250039_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental 4u6

INSPECTIONS.
INSPECTIONS
a
INSPECTIONS

Type of Visit: 40 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation D Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: *Routine 0 Complaint ❑ Follow-up 0 Referral Q Emergency ❑ Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ® Arrival Time:
+ Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm :Name: Orr, t L. L-1.... Owner Email:
Owner Name: oL I 1 Phone:
Mailing Address: S� �J -• , �' � &a 1V U.-i
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: b.AL)t�Ir\ l Vtj A Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Sack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: �]
Certification Number: M1 ( 7 _
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharp-es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made`?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DW R)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system'? (Ifyes, notify ❑Wk)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑N ❑NA ❑NE
❑Yes ❑NA []NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

lFacility Number. - Date of Inspection: 3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E2"No
0 NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ "o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
E:f 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
d
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Amilication
10. Are there any required butlers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 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
0 Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil T'ype(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes [ "
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes [ /No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes [�J
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ]o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
NA NA
[] NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes. check
❑ Yes
❑ 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
1 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[] Yes
No
❑ ❑ NE
NA
23. If selected, did the facility Fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[] Yes
❑ No
Ti ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

F'acili Number: IDate 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
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
ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No R/NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No [] NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA �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
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
[] Yes
[ N . ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
C] Yes
o ❑ NA [] NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
9,0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comruents..(refer t-o.question:#): Explain.any.�YES.answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
'
Ilse drawings of f- tyio.:better.explain. situations,(use.additional pages as necessary).
'
Q U nhA.ke, T ) , 5 +
bacL
S-W\ 00-�
&'rWdr,,-
C" - \ Vim ` � � fv"p . �r►5 � C�
1c - - � --) �Q 17 L'oo."sA.-r- Ar ^+r" 0 - ri
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
� . CJDrr-t 51e6V1\ d 4 s �-� , ]��► {-+ �—
Phone:
Date:
21412015

Type of visit: * Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: * Routine ❑ Complaint Q Follow-up D Referral ❑ Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1-- 1(, I Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: cr«-+r-C- Region:
Farm Name: ,5 " j r t lti Owner Email:
Owner Name: �� „ f y), a ar_ _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
' Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 9 i?( t -F_ 4kidn-11
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: l W�
Certification Number: H `7'7
Certification Number:
Longitude:
NEREP.."'C!ity Pop.
Wet PoWtry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pap.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Non -La er
I
EE-
Dairy Cow
Daia Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
01Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D ►Pool
Ca aci
P.a
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Non -Layers
I Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turk Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other;
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes rNo
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: jDateof Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
[:]Yes
[7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in);
Observed Freeboard (in): o� J
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
[:]Yes
[2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes
C]"'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes a<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 �Crrop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): qP 4 . JL� -
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
a�jo
❑ 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
[3-No-
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
10
❑ 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
[D--No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
6--No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ W UP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes L 7 1Ye ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:)Yes ❑-<❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [-]Yes [—]No IA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili umber: jDate of Inspection: ---j--
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes O/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 6 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 Eg/�o rNA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
Other Issues `
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes E7 No ❑ NA ❑ WE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes [2r�0
X
❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
F❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments {refer to question f : Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other. comments..-:..: �
Use drawings of facility to better explain situatiions f u^s�e additional pages as necessary). ti
QC' y-, 7'o "! �� bzvo l,� p o n', �LJ
1
Cram - L CornLf" �
A�e -z,� � r
�l_3a-15 X,q3
CI - 30
115
�rea + t n Lam,
wd
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3of3 31-y
qz�.5
Phone: C, q g— Jq T L
Date: 3 — -7— l
21412014

I1 ype of visit: compliance inspection LJ Vperation Keview i J Structure Evaluation U f eclinical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine ❑ Complaint D Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: (�r et,.4-1— Region: 6J'f;lt2-0
Farm Name: J PAI 5,p{ lA � 5' L, L , C Owner Email:
LL_
Owner Name: �O�e�� � U Irl & OA Phone:
Mailing Address: �� � �1 �l 5 Iti[A V NC_
�a
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: 1V t, Certification Number: 7_
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Design Eurrent Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Eapacity Pop.
Layer Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
Dairy Calf
6Urrent
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑
p
Dairy Heifer
Design Dry Cow
D . P,ouI Ga aci.- P,o . Non -Dairy
Layers Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Boars
Other
Other
Dischar2es and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes a<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] N ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes LJ lyv ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑'NO ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - I Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes [�`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
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 &N/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 dNo [] NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [—]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[:]Yes
Fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
o
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
I_J ' c
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
FD4
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
N
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
D
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
&NIO
❑ 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 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 D_<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes ❑ No Ej'NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: - $--
24- Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ea"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes F31No [] 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 [3] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No 6/NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [] Yes [allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [3 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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E31�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes EKO ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes �W'O'
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments:
Use drawings of facility to better 'explain situations (use additional pages..as necessary):
.5W C)
U
�t3"'� �YGL•l � V 1 1 CJ_� L�
4 �Jjl . )1� 4 1,
v) c�s�e is f\o_�3 i 5
s -2% -14 ,c(-7
-1C)-l.s'
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
i
0 �h s
5 L4 1 fl , .
Phone: Clo $ r-S� L
Date. y — q J
21412014

