1-9/30
•325
0
0
Irrig.
325
193.76
0.00
335.01
0.01
5842
E
Si 1
Norfolk
0.80
0.80
Small Grain Overseed
1.0 Tons
1011-3/31
50
0
0
Irrig.
50
29.81
0.00
15.86
J.St
5842
E
S11
Norfolk
0.80
0.80
Hybrid Bermudagrass Hay
6.5 Tons
3/1-9130
•325
0
0
193.7fi
0•
103.09
,.91
5848
NF
S11
Norfolk
11.85
1I.85Wheat,
Grain
60bu.
9/1-4/30
k144
0
20
qIrdig.325
12
73.93
0.00
147.85
0.0t
5848
NF
S11
Norfolk
11.95
11.85
Soybeans, Manured, Double Crop
35 bu•
411-9/15
0140
0
0
1 Q
83.47
0.00
166.93
0•Qt
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed. 3/19/2007 WUT Page 1 of 2

1
Waste Utinzutton Table
I
Year I
Tract
Field
Source
1D
Soil Series
Total
Acres
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
(ibs/A)
Cann
Fert,
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Res,
(IbVA)
I
Apphc.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
(lbs/A)
Liquid
ManumA
pplied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Sal'h
Manun
Applied'.
(Field)
N
N
N
N
low
gal/A
Tous ,
1000 gais
tons
Total Applied,
1000 gallons
-1,901.59
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
2.316.60
Balance, 1000 gallons
415.01
Total Applied, tons
0.0(
Total Produced, tons
ml
Balance, tons
0 0a
Notes: 1. in the tract column, — symbol means ]eased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
Preview Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 3/19/2007 WUT Page 2 of 2

ram.
y'
cam.
The following Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization table provides an estimate of the number of acres needed for
sludge utilization for the indicated accumulation period. These estimates are based on average nitrogen
concentrations foreach source, the nuinber.ofanimals in the facility and the plant available nitrogen application
rates shown in the second column: 4
Lagoon sludge contains nutrients and organic matter remaining after treatment and application of the effluent. At
clean out, this material must be utilized for crop production and applied at agronomic rates. In most cases, the
priority nutrient is nitrogen but other nutrients including phosphorous, copper and zinc can also be limiting. Since
nutrient levels are generally very high, application of sludge must be carefully applied.
Sites must first be evaluated for their suitability for sludge application. Ideally, effluent spray fields should not be
used for sludge application. if this is not possible, care should be taken not to load effluent application fields with
high amounts of copper and zinc so that additional effluent cannot be applied. On sites vulnerable to surface water
moving to streams and lakes, phosphorous is a concern. Soils containing very high phosphorous levels may also
be a conceal.
Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization Table
Crop
Maximum
PA-N Rate
Iblac
Maximum Sludge
Application Rate
1000 gal/ac
Minimum Acres
5 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
10 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
15 Years Accumulation
Swine Farrow -Feeder Lagoon Sludge - Standard
orn 1 Zb hu
1
13.16
21.43
42.85
64.28
tia%' 6 ton R_Y.F-
300
26.32
10.71
21-43
32-14
Soybean 40 bu
160
14.04
20.09
40.17
60.26
333456 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 08-31-2006 Sludge Page I of I

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
�- capacity available at the end of each month ofthe plan: Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is define as ttie date'prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage
capacity, this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated
If available storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design
storage volume of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval
in the waste utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Available Waste Storaee Canacitv
Source Kamm
Swine Farrow -Feeder Lagoon Liquid
Design Store a Ca aci a s
Start Date
9/1
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)'
1
1
105
1
2
95
1
3
112
1
4
156
I
5
170
1
6
180
1
7
180
1
8
180
]
9
180
1
10
167
!
11
155
1
12
139
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
333456 Database Version 3.1 Date Printed: 08-31-2006 Capacity Page 1 of I

S
f-6BB 5 T���
lrr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # A Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 1.862
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OlC
Ownee's Address OlC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I BH PAN 325�
Source
Data
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GaVAcre)
Waste An0q
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bel.
(lbs/acr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
5/24/2010
12:00 PM
2:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
317.34
C
1
2
5/25/2010
12.30 PM
2:30 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
309.89
C
2
5/26/2010
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1 1,2
7.66
302.03
C
2
6/3/2010
3:00 PM
5:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
294.37
C
2
6/4/2010
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380,24
1,2
7.66
286.72
C
TR
2
615/2010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
279.06
C
2
6/6/2010
12:30 PM
2:30 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
271,41
C
2
6/7/2010
1:00 PM
3:00 PM1
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
263.75
1 C
2
6/8/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
1 6380.24
1.2
7.66
256.09
1 C
2
6/9/2010
40 PM
6:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.2
7.66
248.44
C
2
9/1312010
1130 AM
1:30 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.5
9.57
238.87
C
r
2
9/14/2010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.5
9.57
229.30
C
2
1 9/15/2010
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
9
1 11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.5
1 9.57
219.73
C
2
9/16/2010
2:30 PM
4:30 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6350.24
1.5
9.67
1 210.16
C
2
911712010
10:30 AM
12:30 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
8380.24
1.5
9.57
1
200.59
1 C
2
9/18/2010
3:00 PM
5:00 P
120
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
1.5
9.57
1 1.02
C
Certified Operator
operators Certification e
'NCUA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter me value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source (ie, Lagoonl5torage Pond 10, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Wearer Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, "now/Sleet, W-Windy
-Person's Completing the irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least eveiy 120 minutes.
Note: It conditions beyond the permlttee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or pound, vxpkriii on reverse,
la"Red V112, "
RECEIVED
JAN 1 q 2011
DENR-FAYETTEMLLE REGIONAL OFFICE y

