820309_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

ivtsion of Water Resources
cih �Numbe ��
r � - � � Division of Sail and Water Conservation
' •Other en
Type of Visit: om ance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: tv j�
Arrival Time:
: VO
Departure Time: County: S'� M Region: r `20
Farm Name: , . a
1
Owner Email:
Owner Name: r i-e Sf
s ,,,
fwt
G Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: CU"L5�r/,�i'rt� _ Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:- Lt Integrator: Py, trt/r.i -C _
Certified Operator: f K / D VC/ 115 Certification Number: qy
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design
Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity
Pop.
vVet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
JLayer
I
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
aS VD
t
Non -Layer
I
airy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
13vo
/d-/ 0
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
D .' P,oult . Caci P,o
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Non -Layer
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
Pullets
Turke s
.Other
_-_
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Ep< -❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ETNA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q 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 DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
E2-<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes
[No
DNA
ONE
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

Facility Number: Z - 'j O jDate of Inspection: Q I 191gr
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [-]Yes Q_No-- ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [] No D-1gA ❑ 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 [ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
if any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes EjNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑,W ❑ 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 []<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E3'1�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): cv- C> �{�y
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
[:]Yes
[3- —oo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
[D-- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E2,<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes Dl�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes C3 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 E] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [2-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: -Cf Date of Inspection: X t
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE
25_ Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ©--K-o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of fast survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 0 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes []N ❑ 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 F_+1q`o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q'11�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ["No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes []No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
Quo
❑ NA
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Comments,(refer to quesdon,:#) Explain any YES answers andtor:anyt additional recommendations oc-any other commentk-'
f -,
Use drawings=af�facility to better`explain situations (use additional pages as necessary
Ced'.6 4,e*k — 9-7—/6
't_t-t!�tqn ~ !( Xc_ 11
C-ft( C'[o- )'0�- b t5[
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
6-- ��3 f- �"a
`fb 7
91
3
Date: D Ao I t I [� 1
2,14415

� Division of Water Resources
aC111 Number , - ®Division of Soil and Water Conservation
®�9Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: CrRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0 f Arrival Time: �,W Departure Time: County: Regionr��
pp e
Farm Name: g 1�� _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: /`��Sf .e%'l Phone:
;Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: CJILJ eucc+i�l.� Title:
Onsite Representative: L{
Certified Operator: �(�� N P,%., ct-
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
integrator: c
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Des. i n Eurrent
Depsi Currpent Design Current
wine tY Pop.
et
t Poultry Ca age Po Cattle Capacity Pop.
�y
eW �.
Layer Dairy Cow
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Sod
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
ju
DO
fi
;t '
Design Current
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
_
Farrow to Feeder
UPoultrv....Ca
Layers
actty Poo .:
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
, M
Turkeys
F Haq .t
Qther, = Turkey Poults
Other Otherk
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?
❑ Yes 5R o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No �A ❑ NE
b_ Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No [TNA ❑ 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 dNA ❑ 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 �' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge'?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: {"
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [g'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a_ If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No [! A ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E@ so ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes E 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 ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
❑ Yes [glo ❑ NA ❑ NE
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 2r o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [—]Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11 _ Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [3N ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
e.
0
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [a o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [" No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes D<O ❑ 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 �o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes [ ND o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
Yes ['No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No [DNA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �5 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

IFaciliq Nu ber: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes g3'11ro [DNA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0�< ❑ 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 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
EEj<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
L_I ITo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Dl o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [aNo ❑ NA ❑ NE .
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ice' ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes l /l No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNO ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [Z�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
_W"L A j C`, 7���O
i 6 -17,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
�� G110��-�s�
Phone: j�o433-3,35
Date: 1
21412015