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up ❑ Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: yw. Region:
Farm Name: JM nQ 1:�o en5 L Owner Email:
T
Owner Name: Y Phone:
Rd Address: �5 rj S�r.g{ - �` 1 t t, PrA �� �� �•�
T 7"
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Certified Operator: � o 6 ►4 �4 n J C. I
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: 0 N
Certification Number: f +
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Current
Design
Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity
Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
F
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
L j z7
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D Poult .
Ga aci
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other;
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑NA ONE
[:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: S
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a�
Structure 3 Structure 4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment 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 5<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [�1Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ';
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes LJ 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 Barc Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): SC�
13. Soil Type(s).
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[] N
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
L_1 '~,
[] NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑•34o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:)Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections ❑Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�rNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facifi 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 [No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge`? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [J(NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes io ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA k
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 C,2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes ff/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 � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations. or any other.: cumrnents.-.::::
Use drawings of -facility to better -explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
C - (,,q
r�/ r�'V
`yl ast-e A.,, 5 . S
�- \AU
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 oj3
1 r% -kA f' - �, Q 1
� I, N%_(- 0 _�o ,__ .5
Z-2c� -- ►� 1�5�
� ID
� � %CAI n- �C&
CDr\/L. [rt7z
J,
CX/_
(_Z�'fv-r Lt;b_
. v
yl�X,l �; 6
Cot, re5 ?O)A d J j
Phone:
Date. J y 1
21412011

Type of Visit: ® Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 4D Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: . _n � Departure Time.- County: V�Ceali�.
Farm Name: AAT Y i yl a `� Owner Email:
Owner Name: rr, r j n �— Phone:
Mailing Address: ] �i �C]lS lU e_w P r h
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Region: ` opo
Certified Operator: Robx Y >- E. inda(( Certification Number: I { M
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish La er
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
of a
Design Current
D . Poult Ca aci P,a .
Layers
airy Heifer
Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ER4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes
[—]No
DNA
❑NE
❑ Yes
[T] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Fg-�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

IFacifity Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ 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):_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑Yes
16 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
No
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
E
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [:]Yes Ido ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[3'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure
to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[3�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
FErNio.
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable [—]Yes
Fff'N'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
I3'ryO
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
Fio
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
ffi-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections [:]Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
�Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
[:]No
�NA❑
NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 1 -01 jDate of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes WN
N ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ 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 laio ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes D No �A ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose o£dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes D-Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes io ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes Ej`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes FTNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes E? o ❑ 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 necessar
y).
k7 G-_'�-_f_ A n IS i 'S
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
i i &\-R 0 ku r• S
4-°l-13
I►�q
H.
'4AAk Car --P-S
Phone:
Date:
21412011

Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine ❑ Complaint 0 Follow-up ❑ Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Crcc_&A._ Region: WPO
Farm Name: A l JY'�. Spr n 5 L L. Owner Email:
Owner Name: ^ V i Q Phone:
Mailing Address: j`� �j �.� �S F�'� 4 1� r + N c— ) o! b
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:� Title:
Onsite Representative:�Y tf i*� a•�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
r u
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
5wieie
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pvp.
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to FeederI
INon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
01Daj1T_q
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
D Pattltry Ca aci Eo Non -Dairy
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Lavers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Other
tither
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Turkey Puuets
Other
Discharges and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [5'No
[:]Yes E ''yo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [:]Yes o [] NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No 0 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment 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 F]/N/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 [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? ,
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
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?
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes U�' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E�Nc, ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E14,, ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [Io [DNA ❑ NE
❑WllP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps [] Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Q'�0
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes []"'No
23, if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [—]No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA [] NE
CaN/A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Ins ection: — l a
24.�Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [dNo ❑ NA FINE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [] Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes []J�No ❑ N ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No L A ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes Aio ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA [r] NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
No
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes E5 ❑ 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 LJ ❑ NA ❑ NE
'y
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34, Does the facility require a Follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes io ❑ 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).
Sim S u z� ►a - l l -71A� .- 6 C
C) �b YZ S
Q&sfA�' A" b%.s �r - 3- [2 .q06
5- 23- tZ t. 5
t - Z3 1Z I ' S 1
C-- C Z7 r
C`r1P boa. G
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
'— I ! Gam[ c�•l.J�
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
1 W Phone: � l l `" 3 � `t
Date: �{ ` 17 —
2/4/2011

Type of Visit: d Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review D Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral D Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: C r-"PCA - Region: (J040
Farm Name: MOM S.t11l15 L , G Owner Email:
Owner Name: _ py(r Y n �` a k Phone:
Mailing Address: V uJ Aic
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: rGt Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 1 •o bAJ �E hj n d et
-U
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Phone:
118
Certification Number: i M r 1 1
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity
Pop.
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
3
Design Current D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D • Paul Ca aci P,o Non -Dairy
]Layers Beef Stocker
Non -Layers Beef Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Pullets Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
TuTkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream -Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[—]Yes
o
❑ 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
C] 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
FE I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
�;<
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 214120II Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: S--
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is 94brage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes OA
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): r-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑"'(es No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes �o
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify 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
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes 2 0
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes fff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure
to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): 111 or ��� �L ` Crg.v.luti 0 coac e-,
.�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes [g-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes �/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes QXo ❑ 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 E10 ❑ 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 [B'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 " RainfalI Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [2'7�o ❑ N ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