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Forma for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # 8 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.532
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OiC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owners Phone #
Crop Type 8H I PAN 1 325
Source
Data
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
0 Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gall/Acre)
Waste Analys
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Be].
(lbslaer)
Weaver
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
7/19/2010
12,30 PM
2:00 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1,2
8.93
316.07
C
2
7120/2010
9:00 AM
10:30 AM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
307,14
C
�. t
2
7/21/2010
1:00 PM
2:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
298.20
C
2
7/24/2010
11,00 AM
12:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1,2
0.93
289.27
C
1�
2
7/25/2010
1:00 PM
2:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.81
1.2
8.93
280.34
C
2
712612010
10:00 AM
11:30 AM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
271.41
C
2
9/13/2010
2:00 PM
330 PM
90
4
11.0
3960,00
7443.61
1.5
11,17
260.24
C
2
9/14/2010
4:00 PM
5:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
249.08
C
2
9/15/2010
12:00 PM
1:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
1 237,91
C
AI
2
9/16/2010
2:00 PM
3:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.81
1.5
11.17
1 226.74
C
2
9/17/2010
11:30 AM
1:00 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
215.58
C
.'
2
9/18/2010
1:00 PM
2:30 PM
90
4
11.0
3960.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
204.41
C
Certified Operator
Operator's Signature
Operator's CertM ation 0
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysls is required within 00 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoonl5torage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Weatf:r Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSleel, W-Windy
"Person's completing the irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Nulc: It c oochtions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse,
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # C
Wetted Acres=(A) 1.596
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs
Owner's Address
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I BH
Facility# 82 208
Ole
Ole #
PAN L 325
Source
bate
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analyz
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Sal,
(lbs/aor)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
Initials
2
6/1812010
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840,00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
313.09
C
/ -
2
611912010
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
301.18
C
2
6/20/2010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840,00
9924.81
1.2
11,91
289.27
C
'
2
6/21 /2010
8:00 AM
10:00 AM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
277.36
C
'
2
6/30/2010
1:00 PM
3:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
265,45
C
2
7/1/2010
4:00 PM
6:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11,91
253.54
C
2
7/412010
12:30 PM
2:30 PM
120
12
11,0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
241.63
C
i
2
7/5/2010
9:00 AM
11:00 AM
120
12
11.0
1 15840.00
9924,81
1.2
11.91
22912
C
2
71612010
2:30 PM
4:30 PM
1 120
12
11.0
115840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
1 217.81
C
2
7/7/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
1 120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.51
1.2
11.91
205.90
C
2
7/8!2010
2:30 PM
4:30 PM
1 120
12
11.0
16840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
193.99
Cr41-
2
7/9/2010
4:00 PM
6:00 PM1
1.20
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
182.08
C
/
2
9123t2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.5
14.89
167.20
1 C
2
9/24/2010
1:00 PM
3:00 PM
120
12
11.0
15840.00
9924.81
1.5
14.89
152.31
C
2
9/25/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
12
11.0
115840,00
9924.81
1.5
14,89
137.42
C
Certified Operator
Operator's Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
-Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8), Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
-Enter nutrient source (ie. LagoonlStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Weater Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, "now/Sleet. W-Windy
"Person's completing the irrigation Inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed m le0sl avM 120 minutes.
Now It conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP ur permit, ex0nin on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTDALLE REGfONAL OFRCE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # D Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 1.729
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type BH PAN 325
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
it Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
volume per
Acre
(GallAare)
Waste Anso
PAN Applied
N"en Bal,
(lbs/acr)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
IntUals
2
7/4/2010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160,00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
313.09
C
'
2
7/5/2010
12:00 PM
2:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
301.10
C
2
7/6/2010
1:30 PM
3:30 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
289.27
C
i
2
1/7/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM1
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
277.36
C
2
7/8/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
265.45
C
2
7/912010
2:30 PM
4:30 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
253.54
C
2
7/10/2010
10:00 AM
12:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924,81
1.2
11.91
241.63
C
2
7/19/2010
4:00 PM
6:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924,81
1.2
11.91
229.72
C
2
7120/2010
3:00 PM
5:00 PM
120
13 7
11.0
17160.00
1 9924.81
1.2
11.91
1 217.81
C
2
7/21/2010
11:00 AM
1:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
205.90
C
2
7/24/2010
12:00 PM
2:00 PMJ
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
193.99
C
2
7/25/2010
3:30 PM
5:30 PM
1 120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
182.08
C
2
7/26/2010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.2
11.91
170.17
C
2
9/23/2010
9.30 AM
11:30 AM
120
13
11.0
17160.00
9924.81
1.5
14.89
155.29
C
2
9/24/2010
4:30 PM
6:30 PM
120
13
11.0
1 17160.00
1 9924.81
1.5
14.89
140.40
C
2
912512010
2:30 PM
4:30 PM
120
1 13
11.0
17160,00
9924.81
1.5
14.89
125.51
C
Owners Signature V- Operators Signature
Certified Operator Operator's Certification #
'NCOA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. Al a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events,
'"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event.
*"Enter nutrient source lie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Wearer Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, "now/Sleet, W-Windy
"Person's completing the irrigation Inspections must initial to signify that Inspections were Completed at least every 120 minutes,
Note. If conditions beyond the permltte4o control have caused noncompliance with the CAWNIP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFACE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field #I E I`acility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.665
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Typal BH I PAN 1 325
source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analyst
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Sal.
(lbstacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
6/5/2010
2:00 PM
3:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
316.07
C
2
6/6/2010
10:00 AM
11:30 AM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
307,14
C
2
617/2010
2:00 PM
3:30 PM
1 90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
298.20
G
1.11 -
2
618/2010
1:00 PM
2:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
289.27
1 C
r' -
2
6/9/2010
10:00 AM
11:30 AM
90
5
11.0
49500.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
280.34
C
2
6110/2010
100 PM
4:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
271.41
C
✓
2
6/12/2010
11:00 AM
12:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
262.47
C
i
2
ISM312010
2:00 PM
3:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8,93
253.54
C
�= J-
2
6/14/2010
10:00 AM
11:30 AM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
244.61
C
i
2
6/18/2010
12:30 PM
2:00 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
235.68
1 C
(
2
6/19/2010
3:00 PM
4:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
1 8.93
226.74
G
2
6/20/2010
10:30 AM
12:00 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.2
8.93
217.81
C
2
9/23/2010
3:00 PM
4:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
206.65
G
2
912412010
2:00 PM
3:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
195.48
C
2
9/2512010
3,00 PM
4:30 PM
90
5
11.0
4950.00
7443.61
1.5
11.17
184.32
C
Certified Operator
Operator's Signature � r
Operators Certification tt
"NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysls Is required within So days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) follo-Mng each Irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source (ie. LagoorlStorage Pond 10. commercial fertilizer, dry litter, eto.)
'Weater Coders; C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Raln, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy
-Person's completing the irrigation Inspections must Initial to signify that Inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: if condltlane beyond the permittee's Control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # NF-1 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.685
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner`s Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crap Type I Soybeans I PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
Waste Analy2
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal,
(lbstacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
8113/2010
1.00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
123.05
C
2
8/14=10
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299,27
1.5
16.95
106.10
C
2
8/15/2010
2:30 PM
3:30 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
89,15
C
2
8/16/2010
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
72.20
C
}%
2
8/17/2010
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16,95
55.26
C
Owner's Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator Operator's Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
—Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B), Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source (le. LagoonlStorage Pond ID, commertiaf fertiliser, dry litter, ft.)
'Weater Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Raln, S-SnowlSleet, W-Windy
—Person's completing the irrigation inspections must Initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: It Conditions beyond the permittee's control have Caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Po
lrr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field 1< NF-2 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.685
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I Soybeans I PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
fl Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GallAcre)
Waste Analysts
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal,
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code I
Inspector's
Initials
2
8/29/2010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1,5
1 16.95
123.05
C
2
8130/2010
12:00 PM
1:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
106.10
C
`
2
1 8/31/2010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
89.15
C
LA
2
9/112010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
72.20
C
1 -
owner's Signature operator's signature
Certified operator operator's Certification #
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within el) days of land application events.
**Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event,
-Enter nutrient source (to. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, atc.)
"Wester Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSteet, W-Windy
"•Person's comOetlng the irrigation Inspections must Initial to signly that Inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Now If conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 q 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFACE

I rr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # NF-3
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.685
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs
Owners Address
Owner's Phone #
Crap TypelSoybeans
Facility# 827208
OIC
OIC #
PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analy
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Gal.
(Ibslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
Initials
2
8/29/2010
130 PM
4:30 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299,27
1.5
16.95
123.05
C
2
8/30/2010
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
106.10
C
2
8131 /2010
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
89.15
C
2
9/1/2010
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
1 60
1 1
1 129
1 7740.00
1 11299.27
1.6
16.95
72.20
C
'
Owners Signature &A_L_� Operators Signature
Certified Operator Operators Cerbficatlon #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within e0 days of land application events,
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
'-Enter nutrient source (le. Lagoon/Storage Pond 10. commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
`Weater Codes'. C-Clear, PC-Partty Cloudy, Cl-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy
—Person's completing the Irrigation inspections must initial to signify that Inspections were completed at least every 12D minutes.
Note: It conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYEfTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE ,.

I rr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0,685
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I Soybeans I PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min,
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons}
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analy
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspecitor's
Initials
2
9/3/2010
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
123.05
C
2
9/412010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
106.10
C
i
2
9/512010
3:00 PM
4:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
89.15
C
2
9/6/2010
12:30 PM
1:30 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16,95
72.20
C
*4L Owners Signature Operator's Signature
Certified Operator Operator's Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis Is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtrwUng column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event
""Enter nutrient source (le. Lagoon)5torage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'WaaterCodes: C-Clear, PC-ParttyCloudy, CI-Cioudly, R-Rain, S-Snowtsleet, W-Windy
-Person's completing the Irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the pennittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # NF-5 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.679
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type Soybeans PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analysis
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal,
(Ibslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
Initials
2
913/2010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740,00
11399.12
1.5
17.10
122.90
C
2
91412010
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11399.12
1.5
17.10
105.80
C
2
9/512010
12:00 PM
1:00 PM1
60
1
129
7740.00
1 11399.12
1.5
17.10
88.70
C
2
9/6/2010
3.00 PM
4:00 PMj
60
1
129
7740.00
1139912
1.5
17.10
71.61
C
ENE
Owner's Signature
—�J'1611 ge4-
Certified Operator
Operators Signature T
—JU�L *�-(L
Operator's Certllicatton #
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent- At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event
'-Erner nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerbal fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
•Wentur Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSleet, W-Windy
I trt sums completing the irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
NO(:. II cunitihni is. beyond the permittea's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # NF-6 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.685
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I Soybeans PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GallAcre)
Waste Analy2
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bel,
(lbsfacr)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
Initlais
2
8/7/2010
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
123.05
C
2
8/8/2010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
106,10
C
s
2
8/912010
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299,27
1.5
16.95
89.15
C
2
8/10/2010
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
72.20
C
Owner's Signature
Certified Operator
Operator's Signature
Operator's Certification #
`NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis Is required within 60 days of fond application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irtigation event.
—Enter nutrient source (ie. LegoorVStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
*Wester Codes. C-Clear, PC -Pertly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R•Raln, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy
-Person's completing the irrigation Inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the permittee's Control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEMLLE REGIONAL OFFICE