i ype of visit: .7r_om uance inspection lv uperanon xeveew U a5wucrure t-valuation cV tecnnicai Assurance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:County: Sft Region:
Farm Name: u Sri. Owner Email:
Owner Name:. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Clime-�l�/5 Title:
Onsite Representative: f l Integrator:
Phone:
5
Certified Operator:
G- /e14Vt_ AkWt5
Certification Number:
;, 2 � I b
•
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Mintivaw
Wet�ult . Ca acr Pa
e pacity Pop. ry pity p.
inish La er
signnt
Cattle Ca
• P h' p•
DairyCow
eeder
bVI
Non -La er
DairyCalf
Finish
b�
ar,
Design Current
Via,
D , P,oult . @a aci P,o
DairyHeifer
Cow
Non-Daiiy
Wean
UFarrow
Feeder
Finish
La ers
Non -La ers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
rl
Beef Brood Cow
=
Other a
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream linnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [3'55 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No R3-VA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[�lA
❑ 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
�iA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes
2'F10
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
F!j 'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Faciti Number: M- Q Date of Inspection-7
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?:
[3J1O ❑NA ❑NE
❑No k�"f' ❑NE
Structure 6
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): S
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
[—]Yes
[�io
❑ 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
[g4Vo
❑ 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
[2'1Vo
❑ 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
[�J`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes ]�No [DNA ❑ 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 // ❑,jEvidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16_ Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 2'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 [ f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [lNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes �lo ❑ NA 0 NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections 1
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes I � 0
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

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail io calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [;3,1 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [] Yes fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? r] Yes �lo [] 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 ❑�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [, f4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes D<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ni ' No
❑ Yes '�[/�" No
❑ Yes [i]'%o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ONE
1\GYIGWGIl111J�lGVlV11�0.111G. V 1 L_ -
C 2
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Dig" _ _ Date: tJ
Page 3 of 3 V412 111

Type of Visit: 4d<om ante inspection V operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: IO t Departure Time: County:y� Region: 1�J
Farm Name: JUG ill Owner Email:
Owner Name: rr'4- s Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �'�S/ c-5 19 "l-W Ck Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: C4.-)
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
PgL(6
,Current
Design p
Desig Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Pop'
Poultry _
@apacit Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
FWet
Finish Layer
DairyCow
Feeder
�pv
a
=
Non -La er
DairyCalf
o Finish
rFarrowtoWean
d
oa
_
Da' Heifer
�,
Design
Current
D Cow
o Feeder
D .Poult ,
Ca ctPo
Non -Dairy
o Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
-s
. .
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[�[
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[-]Yes
[-]No
[�-*A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[:]No
[yr�A
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
[:]Yes
[:]No
A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes D<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [—]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: ArT b 1 Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑_bLo-
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
n
Observed Freeboard (in): f�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E3-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
L__J 5o
❑ 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
Q p
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑>o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
❑Ao
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
[5No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes p o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): c.] G (.0
13. Soil Type(s): L41ft -t-All - Q_q
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated A the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement`?
❑ Yes
23'110
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[3 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
E3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate Coverage & Permit
Yes
NA
NE
of readily available?
❑
[3*'No
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E 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 E2"N'o
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall D Stocking [] Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
DNA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
[� NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

•
Fa>rili Number: Date of Ins ection: rc.
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �To
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 55,Nn
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 EJ-No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes C�t<o
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?
mments (refertogneshan ##) Explain any YES answersand/or°si
7-15,
1 Y
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [5,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [/] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E No
❑ Yes RrNo
[::]Yes E!rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
p �- Q. C) Y67-V
Phone: `
Date: as s
21412014

i ype of visit. %W-s..om uance inspection v vperatton Keview V structure r:vaivation V i ecnnicai Assrstance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: .d Departure Time: County: �� Regio O
Farm Name: F t ' - •7 f ? h LA �, �i(C Owner Email:
Owner Name: �u pjLi+/` _( Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
r fj �r
�(Jw St`G(t Title:
Onsite Representative: L I>!Y _
Certified Operator: ire, W/x / ) W r
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: 7
Certification Number:
Longitude:
loom
Designs Current n
Design Current Y
Design Gurreat
Swine
Ca aci v 4.1 Wet4Pouit , Ca c Po ,� "
P F'_
Cattle
Ca a ' Po
city p.
Wean to Finish
La er
70
Dairy
Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes lam'"� ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: El Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ o ❑ Yes E NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [:]Yes [D' o ❑ 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 [�No [:3 NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters [:]Yes &o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

At-
Facili Number: IDate of Inspection:thi
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[—]Yes
[3,Ko—
[DNA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[[P<
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[gj Ng
��
❑ 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
[Z " 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 DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
0 Yes
[;K
❑ 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
NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Q oh —
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. [] Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): ��✓z S
13. Soil Type(s):i^
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes Lfwo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
[D'<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[.—JNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ZL>e
❑ NA
❑ NE
0 Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [4.N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes QD W ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and' 1 " Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes rNo
4� ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection-
'24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes [[o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes O.-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 LTV ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [[Ad6 ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes D,At6 ❑ 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 Q-lo ❑ 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 [aKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ©'I'Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ES- o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments t
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
q L4
3
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
P110 ' l 130
Date: 1 140t I q
21412011