FaciliNumber: jDate of lns ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 13440
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes C24No
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 Iagoon
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 [ r No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
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.
34. 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:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
tiIA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [—]No ❑ NA [j'�E
❑ Yes No ❑ NA [] NE
❑ Yes [�iv ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [.]'fvo
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes Dio
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer..to question ft Explain any YES answers andlor.any additional recommendations or: any other.coninients.m
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary): • . - :.... ... , .
y . ` g' -
11 -ck- I❑ -'Lack -t.y9,'
(Ar�r��atl � d`❑ t t
Cy' p l e;V4_
S,-, I T-t. 54- ID,-23 -- 1t3
Q t1 r►� ti �-�.� - ��, 5 i
YL
C. u G 2 r. J a S v►� , n r oL,
3 -�.s t� t •3
t -13`��
to �a rM r, t
Vn Y gT VN �rar AnL2. ►.w s r (--r eAds
d
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3of3
Gh 4. <4
► 4 3 rf, % �4ram.
Phone: 142 r E 1 g 7
T '
Date: —52 5-
2/4/2011

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit / Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: ���{ } Departure Time: County: Ca_fQ1.-1&. Region; W /10
Farm Name: Ai t>+1*� Soffit nay Owner Email:
Owner Name: K J o A -TV A a A•1 ` l Phone•
Mailing Address; S+ _ j �IBC. � 5 1
� .�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title;
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: , YT _ i n 14 a,
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: i -7
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = i = « Longitude: = ° = 6 = ff
Design Eurrent
Design Current
"C=ity
Swine Capacity Population
Vet Poapttlation
❑
Wean to Finish
1OLayer
I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Daia Heifer
arrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
❑ ers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Non-Lay
Eltsers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑Pulle
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
❑they
❑ 0 t
❑ Turkey Poults
10 Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I o, f 3
❑ Yes /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
El NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�❑
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued
e

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
W� Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes L'J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes B'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 9<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the stuctures 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 El Yes No ❑ NA El NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
3 No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below,
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of
Area
12.
Crop type(s) VD A , "S 6 _
13.
Soil type(s) K)O / i OJ L_E— t r G&+4A1. , Ca ylCtaC.
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
';'O ❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E34fo ❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
U,�,
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�I
�4o NA
[3 NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El Yes
,6„
L�' o LJ NA
❑ NE
Comments. (refer to: question #): Explain: any YES answers. and/or any.recommendatI06 or any iitl 'er comments
.. d
Use drawings of facility twbetter explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):ACZ
Reviewer/lnspector Name m — one: CA Ph
`-
r x;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 0 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of inspection p
Re aired 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 ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
❑ Yes zwo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge`?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency`?
❑ Yes No NA ElNE
ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
P-<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[,IAA'
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ElNA
ElNE
[IYes
ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
Mkid ❑ NE
❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
El Yes o ❑NA El NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: ::.t 'e=
5MOAra.4� �► C rvm�►- V
AL
S LU S 0 11 , $ _ 0 ,,, CL , - : fa\•
NeLA p vn4y ' �&6 mtas v,r,�,,,r�
C&4 Y\ , '
o czn,.gt4 26o°t
S � ; d S r�
Cramp �&1 CJ C�U -- 3L ,��S ot" rwWd�
Co S UJI
H,
Page 3 of 3
12128104

Type of Visit S Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: N Ab-Q Arri►al Ti,,- i $ •'a j'1� Departure Time: � County-C�" wv— Region: UCL(1_(3
Farm Name: U Yr t 1 `-3��• �. _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Y�O►` C" Phone
Mailing Address: E�s 5 sF. ead 5 _ I ex-, Ix V10 'al 5 C� �.
Physical Address: Facility Contact: �0. 'TV nJ Title:
Onsite Representative: Y0. r,��1
Certified Operator:`�-
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number* 1 9 -7 -7
Rack -up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = ' = " Longitude: ❑ c 0 f = «
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 5�0
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
Dry Poultry
LJ-I.ayers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow -
Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NF_
El Yes
El No
❑NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes O
N[I NA ❑NE
El Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: as — Date of Inspection II—�
Waste Collection & Treatment
,�,N�
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
(I Yes
& o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): ]o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
El Yes
,�/
O 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
0"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 tat, notify DWQ
11-1
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA [INE
ElE�
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) El"
No Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste A lication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes J3"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
or-cb
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
M=El
NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'![] Yes
ElNA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[3No
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
SiF. SeeT��.�:L`S..i ..'i:- - '•'��:' .�'s ._�ga '�rt:.a?'Yt air
Ckd
ReviewerlInspector Name: Phone:
y= 1 `�`' Otl�� 3q
:r :r'.:
Reviewerlinspector Signature: r Date: I ) -rf 4 --�jq
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: `� —3 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility rail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
a<o 0 NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWN4P readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ CheckIists ❑ Design El Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[f'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
BNo El NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes ❑ No Eg'KA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by The permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑E N
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�B'No
L��J No
El NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Li No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
EYNA
❑ NF
Other Issues
��
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
ElF 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
ffNE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 L
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
L{ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Genera! Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/'inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: z ,
Sri4e- SY - - a a,- .18ct C Qum
LT Z "7 , a
`6 �on S
V_7r_�Ioc) a r- CA �1 PCkl f� "A C_ OW-f �& '&� CZ),f MS r j � - I C (-'\ �Ok) i)
12128104

I Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
jj Reason for Visit / Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
L
Date of Visit': ACrri C rCtxs�'
—ral Time: � Departure Time: � CountV: Region: Ck_ f'D
Farm Name: O\ UYY\i Y' 5 U L _C_ _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Or jU h A C -k Phone: N5a ' 9 3-7 7
Mailing Address: 55 ,5_ V,tt_a _5 1'J\• _It� tw Mc -
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �e hir �/T 4�1,1-- Title:
Onsite Representative{:: j
Certified Operator:ter F-• • >r, o. 1
11
Back-up Operator: , �.\C7, A }] 4h ti 0'� 1
Location of Farm:
NEesig Currenin 01111 t
Swine Capacity Popularion
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean 3
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Qther
❑ Other
Phone No:
Integrator. — uy_ ()�w
Operator Certification Number: 1 CA -1 j
Back-up Certification Number: 9 -1 -7Q
Latitude: 0 0 ='
= s Longitude: = n = =
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkcx Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
ne Capacl y Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
Discharges Sc Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
[:1 NA
[:1 NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
,❑....,,
[9 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
eo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: S — Date of Inspection b
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes EJ 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 (_'t'�io ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
1f any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thr-eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes M4at❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes On-1vo ❑ 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 G -tao ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 1. 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 > 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) 6WT'WdCL L�-_A }, Srti.. Grc
13. Soil type(s) �] p� �t�' �L. 1 �r cA,�, P�►_r�t.
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ,©,,'l//�io ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'? ❑ Yes ,_�,, jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes I,E�J' <0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes E4 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes EKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
C � ,
�Da � u- I c7S 2. �
).2-
ReviewerlInspector Name F— f- 71 Phone:
-- a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: rj — Date of Inspection—�7
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
Yes
El Yes
1
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
14401
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ Wi]P [I Checklists [I Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
UNv
❑ 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
[2'N'o
[J NNAA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
E'NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ X6
❑ NA
❑ 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
QIgo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
2<A
❑ NE
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
EJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[;�<E
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
El Yes
,,__,,_,�
BNo
❑ 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
U<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:. .
_ iA1
2 oo q
W/ E;q GP
Drop GR Ca � A� v-v <9 - `I _p IS
a
S ► l --e5A- 10- 27 { 0 7 W1.�.�.� �.7 ins
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality
Facility -Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation`
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit * Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation ❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 46 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral D Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 10 - 0-11 Arrival Time: 1611.00 , Departure Time: County: " Region:
Farm Name: 1 VVV, „'n "1 5 L �- _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: iL a Y` + L _ Phone:
Mailing Address: P e-•T i t 5 6L,.> "ck �3L`'.7 P.;;,t-YL
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: _- T)�Yck- 4 L\ Title:
Onsite Representative:(} I
Certified Operator: ^fit" E•�i h �a-L l _
Back-up Operator: Dr 2-r a 1. --- l Gt- i
Phone No:
l
Integrator: � 1VY E�Li
_
Operator Certification Number: —�++ � —-1-7 1
{ _
Back-up Certification Number: � -7 -7 O
Location of Farm: Latitude: = n = ` = , Longitude: 0 n = 1 0 «
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Layer
JO Non -La et
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
` OO
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other•
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
Pullets
❑ Turkeys
ElTurkey 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)
Cattle
Design Current
Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Co
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: . ELI .
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 &<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
rNo
El NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,,..�,
L7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

FacilityNumber: ;)S— 3A Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any innnediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes NoNA El NE
❑ Yes:O�Eol NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes LI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B o ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental) threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [91 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes B<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 El Yes Ei� ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
ma intcnance/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 t0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acc table Crop Windo +w t ❑Evidence of Wind Drift [I Application Outside of Area
12. Croptype(
SY 31
�c
13. Soil type(s) Caut.- • ,�-
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes L7 Nvo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [�!, <000 ❑ NA ❑ NE
I & Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes ,F��W�ty<�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'? ❑Yes ,Lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 6k ❑ 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): .
' r k]C'5V e Rr+��:5
� C. � �e r+� ��oei
3— ?o -07 I
i -Zq-v7
I
Ei�ZS-�� !• �..
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone: Rqct� —3 oL 4,1
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Date: 7- 1 o— o7
v ( ) I2128104 Continued

Facility.Ntimber: 'A5 —3 Date of Inspection ►=--0r7
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 ❑ Desig
n ❑Maps ❑ ether
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Lltiio ❑ 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'?
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal'?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 L 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?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
5Wo d 5V '"7,k—C"_-T aVv&OA lw�+y 0-1 4
—
,gin
Yl �1_
n
_?tOZJ2� _.,>— 2- 05 wl
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[ 1vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2'�Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Ml o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0;�<o
El NA
❑ NE
El Yes
El No
P A
❑ NE
❑ Yes ,B N'�o El NA El NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA R<
❑ Yes Ll� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes I_T< ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes B�tqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
n ��.11 ti � t� Iwct � � �vr►.�
OLwek vvctatO '►rri �`i moo-f d 5 R r t,�r.El 0 n� r►.�►1, ,�•z{�
Sam r,_," D-' 4.1 ne 6et.t Lt> S410 OLMI—P
2 � && VY