I rr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field NF-7 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.589
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type So beans PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min,
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Analy
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
tnspectoee
Initials
2
8R/2010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
120.29
C
2
8/8/2010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
100.58
C
2
8/9/2010
12:00 PM
1:00 PIVII
60
1
129
7740.00
113140.92
1.5
19.71
80.87
C
2
8/10/2010
4:00 PM
5:00PIMI
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
61.15
C
Owners Signature 4�k_
Certified Operator
Operator's Signature
Operator's Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 50 days or land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting Column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting Column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
—Enter nutrient source (is. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commercial fertllizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Wester Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSleet, W-Windy
—Person's completing the irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: if conditions beyond the permittee's control have mused noncomplianoe with the CAWMP or permft, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

I rr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Farm for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field #I NF-8 Facility# 822208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.589
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OiC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type Soybeans I PAN 1 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre'
Waste Analye
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
8/13/2010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
120.29
C
2
8/14/2010
11:00AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140,92
1,5
19.71
100,58
C
2
8/15/2010
12:00 PM
1:00 PIVII
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
80.87
C
2
8/16/2010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740,00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
61.15
C
=
2
8/17/2010
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
41.44
C
' l
Owner's Signature Operators Signature
Certified Operator Operator's Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
-Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
—Enter nutrient source (le. LagooniStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
'Weater Codes, C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, Cl-Cloudly, R-Raln, S-SnowlSleet, W-Windy
—Person's completing the irrigation inspedions must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: It conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 ?^'?.
OIi. r r

Irr-2
Tract #
Wetted Acres -(A)
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's Phdne #
Crop Type So beans
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
On a Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Field NF-10 Facility# 82-208
0.685
Felton Hobbs OIC
OIC #
PAN 140
Source
pate
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
AcreWaste
i(Gal/Acre)
AnAIA
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Sal.
(Flea)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
9/7/2010
11:00 AM
12:00 PM
60
1
129
7740,00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
123.05
C
-
2
9/8/2010
1:00 PM
2:00 PM
66
1
1
1
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.6
16.95
106.10
C
2
9/9/2010
1 1:00 PM
2:00 PM
60
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
89.15
C
2
911=010
10:00 AM
11:00 AM
60
129
7740.00
11299.27
1.5
16.95
72.20
C
Owners Signature LJ1.1= �9_L
Certified Operator
Operator's Signature . — Y__ J _�'_ '44 �
Operators Certification 0
'NCi]A Waste Analysis or Equivalent, At a minimum, waste analysis is regJired within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (e). Continue subtracting column (10) from Column (11) following each Irrigation event.
—Enter nutrient source (Ia. LagooNStorage Pond 10, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
"Wetter Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSloet, W-Windy
**Person's completing the irrigation inspections must Initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes,
Note: If conditions beyond the permitlee's control have caused noncompliance'Nth the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011

Irr-2
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # NF-11 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.589
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type so beans PAN 140
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min,
# Sprinklers I
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GallAcre)
WasteAnalys
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bat.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspector's
Initials
2
9/7/2010
2:00 PM
3:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140,92
1.5
19.71
120.29
C
_!
2
9/8/2010
230 PM
3:30 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
100.58
C
2
9/9/2010
4:00 PM
5:00 PM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19,71
80.87
C
2
9/10/2010
9:00 AM
10:00 AM
60
1
129
7740.00
13140.92
1.5
19.71
61,15
C
:� 1
Owners Signature�_J✓ IkLOperator's Signature
Certified Operator �.. Operator's Certification #
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
—Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event,
—Enter nutrient source (is, l.agoonlStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
"Weater Cates: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSleel, W-1Mndy
"Person's completing the irrigation inspections must initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the permittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTE'O LLE REGIONAL OFFICE

NCDA&CS Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web site: www.ncagr.goy/agronemi/
Report: WO1140
_
•'=��•.'''.` �.'
/r
• ,,� ,..: Waste A
nalysis Rohort
Grouer. Hobbs, Felten
7687 Keener Rd
Clinton, NC 28328
Femx:
Copiesl0.
Received: 08/11/2010 Completed: 08117/2010
Sampson County
sample information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless otherwise noted)
sample 1D: i
N
P K Ca
A
S Fe Aln 2n
Cs 8 Mo Ci C
rotal 349
44.3 us 1V3
39.7
27.1 3.27 0.51 1.70
i.o6 1.42
01
IN N
Waste Corte,
-NH4
Na Al Cd
PS
Al Se H pH
SS Or DAM CCE% ALE(
ALS
-NO3
303
7•86
Description:
OR•N
Swine L n Lig,
&W
RecomingildWoul:
Nutrients Available for First Crop
lbs 10M auatts
Other Elements lbs It7t7t7 ons
Applknlion Method
N P205 W
Ca Mg S Pe
Mat
Zn Cu 8 No Cl
Na Nl Cd Pb Al se V
lrrigatlon
1.5 059 7.1
0.00 0.23 0.16 0.02
T
0.01 0.01 0.01
2.5
RECEIVED
JAN z 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTBILLr REMNr11.OFFICE
Reprogramming of the laboratory -information -management system that makes this report possible is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
- Thank you for using agronomic services to ntanage nutrients and .safegtrurel environmental quality.
- Steve TrrWer, Com►nissioner of Agriculture