41at1 /a,
Type of Visit: - (gC.,/ompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: V Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral O Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �/� Region: PRO
Farm Name:
Owner Name: -SMSA_','tA>r2�pS�'Tr•e�
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: C V RA2g eAftt,J2Cr� - Title: 'T��1,+�ca,\ '509C2aisST Phone:
Onsite Representative: Q_Um-s Integrator: kzmsq- p5fraLcl
Certified Operator: ai EK- ' N OP 90. i -' Certification Number: ID14 U G
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
,..
h g
JA
Depsg
Cu nt
Duty C ent
Design Current
Swme aci
Po Wet Poult .
H ry
P
Cyyaqqacid. op.
I fir..
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
ddddCa
Layer
I
Dairy Cow
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder2500
amo
INon-Layer
I
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Des gn
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P.oul
paci P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
he
urkcy Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[—]Yes
E[ 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
❑ 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
[3r]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 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 30 jDate of Inspection: Q E 2
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes E3'/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: &_%j
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): I Q �5
Observed Freeboard (in): la-1 rr3lg
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ 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 ENo ❑ 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 [3/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 [yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [g(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes Ev 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): Q. d&tjt^%>Q 0. ( lAre_ \ s kl 0 '
13. Soil Type(s): L
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[] Yes
FY/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?
❑ Yes
E�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
E2 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
CE�`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
[:IS ludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
;Noo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

a �►
Facility Number: - 30 Date of Inspection: T t1A r1D,
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [jfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [:]Yes [+"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [ N' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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 ff No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [;(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes C�No
❑ Yes [jNo
❑ Yes j No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or y°otlier4'commetits.
Use drawings.ot facili : to better explain situations use additional pa es as necessary).<'
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: Q 1
Date: \�
21412011

I_ i
_J_VS D !MS '61 a3It
Di'vi"sion of Watcr Quality '
Facility Number $a - ® � Division of Soil and Water Conservation
no Other Agency
Type of visit: IE�Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Q Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: J Arrival Time: Departure Timer County: Region: ��
Farm Name: $uga - Owner Email:
Owner Name: Frt&'f' Sml�k B&m Tyc Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _Norr�S Title:
Onsite Representative: LIMA koffir Integrator
Phone:
E7fH± Sm
Certified Operator: &Lf4 NorrCertification Number: D7LILi
Bach -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
C►attle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
]Non -Layer
Dry Pzoultr.,
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design
Ca_ aci
C►urrent
Po P.
DairyCow
DairyCalf
DairyHeifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
can to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
arrow to Wean
Farrow- to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes Ej No ❑ 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? C] Yes Ef No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili� Number: $D, - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [3j 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): 1 Q —
Observed Freeboard (in): — 3_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [,g 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 4� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
12 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
[�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
5? No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [,�R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 tbs. ❑ 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): Cpfj fa � tft-d _ �g- Pojille- J fie! n ✓-e! Pdt
13. Soil Type(s): cafn hay S Ca $ VVV
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IS. 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?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ 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
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. JS Yes [:]No
rK 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 0 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
RNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: U - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with. permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes '—X] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below_
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification'? ❑ Yes ❑ No [RNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ 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
M No
❑ NA
❑ N E
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
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i_e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
NJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
14 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pales as n tla, recotnmendationsany rmmets I, Comments refer to. question # •.Ex lain an YES answers and/or anv additional
ecessarvL' .
Z Lazo has 11'la'or bat- G f6S dve-0C V-P'Y Sand S6I and— 411Mr -er.,
CIA �+0 0 I I , ^ I r ��� Sf�+c� � �'9i'yii , QG�S �✓�'e-
4
6VI 114 in I as` _lpo I I ,
niecl 5o i ! 0,1 !rs 1's, cad I1)n,e as Re Ids hti,,e9oacQ
i 5. Pleare c e4
Cou-e�-'
I. Plea -re uje_ Cv101f vli9jk c�7a1:, 11 -6, N r C+S -(;r s rah, re cords, NO f a rl
- �rine_lime.lerroa
ova r d�? 1 oA MHO - chd- MAI-i rvere lot tic sQ s° -: �`
�i,a�r
�sSj�d�,e radio is 0r4g a sf�d�e 40 a �, Lana, wi1� n Cclee�►�`f-
f
�4� w� N a Y `r-5 a�rsIud e- rv" o achies asp
4M lSm4(ha.n�crk-K bL+ �ncfi&_T as o� wad It o�,d iS h�ii 0 rowh
/� n� r�. y
' ?! rani S-i� A s (1'dQe- s wv-e � s 1) od l e � c
Iry iA1 V��n t �s) J
arm,- elds� 4 recce[ s arQ. i notac� S�Ia�P� �1ct� a r 11 DPo� aid �P,
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Zo riSrh n e Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Q
Page 3 of 3 /4/2011