• F Division of Water Quali
N' Q f Soll and Water Cr�nser
Facility umber `j Division o
i
O they Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �(� Arrival Time: ll'r c�D Departure Time: County: Cr�^n Region: Ogo
Farm Name: Pjkt]-M SQL '��[5 L.L. C • Owner Email: 7
Owner Name: r �' -TV ndC' � �Phone:
Mailing Address: F)ss � t P.v_' Falk Road m +r me :�eS 5Q_
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Phone No: p
Onsite Representative: r Integrator: iJt. �V-01- n
Certified Operator: _R6e,-� F • I nda[ I - Operator Certification Number: i cL, 7 I
Back-up Operator: 6 G AAG Back-up Certification Number: 770
Location of Farm: Latitude: ©v ®` Fb7l
a Longitude: [n ° 7.3 ` 0 "
Title:
'. Design.:;:::.. Current.. .:Design Current . Design Cu"rreii't `= .
Swine Capacity.; Population. .:..' Wet•Poultry. Ca aci Po ulation Cattle Ca aci 1'o ttan_
P tY P P ty a P.,..
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
®'Farrow
to Wean
P400
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
.,.Other:.
_❑ Other--
❑ Layer
_41❑ Non -Layer
Dry. Poultry.
J 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?
E]Dairy
Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
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?
Page I of 3
ElYes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
El NA
❑NF
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
a
❑ NA
❑ NE
I2128/04 Continued

Facility Number: a-'S -3q Date of Inspection O
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
ErNN�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
►tom 1vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): d
Observed Freeboard (in): 2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
El 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?
El Yes
,j��
RNo ❑ 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
Ql o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ff o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? .
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElE Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 1 O lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
'73�]r1 ot7JrJ (3-",] So Me 1iD it�-�� 1-4a iq [3'4k)
12. Crop type(s) &r' t' Cc "5r^ . G; °I-4 Su ,ZQn S [,� i�ltla
13. Soil type(s)
r c)A bra or.n c, B . cn 9
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
EI,N-6 ❑ NA ❑ NE
L�'iQo ❑ NA ❑ NE
+�N ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
iL < ❑NA El NE
t q )• P Y y.. y. x==
Comments refer to question # • Ex lain an YES answers and/or at] recommendations.or..an other comments:.=.;;::::.-.;; -.-�
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): rc
I 'Ttlti+rtt-3Po? o,5 ti- ]rai) Tf,64 1-$"_p�, (iti o4
IVPtt/ [ i,� r. , >I --on
C 0c�
yo' IFS �o� l ► �
R- 2`OS r C
Reviewer/Inspector Name - ~� - - -- - -�-�� Phone: Rry� "4-7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: T - 7 a �i

Facility Number: arj — 3 Date of Inspection i
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [ 10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA WMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes io [] NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design [I Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes +In ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crap Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
❑ Yes
L{�'N
]tJ'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ILKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[j,10
El NNAA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No A ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 2, 2/No, ❑ NA [INE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ElYes l � 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 PC
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 UKo ❑ 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 ZKo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes KKOI ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
ckA.b {a)In mac• 5 co r,,f3 - 2.105 -
j i 1+ri eIOL� Can of
6Vwt.n.Q�4n..
F-"Z% Da'-d recarol s C-O(A-P-;11 20-cl
L d ��� o5-1
j _T_t 1,- Z Forn,S
P'e co'rd S lob % 5 r -e. n,+ ti , >n 5-0�CI
c of I o\-t v i _C - aA � v,e_5 �' a ram_ 5 - - 39q 7
Page 3 of 3 12128104

r DiTision of ►Voter Quality
Facility Number `�� Q Dir+isinn of Soil and Water Conservation
Type of Visit If 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: Arrival Time: I 9. d d I Departure Time: County: [rMV rn Region: L.L
Farm Name: A&IrI's og C -,,0 5 Owner Email:
Owner Name:
MaHing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: +® —!2k ►" �T
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification dumber:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ 0 0 , ❑ 44 Longitude: = ° = I =
11
- Design Current
Design Current
a
Dn ' Curren#
Swine Capacity
Population
Wet Poultry Capacity Papularinn
.Cattle;=: `' :
CapacityP.�apulation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La et
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
Ej Dairy Heifer
arrow to Wean
a
19364Dry
Pnultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stucker
❑ Gilts
❑Non -La ers
'ElBeef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑Pullets
❑ Beef Broad Co
❑ Turke s
Other
E]Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Other
Number of•Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
I►Io
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ N❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes. notify OWQ)
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: `]=
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in);
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
e.
❑ Yes 'No
❑ NA El NE
El yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental) thret, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 5 �00
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ;y NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits. dry stacks and/or wet stacks) �
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require El Yes ,�,�No El 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 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)
7�
v�
13.
Soil type(s) v
14,
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
93No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
❑ yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re�iewer/Ins ector Name `` '' ' -
p r � Phone: ���q
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: -;L-/I—as`
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA W M P readily available? If ycs, check ❑ Yes ❑ N❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections El Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
gKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
u<
❑ 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
VN A
❑ NE
Other issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
2<0
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E2<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
Ko
❑ 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
Ild'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
VNIo
0 NA
[:INE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
91No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
1
1212AVO4