NCDA O Agronomic Division phone: [phone] Web site: www.natgr.g"/agrosomi/
Report: wagoo6
Groaner:
Hobbs, Felton
Copies IV:
1 � i•1':TI
Waste naR.-., ort
lsis y
7887 Keener Rd
Clinton, NC 28328
Received: 06/16/2010
Completed: 06/22/2010
Sampson County
Sample lafortn.ulon
Laboratory Results (parts per Milian unless otherwise noted)
Sample IQ:
N
A K Ca Mg S
Fe Ain 7n
Crr & Mo C1 C
01
Total 277
48.7 793 98.1 37.7 37.0
4.58 0.64 1,41
1110 1,15
1N-N
Waste Coder
•NN4
AL5
NO3
Na N! Cd A At
Se Lr' P11
SS ON DAN CM ALB(
Descrip1W.,
Oil-N
271
7.48
Swine Lamon Lin.
Urea
RtgommCadadool:
Nutrients Available for First Crop
Its-do-0-0
Other Clements 1bs11OLVgqUons
AppUcatlon Melhod
N P103 W Ca Mg S Fe Mrs %n Cn
B No a
1Va Ni Cd A Al Se !d
Irrigation
1.2 0.65 6.4 0.57 0.22 0.22 0.03 T 0.01 0.01
0.01
2.3
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENA - YPnMUJE RECAOM OFHCE
Reprogramming of the laboratory-inirlrmstion-managament system that makes this report possible is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust fund Commission.
Thank you jar using agronomic cervices to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
- Steve Troxier, Commissioner of Agricuilure

NtDmx(S Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web site: www.omgr.gov/agronomil
- —
--��� Report: W07492
Grower:
Waste Analysis Report
Hobbs, Felton
7887 Mener Rd
Union, NC 28328
Farm:
Copies to:
Received; 04/14/2010
Completed: 04/21t2010
Sampson County
Sampie information
laboratory Results (points per million unless otherwise noted)
sample lDr
N
P li Ca At S
Re Aft, En
Cu B Ma G1 C
Pota! 432
29.0 580 181 48,2 40,8
8.53 041 1.03
OA6 0.85
l
MIN
Waste Code:
-NH4
ALS
•Ni93
Na Nf Cd fb At
se li PH
SS ON DM% CCB% AU(Kgd)
144
7.56
aftm ptlon:
OR-N
Sa1ne Upon Uq.
Urea
Nutrients Available for First Crop
m5flamtUans
Other Elements ft ff- anions
AppliwOon Metbod
N P205 K20 Ca M8 $ Fe Ain Zn 04
a Ma C1
Na Nt Cd A6 At Sa U
irrigation
1.8 0.39 4.6 1.1 0.28 0.24 0.05 T 0.01 T
T
1,2
North Carohna
h
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DEJ8-FAYUrMLLE PEC,'ONA!', cFFic,,
Reprogramming of the laboratory-informatior+-management system that makes this report possible is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
-Steve rrozier, Commissioner of Agriculture

0
p
A n m
� � n
m
mC
q CD„ 1
2 r
O
m
ry?.
-8
r

FORM SLUR-1
Slurry and Sludge Application Field Record
For Recording Slurry Applicaton Events on Different Fields
Farm Owner Facility Number
Spreader Operator
Tract &
Field #
Date
mm/dd r
''Weather
Code
Crop Type
Field Size
(acres)
Application
Method'
Number
of Loads
per Field
Volume of
each Load"
ailons
�
Cis G� •Y(/
L/l�'
.. 4 ��
4
o Ja
•' 1
/
�-
G do v
v
C z--
, 7 3
r+�
JALi
" SI = soil incorporated (disked); BR = broadcast (surface applied).
*" Can be found in operator's manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer if you do not have your owner's manual.
I Weather Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, C#-Cloudy,,R-Rain, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy 3/14/2003

FORM SLUR-2
Tract 0
Field Size(Wetted Acres)=(A)
Farm Owner
Owner's Address
Owner's Phone #
S�rry and Sludge Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Field #
Facility Number
/� Spreader Operator
7 k- t -) 1Cre ��-+^� and Address
C'
Operator's Phone #
From Animal Waste Management Plan
�j5 , ! f �� Crop Type � � ja Recommended PAN �v
6 d� L Loading (Ib/acre) = (B)
1 2 3 a 5 8 8
Lea
** "Nutrient
Source
Date
(mmldd/yr)
`
Number
of Loads
per Field
Volume of
each Load'
(gallons)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
Volume per Acre
(gallorWacre)
(4) ! (A)
Waste Analyst
PAN"
(lb/1000 gal)
PAN Applied
(lb/acre)
(6) x (5) 11000
Nitrogen Balance—
pblecre)
B -
a= --b .
.-.,v—ry
occ
JAN
Crop Cycle Totals: D pUU
Owners Signature
Certified Operator (print)
.1 1 _j
Spreader Operator's Signature
Operator Certificaibon No.
" Can be found in operator's manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer If you do not have your owner's manual.
See your waste management plan for sampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis Is required within 60 days of land application events.
*"Enter the value received by subtracting column (7) from (B). Continue subtracting column (7) from column (8) following each application event.
"'Enter nutrient source (Ia. LagoonlStorage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/202006
;IVED
y 2011
LE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field AA Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 1.862
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type SG
PAN 33.89 (PAN Rate from Application Field Record IRR-2)
Source
Date
StartTlme
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GalfAcre)
Waste Analp
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bel.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
L2
11l712010
2:00 PM
4:00 PM
120
9
11.0
11880.00
6380.24
0.97
6.19
27.70
C
L2
11/8/2010
100 PM
3:30 PM
30
9
11.0
2970.00
1595.06
0.97
1.55
26.15
C
Ownere Signature, - Operators Signature
Certified Operator
Operators Cerdcation 0
'NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a miriunum, waste analysis is required within 60 days of land application events.
"Enter the value received t>y subtracting column (10) from (8), Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each irrigation event,
'"'Enter nutrient source (to. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
Weater Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, Cl-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Wkrdy
"Person's completing the Irrigation inspections must inRlal to signify that inspedlons were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If conditions beyond the parmittee's control have caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR JAYETTEMLLE REGIONAL OFFICE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # 8 Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 0.532
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I SG I PAN 1 50
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
flow Rate
Total Volume
(gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(Gal/Acre)
Waste Anal
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
111712M
2.00 PM
4:00 PM
120
6
11.0
7920,00
14887.22
0.97
14.44
35.56
C
2
1118l2010
3:00 PM
3:30 PM
30
6
11.0
1980.00
3721.80
0.97
3.61
31.95
C
1
Owners Signature V.M,fJ Y ` 1 Operators Signature �—I�
v4t,—
Certified Operator Operators Certification #
"NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within Bo days of land application events.
*'Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (B). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
"'Enter nutrient source (is. LagoonlStorage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
"Weater Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, Cl-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-SnowlSleet, W Windy
—Person's completing the Irrigation inspections must Initial to signify that Inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If Conditions beyond the permittee's control have Caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
OENR-FAYETi EVUE REGIONAL OFRCE