Facility No.la-309 Farm Name 5�-a& Date $ jda 1/1
Permit L-�COC IC NPDES (Rainbreaker j O(OPLAT Annual Cert )
W. '
M-
R
r
•1 abdia
Lagoon
1
2
3
4
5
fi
7
S illwa
Design freeboard
Observed freeboard in
Sludge Surve Date
Sludge Depth ft
Liquid Trt. Zone ft
Ratio Sludge to Treatment Volume
F An 4ORL 1 n F'. IKS
Calibration D. -
QIII�i�©©�
Flow
Actuallesign
---�--
Design Width�T�-----_-
Soil Test Date Wettable Acres RAIN GAUGE
pH Fields WUP Dead box or incinerator
Lime Needed _ Weekly Freeboard Mortality Records
Lime Applied 1 in Inspections , !Amp-brfffPly
Cu-I ✓Zn-I -� 120 min Insp. Wel� Iry
Needs P_ Weather Codes _7 '7
Crop Yield Transfer Sheets
-D - -
Qrmri,�VI
• I E-31
is i5! E
Wrffz
059
1
/
aa
Verity PHONE NUMBERS and affiliations
Date last WUP FRO rabo1q) Date last WUP at farm
FRO or Farm Records
Lagoon #
Top Dike
Stop Pump
Start Pump
Conversion- Cu-I 3000= 108 Iblac; Zn-I 3000= 213 Iblac
App. Hardware 6 &1p�q
36
jq�m fl��

9-11- zold
Type of Visit ®'Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 8:/D Departure Time: �j!'/� County: Sa!!+esa^1 Region:
Farm Name: Su ej d,,- I Owner Email:
Owner Name: `A -LPL ' Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _ C "werixI df -,'1``S Title: ��"� �w^���r Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: Gcer�a.�.e��►' Sc.� l�
r�
Certified Operator: ^�� Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e ='
0 « Longitude: = ° =' = "
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle Capacity Population
ElWean to Finish
❑ Layer
El Dairy Cow
IffWean to Feeder
2500
1
JE3 Non -Layer
I
El Dairy Calf
eeder to Finish
113,00 1
El Dairy Heifer
ElFarrow to Wean
IDry
Poultry
El Dry Cow
ElFarrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Putlets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
❑ Turke s
Other
❑ Other
JEJ Turkey Poulis
IVUOther
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a_ Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
El No
❑NA
El NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: e2 —,30 Date of Inspection , - —10
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: r >O 7—
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
l 2. Crap types) �. �..� e�/i� � +�q� .L. ��,1� (9 rrrr`a/ L Q • S
13. Soil type(s) cis v /--
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
IT 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
Reviewerfinspector Name r tv S Phone: 47&7A/.33.3300
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: ,/i 23~Zoleo
Page 2 of 3 1 Z1.16/U4 Uonrrnueu

•Facility Number: 82 —309 Date of Inspection 6-7w3�/t7
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Cl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Cl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31,
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
AddttionalgComments and/oir Drawings
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Z
Type of Visit (Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 01outine O Complaint Q Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /.0-/of-09 I Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: - �S Region: lf�gQ
Farm Name: 7'Owner Email:
Owner Name: CkNGSl .0_Wi) it Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: rl cr/�J/�°rv4� Title: "r"` It9`' Phone No:
NNII arr'-s c1 �r'P�7 OnsiteRepresentative: w�� Integrator: CJW'�dN r
Certified Operator: 61`'N� moo,-r�'s Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = = i 0 u Longitude: 0 0 =1 = N
Swine
Design Current
Capacity Population
Design Curren1�1t�,m--p
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Gnrrent
Cattlapacity Population
Wean to Finish
❑ La er
Dairy Cow
Bcan to Feeder I
Z Sao I Z S—o a
1110 Non -Layer 1
❑ Dairy Calf
feeder to Finish 11300
1 / '?UV
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
DrJ Poultry
❑ Da Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑Non -La Non -Layers
ElBeef Feeder
PE] Boars
ElPullets
ElBeef Brood Co
El Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
El Yes
El No
/
& A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
ffn►A
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
I
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
ID Yes
❑ No
,
Lf tvA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E o
❑ NA
El NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