Facility Number 25 - 39 Cate: 126104 Time: 1030 Time on Farm: 60 WARD
Farm Name Alum wings L. L.C. County Craven
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 555 Street Fields Road New Bern NC
28562
Onsite
Representative Michele Anderson/Debra Tyndall Integrator �urphy Brown
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ Op rating below Last Operated:
El Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
2400
2400
Purpose Of Visit
D Routine
0 Response to DWQ/DENR referral
0 Response to DSWCISWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
Q Emergency
0 Other...
Design Current
Capacity Ponulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL [QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ® yes ❑ no
requiring DWQ notification?
5- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 25
CROP TYPES oastal Bermuda -hay I Ismail grain overseed
SPRAYFI ELD
SOIL TYPES NoA CrB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
Facility Number 25 _ - 39 Date: 2/26144 I
PARAMETER
M R Warta Snill laavinn site
Q No assistance provided/requested
68 ......._ .. ..._.—•---•-- .. 63I10I03 .
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL [QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ® yes ❑ no
requiring DWQ notification?
5- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier
Level (Inches) 1 25
CROP TYPES oastal Bermuda -hay I Ismail grain overseed
SPRAYFI ELD
SOIL TYPES NoA CrB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
Facility Number 25 _ - 39 Date: 2/26144 I
PARAMETER
M R Warta Snill laavinn site
Q No assistance provided/requested
68 ......._ .. ..._.—•---•-- .. 63I10I03 .

r.... .--- "IV
❑ 9.-Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
012. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
® 14. Over application >= 10°% & 10 lbs.
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
®17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
❑ 19. Latelmissing lagoon level records
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
Regulatory Referrals
I Referred to DWQ Date: 2/26/2004
] Referred to NCDA Date:
] Other... Date:
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
MADE BY OPERATION
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
S.
I ht;HNILAL A: b151 ANUt Neeaea
Proyiaed
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
30. 2H.0200 re -certification
❑
❑
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (POA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
0
ER
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
36. Sludge removaliclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
43. irrigation system design/installation
❑
❑
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
49. drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsolling, aeration, etc.
❑
❑
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
to
z
58. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil andlor waste sampling education
❑
❑
Facility Number 25 - 39 Date: 2126104
COMMENTS:
fig 03/10/03

Need to address trash in lagoon and dispose of properly. (after birth and four baby pigs)
Flash board risers have been installed in ditch between lagoon and spray field.
Receiving crop small grain overseed in good condition.
2.4x4 post frame has been constructed around recycle pump in lagoon and posts that support discharge pipes in lagoon
ave been replaced. Old supports have been pulled up. Mr. Tyndall was not aware that he should contact structural
pecialistlengineer or seek assistance from local district before these additions were made. Suggested he should contact
)cal district concerning this work.
Did solid system has been replaced. Design by Crockett Irrigation.
New waste analysis taken on 2/25/04. Waiting for results.
Naste analysis dated 112104 nitrogen is 1.3 Ibs
10/29/03 nitrogen is 1.2 Ibs
8/29103 nitrogen is 0.99 Ibs
Soil test dated 1219/03 Cu, Zn and ph within guidelines.
7. Small grain overseed planted Oct 2003 in solid set spray fields. There have been several irrigation events but none hav
een recorded on IRR2. (spray field Al and A2) OIC has responsibility on monitoring and recording all irrigation events.
Crop window for coastal Bermuda hay is March - Sept. There were several irrigation events outside coastal bermuda
iindow. Waste that was applied during Oct 2003 needs to be deducted front small grain overseed PAN balance. Be sure ti
se the most current waste analysis.
. and 14. Over application tract 5327 field D 4 small grain overseed amount 10.40 lbs nitrogen per acre, tract 5327 field D
mall grain overseed amount 20.73 Ibs and tract 5327 field D fi small grain overseed amount 14.47 Ibs. Notice of referral to
and 57. Reviewed waste plan including crop windows.
]oon level recorded weekly with drops in lagoon consistent with irrigation events.
rA
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST IMartin McLawhorn
RKW:)►AOIZ44
Date Entered: 27104 Entered By: Imartin McLawhorn
70 03/10/03

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr_, Secretary
Departrnent of Environmerd and Natural Resources
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director
Division of Water Quality
Ta: Producer
From: Daphne B. Cullom
5pcA
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subiect: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2002
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility
bythe Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this Inspection and keep it with all other
documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the faun has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP); (2) the
farm is complying with requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2110217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal Waste
Management PIan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified
Operator, (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion; and/or nmof£
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and the
General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented
-
q) The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum, maximum waste
level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to contain 25 year, 24 hour storm
event plus an additional foot of structural freeboard.
(fi An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and at least
within 60 days (before or after) ofthe date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters: Nitrogen,
Phosphornhs, Zinc and Copper.
q) Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis.
(p The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, wastelsoil analysis and land irrigation records:
These records should be maintained by the facility ownerhnanagex in chronological and legible form for a minimum of three years.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. in no rase shall land_awlication rates exceed the Plant Available
Nitr en rate for the receivig crop or result in runoff during an 'ven applicatiom
(p All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate capacity to prevent pondmg or flooding damages. The outlet can be
another vegetated chazmel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
(p It is smgg- , not a requireme to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan. You will
need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
For your information, any swine facility that has a discharge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-6481, ext.
321 or your Technical Specialist
Cc: WaRO
1�G'Files
943 Washuhgton Square Mad Washington, NC 27889 252-9466481 (Telephone) 252-945-9215 (Fax)