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field # C Facility# 827208
Wetted Acres=(A) 1,596
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type SG I PAN 1 50
Source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Tote! Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Acre
(GBVAcra)
Waste Analys
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bel.
(lWacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
11/16/2010
1:30 PM
3:30 PM
120
15
11.0
19800.00
12406.02
0.97
12.03
37.97
C
2
11122/2010
12:00 PM
1:30 PM
90
15
11.0
14850.00
9304.51
0.97
9,03
28.94
C
Owneea Signature (." Operators Signature
Certified Operator Operators Certification #
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equivalent. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within BD days of land application events.
-Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event.
—Enter nutrient source (ie. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
"Wester Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-Snow/Sleet, W-Windy
—Person's completing the Irrigation inspections must initial to signify that Inapeotlons were completed at least every 120 minutes.
Note: If Conditions beyond the permittee's control have Caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse.
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR--FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

FORM SLUR-2 Ind Application Field Records
One Form for Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field #
Field Size(Wetted Acres)=(A) 3 Facility Number
Farm Owner P ! - V7 Spreader Operator
Owner's Address —7Yp&7 and Address
Owner's Phone # S r ' 7 ��� 7 Operator's Phone #
From Animal Waste Management Plan
1 Crop Type 6 ` Recommended PAN
Loading (Ib1ac►e) = (8) "
1 2 (3) (4) 5 B LIK
liv 42�
L
""Nutrient
Source
Date
(mrrdddlyr)
Number
of Loads
, per Field
Volume of
each Load'
(gallons)
Total Volume
(gallons)
(2) x (3)
Volume per Ape
(gallonstacre)
(4) ► (A)
Waste Analysis
PAN"
(Ib11000 gal)
PAN Applied
pblacre)
(6) x (5)11000
Nitrogen Balance"'
(lblacre)
B - 7
Bo . a
oTa -,
��°�
td e 0 0
L32(2, 6.3
0, a
:IVED
Crop Cycle Totals: o 0 7. -7'f7 1 JAN 2 4 2011
Owners Signature .Q, �,. Spreader Operator's Signature
REGIONAL OFFICE
Certified Operator (print) Operator Certification No.
Can be found in operator's manual for the spreader. Contact a local dealer N you do not have your ownees manual.
** See your waste management plan for sampling frequency. At a minimum, waste analysis is required within 80 days of land application events.
*"Enter the value received by subtracting column (7) from (B). Continue subtracting column (7) from column (8) following each application event.
***Enter nutrient source (le. Lagoon/Storage Pond ID, commerical fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
12/2012006
W

Irr-2-Combo
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Field Records
One Form for Each Fleld per Crop Cycle
Tract # Field #1 D Facility# 82-208
Wetted Acres=(A) 1.729
Farm Owner Felton Hobbs OIC
Owner's Address OIC #
Owner's Phone #
Crop Type I SG PAN 46.25 Kl't1Z Mot -
source
Date
Start Time
End Time
Total Min.
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
(Gallons)
Volume per
Ape
(GaVAcre)
Waste Analys
PAN Applied
Nitrogen Bal.
(lbslacr)
Weather
Code
Inspectors
Initials
2
11/14/2010
12:00 PM
1:15 PM
75
14
11.0
11550.00
6680.16
0.97
6,48
39.77
C
2
12/22/2010
3:00 PM
5:15 PM
135
14
11.0
20790.00
12024.29
0.97
11.66
28.11
C
,;(- 0i V
Owners Signature 2&AiAOperators Signature
Certified Operator Operator's Certification 0
•NCDA Waste Analysis or Equlveient. At a minimum, waste analysis Is required within 90 days of land appheation events.
"Enter the value received by subtracting column (10) from (8). Continue subtracting column (10) from column (11) following each Irrigation event_
-Enter nutrient source lie. Lagoon)Storege Pond ID, commercial fertilizer, dry litter, etc.)
`Wester Codes: C-Clear, PC -Partly Cloudy, CI-Cloudly, R-Rain, S-Snowlsleat, W-Windy RECEIVED
��-Person's Completing the Irrigation Inspections must Initial to signify that inspections were completed at least every 120 minutes. El VLr1
Note: it conditions beyond the pennittee's control have Caused noncompliance with the CAWMP or permit, explain on reverse. J
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYEfTEVILLEREGIONAL OFFICE