0. %
Facility Number: g2 — 3a Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Eff 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: jocr,�Al _ Alu!q�
Spillway?: A129 /rO
Designed Freeboard (in): /Q
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 2illo ❑ 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 thre t, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes No El NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
IL Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Mill ❑ 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 types) Bev�tec��G�, ljj�Qy/(rr�G) �fK GYYc,,-j ` O. •s•�
13. Soil type(s) (fez
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ET'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
to ❑ NA ❑ NE
[ Rio ❑ NA ❑ NE
4
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor� n r,.ecommendat ons or any other comments.
Use drawings.ot facility to better explain situations.'(use additional pages as necessdy
ary):
—.— ...
Reviewer/InspectorName tG 2V.; S;`` „ Phone: 9�ai�33,�3Dl�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -zoo q
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 29 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ W1JP El Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes BlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B o ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ 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
Ell1
�/❑
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbrcakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NNo El NA
[I NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Er
[ Now❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
<0
9❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes L�SNo NA ElNE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document El Yes 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
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
BIC, ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Ad'ditibnA:Comments;and_/,o"Drawings
Hw
12128104

Slil-4S cN4ei-cct q-17-2o08 eP-
Type of Visit ('f,,--,,oml!pliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reasor} for Visit l7Koutine O Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other [I Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7-o0 A9 I Arrival Time: ;QD /¢ Departure Time: :dD County: Qua a Region: f�0
Farm Name: 5lXs4�- ���fl Owner Email:
Owner Name: �! �� si�9rl� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �9f G�[/,t/� !i^/ 5 Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: = o = =64 Longitude: = o = 4 =
Design
Swine � apacity
❑ Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder ZS�'O
Current
Population.
Design Current
Wet Poultry � Capacity. Popu�latt'on
❑ Layer
Non -Layer
Design Current
Gattfe Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish 300
_ :'
DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
'��3 oul
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
El Beef Feeder
EGilts
Boars
❑ Beef Brood Co
r ,.
Other ��.
....:....... .
l
spa _ ,
❑ Other
.� . - - _
Number of Structures:iY
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes L9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
12
LT No
❑ NA
❑ NE ,
❑ Yes
9'1`Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
El NE
❑ Yes
El Yes
,L/��No
No
El NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
_L!
L7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: —30Q Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0--No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 21 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: I N,Y rlY
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): S 3S
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 U ' o ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes FKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) ,,_,�
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application ,�
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes L°j<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 1 _ Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Ehlo' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop/Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) Ca
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes N
,E ��o ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes L_"_TNo ElNA ElNE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ E Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes Dlgo- ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes E'N'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
ecru.- �-r L-�-•-�- �.
Reviewer/Inspector Name I rc GVcPS Phone: 91,0. SW- 3330
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 9-of-
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: $2 —3L79 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
[:]Yes Rio ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21 _
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I "
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
L/J No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
[VN
❑ NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
2rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ETNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
O 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
��
L�J No ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ffNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

8'0(s A5='A e_d off/ os'/ zoo S
Facility Number SZ 30�
ivision of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit
ompliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
outine Q Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 2 1y-0% S4(ti Arrival Time: /i Departure Time: County: ¢ �� Region:
Farm Name: a P- fri+< Owner Email:
Of
Owner Name: '0 ' e_5f Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: nn��
Facility Contact: G��� /Yory'1 5 Title: _ 14.�Csu Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: _a,%aA/ ��% Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 00 =' = Longitude: 0 ° =' =
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
25o0 10 Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Cattle Capacity
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef 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 Ex No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
r*o
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
iYJ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:
1z /bf O 7
Date of Inspection 172 /if D
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?
711n:Y
cture 1 Structure 2Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: F!"- I L5 `` e ,
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ONE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): .30 3 7
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 L� I
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes V1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffets, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VINo ❑ 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 ❑ jEvidence of
Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) �eJr/'1�L&k l ,*, / �� ie/ . 5�-ftZ166G, nl f/Q. S
13. Soil type(s) ec"
14. Do the receiving crops direr from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
`Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other[commernts. F _
Use drawrngs�of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
i
T
!/
Reviewer/inspector Name �,r/� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 2,0O7
Page 2 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 [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [� No [I NA El NE
the appropirate box. ElWUP El Checklists El Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soit 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
ElNA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
ElYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[;?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
l
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
P'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 03`Q Arrival Time:: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: 1
Facility Contact: Gr f_Aj^J A ar*, S Title: All", Phone No:
Onsite Representative: GlevAy Aj0ryl's __ Integrator: 642yl61val 14vl-11 5 woe
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
/C-/Zv
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = 1 = « Longitude: = ° ❑ ' E__1 "
Design
Current
__A!5W , .
, Design ' " Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity
Population
Wet PoylryCapac�ty Population
Cattle Capacity Population
FEWean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Z S DO
❑Non -La er
❑ Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
O
O
DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
3`
❑ D Caw
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
Gilts
crs❑
Feeder
EBoars
Pullets❑Beef
❑ Beef Brood Co
- --
❑ Turkeys
other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
El Yes [$No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [29 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes (M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