Facility Number Irate of Visit: 91111211Q2 Time: 10:25 am
p Not Operationalp Below Threshold
Permitted p Certified p Conditionally Certified p Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: Allum Springs Farms, L.L.C. County: Craxext............................................... .WARO.......
Owner Name: Robert Tyndall Phone No: [phone]
Mailing Address: 555.StreeL.FWds.Road..................... ............... ........."""................ ., Nesr.Bern...XC...... .......................... .............. ......... 28562 ............
FacilityContact: ............... ............... ................................................. Title: ....... ............................. ................... ....... Phone No:............................
Onsite Representative: Robert.Tya.daI1.......................... ............................................... Integrator: Mnrphy.FamUy.Farms......... -...... -.....................
Certified Operator: RoUrt.F..T,yndall........... BO01C.-Mettra.TWall............. Operator Certification Number. 19.7.7.1.1.19.7.70...........
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NU Highway 55 in Craven Counly. Farm entrance is located on the noRfi side of NC Highway 55 r
approximately 1.5 mile east of Lanes Chapel.
® Swine p Poultry p Cattle p Morse Latitude ©0 ®° ©cc Longitude ©• ©9 ©u
ne: ? .' Capacity
13 Wean to Feeder
p Feeaer toMET—
is Farrow to Wean
p Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
p Boars
fl7esign :Current :" ' s; =5~. �Design� "-Current :
:• := e
CapacityPopgtatian; Capacity .Populati
Cattle --'-
On:
Other -
"' TbtalDesi :Ea aci 2,440
:Total' SSLN 1,039,200
Discharzes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 13 Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 13 Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
p Yes p No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? 13 Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? 0 Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway p Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ................42............. .-.

ac um er: 25_39
Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? (If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stactures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? [3 Excessive Ponding p PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda Small Grain
0 Yes 10 No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®Na
p Yes ®No
p Yes p No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? p Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? p Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W-UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis &-soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes No
p Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
0 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
p Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
In No violations or deficiencies were noted uring this visit You will receive no ru her correspondence about is visit.
.._.,Ea Iiii'— '-YES answers an gf~aii'-'ref ni>iiiii endatioiiis`or an 'nttier4comdied#s r+:: ; '{'� W :
t;omments (re er_to. nes#xon #}, _F R�r° y°
E
till' 1 a a �nec
Ia tti #' ifi
=a�f-fa "�to�bett a d I es
t3'-
�'° r
e - a •
r ex °si tins, u egad an s. es a
Used aving5 , _- p. p� [ 8. P ?Y�. Field Co Final Notes . w
Fes. z t
'CV,..... ' a
-:...r..a -2.. .,.. � J.
4. Freeboard level at great level for this time of the year.
7. Lagoon mowed since previous Operation Review on 4/2002 and a lot of trash removed; continue efforts to
remove trash material remaining on east portion of lagoon.
Waste analysis 8/2/02 - 1.0 lbs/1000 gals.
Soil analysis 4/23/02.
Irrigation records complete with date and times of irrigation events; planning to put all information on the computer
w- ---if g __. — _-_--e-. -_ ,_ - -- _._ -- --�_ _ - __ y Ito
com lete-nitro en-balance.for.2(]02-Loastal_I3ermuda._---------..- Et-YAGE.3
�
ector ame :: ,r,..... ..,.. ,.....,...
viewer/In N uilom .......,... Ann..
p Daphne.B..0 :,entered.hyndall.,.�„ _---
Fs
Rviewer/Inspector Signaturek14.2 Date:

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: 2539 Date of Inspection ® ~
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [3 Yes p No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? p Yes ® No
28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, p Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? p Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) p Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? p Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? p Yes p No
ax freeboard levels/records to-DWQ-WARO.- (257--945-9215)
Place copy of new Certificate of Coverage in file.
Will revisit facility to review irrigation records once they are completed on the computer.
5. Mr. Tyndalll is planning to level all fields this fall an&plant cover crop to improve field conditions.
Freeboard levels faxed to WARD on 9/11/2002
DCulIom

-
ivisiaa of Sciil and Wat3er..Canservativa� �"
-
_ - x....::: -_ .. _.........w
�- •-._-....�:.:...:.�: �-:
... _ , _
�: _ -� r .. , _
� .... � �..x - .�==i- -_
- Mgt • _
Type of Visit
CCommplianee Inspection
Q operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit
L1� Rout'me Q Complaint Q Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q other
❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of visit: ��Time_ 10 : _�G
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted ©Certified. U Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Count►•: CE2jV@.AA_- [�
Owner Name: Phone No: ':ps'�
Mailing Address:�—
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: � ,
CertiUmd, Operator:��g A' y
Lora o arm: -be% rr__
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator 1A FE
Operator Certification Number:
1 Cj -z 7 0
al wine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 00 lam• " Longitude a 0
Design. Current
Swine Canacih, Pnnulatine
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ eederto Finish
Farrow to Wean
7—Q
30
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Qesign = Current
Pursitrr C aciri Po ulation Cattle capacity: Pa ulation
]] D
airvLayerairy
[,] Non -Layer] Ilion -Dairy
[] other
`:Total.Design Capacity,'
_ Total SSLW -
Numberpf I:agw s - ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 S tar Field Area
,Holding Ponds I: Solid Traps - = r ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Sr stem
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State.? (If yes, notify, DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2, Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Was Collecti2n & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Structure 5
❑ Yes BKO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 2"No
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): y Z 1
09103101 Continued