NCDA&C3 Agronoadr Divides Phone:. [phone] Web site: www.nW4D!/kgmomi/
Report: W04293
Grainer,-
Hobbs, Felton
Copies la,
7887 Kerner Rd
Clinton, NC 28328
RECEIVED
y
aste nalysas sport
JAN 2 2011
a
/ 9 z
Received:` 12/09/2010 Completed: 1211612010 T�/F I-Inke to Helpful
information
Sampson Couph'
DENR-FAYETTEUILLF REGIONAL OFFICE
Socaple lnh nmtlon
labboratory Results (parts per mow unless otherwise noted)
Sample M
N
P jr Ca
Mg
S
Fe Mn
in
Cn
B Mo ct C
H-D `
Total 4.74
8.09 44.7 82.4
21.7
7.63
1.42 0.11
2.33
0.29
0.20
W
INN
Waste Code:
-NH4
Na Nt Cd
P6
Al
Se U
PH
SS
C N DM% CCB% ALB
ALS C,,,
-NO3
40.3
5.9
Deseriptton:
OR-N
Swine Upon Li .
Urm
Natrlenis Avallable for First CmP
lbs 000 allows
Other Elements @S 000 dkM
4AP6oation Medbod
N PJ05 X20 Ge Mg S Fe
Mn
Sn CU
B Mo
C1
Na
AN Cd A Al Se M
Irrlgatlon
0.02 0.11 o.36 0.4a 0.13 o.04 0101
T
0.02 T
T
o.34
Broadcast 1
0.02 0.11 0.36 0.48 0.13 0.04 0.01
T
0.02 T
T
0.34
comgietI& Dec. 14, 2010
The pH of the lagoon kpd 1s well below the desired rungs for buterlal action and waste prorusshrg. Begin a4mthrg pH by adding
i lb. of vVicubmil 11M per 1000 cu. It of Bgptd resna"in ft tagm. Sample
mo and condnoo to add Ibne onUil pH Is wltbla the ideal M of 7.0 - 8A, You 2M want to contact it Teclinlcel
for asslstsnse.
Sample Information
Laboratory Results (parts per million unless admvise noted)
Sample la. /
N
P 6 Ca
M8
S
Fe AM
Eh
Cu
B Mo a C
Total 119
89.4 342 91.9
57.7
15.7
3.02 0.35
3.09
0.44
0."
HIF {J�y
Q
Waste Code: 0d
IN-N
N714
�{
ALS 4!
-NO3Na
M Cd
P6
At
Sa Il
H
SS
GN MCM AL8
70-
7.94
Diescrtplfmr: r 1, e�
OR>
Wne Lagoon L,`U
Nutrients Am dkMe for First Crop
Ift/Imilaubw
Other Blemenb lbs legs allows
Applioa 0" Metbod
N P205 _ M Ca Mg $ Ao
lobs
b • Cie
8 Mo
C!
Na
M Gi A Al se u
Inigadon
0.50 1.2 3.7 • 0.54 0.34 0.09 0.02
T
0.02 T
T
0.59
Broadcast
0.50 1.2 3.7 0.54 0.34 0A9 0.02
T
0.02 T
T
0.5
North Carolina
AL
Tobacco Trust Fund Commission
Reprogramming of the laboratory -information -management system that makes this report possible Is being funded
through a grant from the forth Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Commission.
Thank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
- Steve Troxkr, Commissioner of Agriculture

NCDPAW Agronomic Division Phone: [phone] Web'site., wwj=V.gov/aSw*M1/
Report: W03156
�``'"� •'
E ` ' 1
i'
7 Y
Grower
Hobbs, Felton
7897 Keener Rd
dinlon, NC 28328
Cap is to,
c C
�
-iWaste
Analysis Report
Farm:
Received: 10/191201
0 Completed: 10/2512010 Links to H21pful_Inf9r1iation
Sampson County
sample
Resaw (pub per minion onless etheMN Hated)
Smapte IA!
N
P d Ca 14 S
Pe Mn
Zn
Cu a Mo a C
]
rota! 233
95.6 411 231 49.3 23.7
7.77 1.10
1.62
0.91 0.79
1N•N
Waste CO&
•NM4
Na M Cd A Al
Se U
PH
SS CN DM% CC8% ALEOW
ALS
Mj
140
7.28
Aescrohoft:
OR N
Same Lalpon L ,
Urea
COMM
iVul ent, Available for First CM
0311000finum
Other Element, Ms/low—MUM-
MO"
N PJ05 ICsO Ca Mg S Fe Mn 8h Q
a Mo
Q
Na Nl Cd 16 Al se M
1rrlpwn
0.97 1.3 3.3 1A 0.29 0.14 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.01
T
1.2
North Carolina
Tobacco Trust Fund Conitn1won
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
DENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
Reprogramming of the laboratory-lnfommUommanagemant system that makes this report possible Is being funded
through a grant from the North Carolina Tobacco Trust Fund Comn*alon.
Th ank you for using agronomic services to manage nutrients and safeguard environmental quality.
-Steve T raxler, Commissioner of Agriculture

kc
FORM FRBn-1Waste Stru ur shoat ally reapita#ion
RECEIVED
--JAN 2 #F@fflpwrw FPdw Number -
r U;/k: dus I
)Nn - AY€TTFmLLE REGIo NAALOFHCE 4 0,,, 4 _ �h
m®e�■�rIIIM
MIMO��
Maim
MICHIIIII
m�����■t
,I
iAIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IN
reffiIIIIIIIIIIII
Ma%m
I
10011111���l�
1. Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankment and the 1,evel of liquid.
For lagoons with spillways, the differenoe between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard plus available storage capacity must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event. (( 3/14/2003