A
Facility Number: SZ- 30
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 04 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: AluI'3e.-u 8, L4
Spillway?: AID NQ
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):7 27
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [% No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(iel large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes M 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 QffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes (6 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 INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[)d No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% 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) �er�tuIIa �Grxa_� T SLl G++•`.� t`Oywsted )
13.
Soil type(s) �a g
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWW? ❑ Yes
[FNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
[ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17_
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
VINo ❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
/RNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
°Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):"
in 33 --3
- 9l0)�33-333a
Reviewer/Inspector Name i j L/��, eaI S A PhoneAgr:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
Fage z of 1 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 72 3oq Date of Inspection S-f7 D
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n El Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes F] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
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?
f 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 [29 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[;?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CM No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[p No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
PNo
El NA
El NE
❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[)PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
., c. -.. ... - - .. - .. �. -. :w ys k ] p4, _. Sri. ■ r -•
Additional,Coibments,and/or Drawings:
•
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: -/, -0S" Arrival Time:
Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: �t���41_ _ _���1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ �� H �kv 5" l �i,, . � Phone: _&_e) _a q 9% 3
Mailing Address: -el-3-1 Q/ gees ;- aol,e v C` �_ /✓�' .:t P�'`+��%>'
Phvsical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: e rr/ f
Certified Operator: 6 /VK / eYI t
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: R 1440*'. G
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [= c = i Longitude: E:1 o = ' = u
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
5200!% ❑ Layer
d 0 3 o u ❑ Non -Layer
UQ4xean to Finish
can to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑
Layers
ElNon-Layers
❑
Pullets
❑
Turkeys
❑
TurkeyPoults
❑
Other
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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
DairyCow
❑
DairyCalf
El
Dairy Heifer
El
Dry Cow
El
Non-Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
El
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Coyd
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 H<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
E,-- <o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Lr►f lvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection y��s
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Q"Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ER<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ V.TUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other ��..----,,ff
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. (I Yes L�1vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes E3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA Cl 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
LWJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E34No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
El Yes
�, //
E? o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
GENO
❑ 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
ffNo
❑ 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
2�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?
El Yes
^^,,��''
IRtvo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
L911vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ad'ditronalsCominents�and/or Drawings
12128104

Facility Number: 2 Q Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment ,�,/
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? El Yes [R o ❑ 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): AO „2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [,To ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [ Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
ON' 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
�
P o
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El Yes
,,��,,11�
Eg/No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 t . Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ElE 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 ❑ Appliclation Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) �✓/lrscG�� x/,, 7 ��/ss�u.r 61-.6Z e
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
❑ NA El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes
,EY,No
(3 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,❑ Yes
[],No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
WN o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Eacplam any YES -answers_;
'�eplainsituatiotis `(iise�;dd
Reviewer/Inspector Name _ Phone:%/
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12128104 Continued

of Visit 10 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit • Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notificabon O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit--10 y o Tune: l� 0 0
Facility Number BZ
-NotOperational C Below Threshold
® Permitted P.Certified 0 Conditionally Certified Cj Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: . _ . I iCounty:.... M kM P&MY,---
Owner Name: �v�e f Sy+tii't'Phone No: IL 0 S Z I
Mailing Address: , P- 0. � 6�[ �' � � _ _ �� a� i aa� ----- -- -
Facility Contact: Tide:
Onsite Representative: Q*-,� X16--r t— f S
Certified Operator. .., 61 ----- �--------
Location of Farm.
Phone No:
Integrator.
Operator Certification Number. ^ . Z �f !t q !P
swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a �� Ou Longitude •
Dischmmes & Stream Impcts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes X No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 14 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
❑ Yes [WNo
Structure I Structure? 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure b
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
I2/I2f03 Continued

Fatality Number: 0Z — g � Date of Inspection !O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
MNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
[:]Yes
No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance— unprovement?
%Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
KNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
RNo
elevation marldngs?
Waste Application
10- Are there any buffers that need maintenancerunprovement?
❑ Yes
ELNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type �et .wsdo. . ram! a CrrCii`Se-edL
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
JZNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[RNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
ESNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
X No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
O.No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
;[No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes UNo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes 96 No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Cammrots {nf�' to'.q ���F.>ow
�YESwas as atty� ar ztoyR�tlier ooncaa v, - _�
IJs�d:a��vnugs cFf3sa'�LLy�o`���-�(nscsddti��PB� � �T9k ❑Field Copy ❑ Fiaal Notes , �;
AL
�"
Z� a rcaS kx-m�r++o� '�'� `e.��ocrri S Vl a y►�►O 4w �C� aA 3 o V . P
w � r �.a v.� {'tra,�yo.,��j V � e��t't] V'� Gtr�t� i r. ►O a � � s �d
r'- a
Reviewer/Inspector Name err ;- _ J. v - uAIM
Reviewer/Inspector Siguatnre: Date: l0 O
»ir�mz Cna�,v..i

Facility Number: 02, — Date of Inspection
Reauired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ANo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie1 WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes JKNo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Eq No
❑ Waste ApplicatioV ❑ Freeboa%1`13 Waste Analy*9' ❑ Soil Sampling/
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ANo
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes RNo
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as rewired by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes RNo
27. Did Reviewer/fnspector fail to discuss reviewrmspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes D(No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes K No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes RNo
LAMES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (if no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes F{No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fait to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDFS required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfa�❑ Inspection After I"
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
WaS� �L,� Si S s Z�Z° l°'� � • �
y ItrA/ems( G D. e3
G/zt/04 j o."
a /"loy l ..,� / G
Z 3 . Fov+�a� o••w v rro r . 5 P u LLS i .4
cr+� wsk. ct�ua��.ts 5 �rcrw. 4c`e ee vLo -t'ti- cart-�c,�
vet .rem eLs (r_� Mr, Wv cam, S i ►��o w4 1V1r. g a . i eY
e X ,� S� c e� �.,.,�f• , o-r- Ate- C L,�eS aL,.-A 4a, w�a iGer Q �-r�csw�(
cvr-r- w-�5 f o '�•� i «i q o-{ i cr,, r+�t-o~vro�-S . `i1.�- P v 1lS i ►.�
i PZ0S - 2/10/0q
P2oK- r0 2/13%a't Z�13(oy
PLos KO y! 14, /a4
12112M3