L. L7H^
FORM FRBD-1
Waste Structure Freeboard and Daily Precipitation Record
Farm Owner . sl
Operator t! li, 11, 61,s
RECEIVED
JAN 1 # 2011
e _ AL OFFICE
Facility Number & . -
Date
(M49 M
Struc#Wra
Freeboard inches
'motion
�ndties
Initials
# j#
2-
# 3
#
#
#
•%- - �v
-a F
3 �
� 4
?i o
��� r l-
-r . ►o
3�
zg,�
! 3
2cr
g�
y�
2`7i
y t�
o �r
z14
z-7
3
21 tt
30
30
1b
rl y f.c
)o
y7
'3 b
3a
211
3)L
3t
11.40�
iI''Y
y—rv—
30
37
; f
t .r
-ro
Z9
q1
;
30
eta
30
33
Z_
Zy
-?-/
x-
24
44
2S,
}. = ee
�-
if
4
._ 1 7,
A3
- .2 47-
..
�_3
Lagoon freeboard is the difference between the lowest point of a lagoon embankcnertt and the levei of liquid.
For lagoons with spilMrays. the difference between the level of liquid and the bottom of the spillway should be recorded.
2. Freeboard plus available storage capacity must be recorded at least weekly.
3. Rainfall must be recorded for every rain event. 3/1412003

01/02/2002 16:12 9105646660 HOBBS HOG FARM PAGE 04
�:,'.I�.',h',' I :, }t{r,�t:}Illui tit•I> Ic'.c`;iltll K�nalr Invoice
i II �1� i ti}t•. r!I I;t'iilll! I�I}i1Cl [date 11v.ltie ii
�.e;fi kiinl '�4it
r}i I VIII-i34-11i4
(
Flif+ I r.
t�1 • t.., , ...f i.'ny.l
RECEIVED
JAN 2 q 2011
_ OENR-FAYETTEMLLE REGIONAL OFRCE
I poll forms Sho
I j N%t 1 f4!!?ir��lA
}]tI-RintRy _1! item ("fx* DBSa1pGOn Price Each Amount i
('allat in t+) Felton
1 tie:r.i. RaLk 110C & I'urnp 8500) 85001
} S 1 sht'l s I ays on Wen Its LwI lawmn %kaW mil of fit4d and t khcs. 45,IM) 1.125.01
,s Ih lr�r' 10.W 150.04I
! srt titilr:u�, o.9I1 1;3.I1u
DOD'
.1 h.:,nk .\ mi 1c"t' pllr t+Vsiut•.ti �. I , �r E V is a_ �C p I dLi)
`-�•- �, Total s2.360.1K►
_. - — - - -
7 - � pr "� a,4 f � - -/D �' � (y rDeH
� --

01/02/2002 16:12 9105646680
lr'linfc��:. NC 2832E
I PO
i ._.
HOBBS HOG FARM
PAGE 05
unbar Tenn on"I w / smo via Prvjact
ItBm � ! DpCf�ptlOA r
1..... , ... �i 5pi.11 Clean Up...�_.._._.__....._T�--�
r
s
t
D 30 days ..
i
I713U.0U
Pd" Each
1.00 15,000-00
31 - 60 don B1- s O dop
Tax I Amount
..--15, 004. 00
I
I
i
Sub-Tolal� $15, 000. 00
Stale Taps 7.00% on 0.0D 0.00
Tiftat $15 , 000.00
90 days
TOW
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
RENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
ItBm � ! DpCf�ptlOA r
1..... , ... �i 5pi.11 Clean Up...�_.._._.__....._T�--�
r
s
t
D 30 days ..
i
I713U.0U
Pd" Each
1.00 15,000-00
31 - 60 don B1- s O dop
Tax I Amount
..--15, 004. 00
I
I
i
Sub-Tolal� $15, 000. 00
Stale Taps 7.00% on 0.0D 0.00
Tiftat $15 , 000.00
90 days
TOW
RECEIVED
JAN 2 4 2011
RENR-FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE

4�lv
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
FAYETTEVILLE REGIONAL OFFICE
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
March 20, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Mr. Elbert Spell
7612 Keener Road
Clinton, NC 28328
Subject: Noticc of psaie !c
Elbert Spell's Hog Farm
Facility No. 82 - 208
Permit No. AWS820208
Sampson County
Dear Mr. Spell:
You are hereby notified that, having been permitted to have a non discharge
permit for the subject animal waste disposal system pursuant to 1 SA NCAC 2H .0217,
you have been found to be deficient in your 2H .0217 Permit.
On February 24, 2000, staff' from the Fayetteville Regional Office of the
Division of Water Quality performed a routine fly -over of the Spell Hog Farm located
off SR1746 in Sampson County. During the Ely -over, it was observed that the facility
was irrigating and wastewater was ponding and appeared to be entering the woods
adjacent to the field. An investigation by an inspector that evening and the following
afternoon determined dud the wastewater was confined to the waste application field.
The General Permit condition 111.6.e. states: " The Permittee shall report by telephone
to the appropriate Regional Office as soon as possible, but in no case more than 24
hours following first knowledge of the occurrence of any of the following events: E
Overapplying animal waste either in excess of the limits set out in the CAWMP or
where runoff enters surface waters."
The Division of Water Quality will take no further action for this incident at this
time.
Failure to comply with the above condition may result in the facility losing its
General Permit and being required to obtain an individual non discharge permit for the
facility-.
22S GREEN STREET, SUITE 714, FAYETTEVILLE, NORTH CAROLINA 28301.5043
PHONE [phone] FAX [phone]
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY /AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER - SO% RECYCLED/10% POST -CONSUMER PAPER

r
Mr. Elbert Spell
Page 2
March 20, 2000
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to
contact me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Robert F. Heath
Environmental Specialist
cc: Sonya Avant -Compliance Group
Wilson Spencer -Sampson Co. NRCS
Trent Allen-DSWC Fayetteville Office
Gerald Warren -Warren Farms
Central Files -Raleigh

lr�

¥t� �
../JR

Or ' s p

- � ^ ry. �U.�J"`. "°� `�' . L� ,R * y � `d 'fix 'a�i?!'

_ -� - -
.• _�-.
i��