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. cR9 - .3a
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 1995
Time: Z: 9Z L: 4P
I
Farm Name/Owner: eR1%c-5T S Irw- t �Qmc 4yl .�►�
Mailing Address: $ z
County:
Integrator: r►r N Phone: AV
On Site Representative: 5 Phone:
Physical Address/Location: SR 1.�o4' Aaa,—,ax AR 60W
Type of Operation:" Swine _L6.- Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: !Iyo,6 4io .V�.a r�r 404x
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude:Longitude: "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) (!&or No
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)?
Is adequate land available f spray? �esr N
o
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200'Feet from Dwellings? es or No
100 Feet from Wells? es r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? es or(Ko)
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue line: Yes cruel D
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes o No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? (j�or No
Additional Comments:
I kJ as IL
Inspector Name
Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Lagoon # 2
.New $" .Drain;
- Gravity
"Mewl,
Pull Plu
Existing
Pull Plu
Existing Hvg. House
Ftioht
30` Access Road
Exisin
Gravi
Power Pole 0
Lift station
Wet well
Pump Control
Panel
60 Phosphorous
Drain to Lagoon 4" Foroe Main To Horhog. Tank
OverHead
Elec.
oPower Pole
Existing: Elec.
Meter Base, Panel
anoaphWA
s�r,a To*11ita19R
12'.x 12 x 4• cone tipum dean -water
lfonmta Pad Teak
For Phosphorus ZA" 31 it x 15 ft
1 2' Access
Road
Rel4cttoh Sludge
Pit f&ettling Tank
1't: ft X 10 A
Cores soft m
Recirculating
.Pomp
NitriftcatiW Tank oNgrifleabm Tank
aftx0it 31ftxi5
ft
Air Sk►►w
HomogwnlzatJon.
36 11 x i6ft
fiAoNe eeparatorC666m0on.
Existing FenceLine
Eillue t Storage
(Separated water) Tank
36:ft x 13'ft
OverFlow 8": To Lagoon
8' Diameter Wet Well
Pre -Cant Concrete
f
4" SDR-21 PVC Discharge
High dater To Homog. Tank
8" Gravity In From Xorm.
Hog House Inv. 78"
Leg Float. 1 2-5 hp 150 GPM
2 Goulds Model 38-8D8 Su4mersiWe Pumps
On Float. 3) Single Phase 1 !_60 1230 V
4) Self -Priming
Off Float 5 Solids Handling
6) Guide Rail System
1)
High. Water Alarm Float Elevation _
50"
2
Lag Float Elevation -
- 96"
3)
On Float Elevation
1201f�
4)
C�fF Float El(§uaton
144"
5)
Duplex Lift Station :5 hp Single Phase
1). Control Panel NEMA 4 Weather Proof _ -
2). Flashing AlarmUght
3) Alarm Hom
41 Pump Run light
5) Control On 1 Off Switch r^^
6) 11-0-,A Switch -
7) 4 Control Floats
Final Drawing - Not For construction
Permit Drawings
0. General layout Inset / Elevations
g
Date: January 2006
� �� Pro,Lect: B & B Farms - Tyndall Project
CARD Operator. JAD Scale: NIA
Sheet Number: 2 of-5
James A. Dodson, PI
'1868 Honeycutt Rd.
Clinton, NC 28328

"New"
Pull Plug � O
Exisfin-g
Pull _Plug
Hog House
House Re -charge Pipe
Valve Connection
Lagoon
Waste Stream
uplex Lift Station
Phosphorus
Settling. Tank
Sludge
Rejection
Pit.
NWiilication Tank
28ftx15ft
Homogenization Tank
36ftx15ft
Effluent Storage
(Separated Water)'Tank
36ftx15ft
❑� f Mobile Solids Removal Unit
Final Drawing - Not For Construction
Recirculabon Purn
2 Submersible Pump
3 Gate Valve
4 Qravi Feed Line
i> 5 Pressure Line
6} Pull Plug Flush
0111111111111/��i
H
SEAL ~
4
„�Hit
p�pL�,.
Permit Drawings
General Flow
Date: January 2006
Ar_ojeci:: S & 0 Fare - Tyndall Prot.
CADD eratw: ,JAD Scale: N/A
Sheet Number: 3 of:5
James Am Dodson, PE
1868 Honeycutt Rd.
Clinton, NC 28320

-ge 6" PVC Pipe
Invert Elev _ 78"
High Water Elev. 57"
I Qlschame Profile To Lagoon From New System
Putt Plug .Elev, 0..0
Top.of Masonery
Hoo House drain
. . . . . I Mobile Seperetor Unit Catch Basin

Flush Line From
Hog House Lift Station. Sludge From
ReJection Pit
1
Hom enization
35'
x
15'
2L
Separated Water
38'
x
15'
3
j DeNitrif cation:
28'
x
15'
4}
. _
Nitrifimbon.
28`
x
15'
5)
Sludge. fettling
1 V
x
15'
6)
Clean Water
31'
x
'15'
7
,
Phosphorous Settling
� .
11'
x 15'
Blo-Geery Food Recirculation Line
Line 0. r - &-avity .Line
tea, Blower,
From atudge Settling
Tank
Gravity Line Gravity Line
Rejection Pit
,,%%1%%i{111f1/ !,
N •
CAR
`' to oY/
FW/
111%r-A
A.
fit"
Gravity Line
Phosphorous
Gravity Line
Glean Water Return Line
/7Ya1-
Permit .Drawings
Flow Profile / Nitrification
Date: January 20
.Protect:, B & B Farfns Tyn"l PMOO
- ._. �
DADA Operator:. jAb
Shoot Number. 4 of 5
.James A. Dodson,. PE
Final drawing -, Not For Construction 1068 Honeycutt Rd.
Clintimn_ NC 211329