Facility Number: 5
Date of Inspection4�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6_ Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvcment?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanceAmprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type l t[�.JL t_3QA,"W Ct-6— 1 _') OA 6, V V (- -Lvr+ti
❑ Yes & No
❑ Yes ��0
❑ Yes RN.
❑ Yes' 2<o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes EZNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crap need improvement? ❑ Yes E� NNoo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? El Yes bQ No
Re uired Records &• Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Am al Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oc/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) J 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel itrigatio freeboard, w te� naIysis &soil sample erports) I�Vo
20. Is facilitynor in compliance with any applicable setback ' ' to effect at the time of design? Yes
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes Z"No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes EfNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes [JNo
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cambteiitts.[refer.to.question #i): Explain i any-- YES arersaudlor:suy;recammends►tians or.:any other,.taom�nents. _.:
_
Use drawings of fatuity: to better explain sitnatioiis: [use xddidifis a[ pages as ecessary):= ❑ W_..r . pv ri El Final Notes
_ w-
- - _
LM
r't on ce.00J6 Go iQX_ vJ � ;< o
7
Reviewer/Inspector NameZ�a -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: CT — I l --,
05103101 V Continued

Facility Itiumber. — coo A
Date of Inspection
Odor ssue
25. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
2T Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
2& is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken Fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged Till pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �o
ElYes No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes V
❑ Yes RN,
El Yes El No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
v rL a� sz o C'OIA,,Tu�4JL
IQJ4 -OL��� c C�
�r[e bo Px 5 Y Gc o f 5` 0
f
ytvi
I
i 4 T-" i e w I tr ,r
CO
-4M Lei
J101 co
-'FV'"OO-A-Q UWd Z' k
05103101

'ype of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit @ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 25 39 Dare of Visit: �pQ2 Time. 12D0
No# 0 erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted © CertMed ® Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: Alllr M.Splri]0.p.EArm L. X................................................................. County: Cxxm .............................................. W.9BQ...
....
OwnerName: Flobed... ..... ................... ...... Tynr&u........ ............................ ............ ..... Phone No:(ZSZ.].5J&-2472............................ ........... _..............
Mailing Address: SSS.S2c t.E]t�l�da. uacl.................................................................... LN-cw.Jkrn--NC.................... .................................. 28562.---...----..
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Aabky.. dm----•--------------------------------------------------_.......... ...------ Integrator: Murphy.F.amil,►.F.armist.....................................
Certified Operator:.PaW.C..._ ............................... B................................................. Operator Certification Number: .16320.............................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NC Highway 55 in Craven County. Farmm entrance is located on the north side of NC Highway 55 A�
approximately 1.5 mile east of Lanes Chapel
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude 77 • 23 � 37 u
- . -..
Design Current :Design Current Design Current.
Swine
Capacity
Population
PowtrE Capacity Population _ Cattle . ICapacky Population:
❑ Layer JE1 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Dther
Total Design Capacity . 21)
-.
- . Total SSLW 1,039,2a(l
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
2410
2300
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
El Boars
------- ..
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lawn Area Spray Frekl Area
Holding Ponds f Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im€►acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge Originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water ❑f tlic State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon 4zystem? (If yes, notify I)WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®Na
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than finm a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structurc I Structure 2 Stnicturc 3 Sinieture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard [holies}:...............22............... --------------------------

05103101 Continued
Facility Number. 25-39 Date of Inspection 41]8I2002
5. Are there anv immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (icl trees. severe erosion, ❑ Yes N No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®Na
(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 strautures need maintenancelirnprovement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenanodimprovement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
®No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanceJimprovement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Cwerseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ `des
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop nced improvement?
N Yes
❑ No
lb- Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(icl WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yeas
N No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
Yes
®No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this vista.
f'omments'fr�fer:tu nuestroo #i1=`'EYotaia anv YES'ans►rers`andlvr.anv-reoammendgtiuns'or_anr:vtheir;cvmtncnts:-��'=:._=.�,°.:::;.=.--"�'
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
**NcW to lower lagoon as weather permits and by following guidance from waste plan.
15. Hydrant DI has low area in pull lane - needs to be filled and reseed.
D6 has low area in pull lane - need to be filled and seeded.
B 1 has low area in pull lane - needs to be filled and seeded.
15. l lydrant Ai and A2 solid set spray field coastal bermuda has very poor stand and needs weed control.
*Soil test dated 6/08/01 no time required Cu and Tn within guidelines. Soil test taken in Nov. 2001 for 2002 no results.
*Facility plans to add acreage to be placed under solid set irrigation. Be sure to consult tech. spec.
Reviewerllnspectvr Name Martih: cLawhorn -- _ r. .. -.-- 'T - _=- _- -T -
.. ' .
Fa��iosvarlrna�....-*nt Cinnafnr+n• ilala-

05103101 Continued
Facility Number. Date of lnspection 4/18/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe Gam the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during Land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads. building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. 1]o the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
©r. _ �.�....._.,.__
n nmmenta: ra�vm s•:::_=:�:._ - - .-..:...�:.� ��y�:�.;�, �; •-:�-.Y-. � :.;�. �,� ...a.._..... -_.-. �,. _:.........�...� .........,.. .
*Waste analysis dated 3/15/02 nitrogen is 1 A lbs11000 gallons �
112102 nitrogen is Q.96 lbs11000 gallons
9/10/01 nitrogen is 1.1 1bs1i000 gallons
*records are complete and balanced.
*Need to mow lagoon to allow for routine and visual inspection.
7. Need to remove trash from lagoon.
*High lagoon freeboard level due to change in ownership and wash down of houses during winter months. Approx. I I" fresh waster
laced in lagoon from wash down and rainfall in past 4 weeks.
r
T

OF ATE
moo? P�
� y
a �
To: Producer
From: Daphne S. Cullom
Environmental Specialist
Washington Regional Office
Subject: Animal Compliance Inspection
Year 2001
PAchael F. Easley
Govemor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
Department ci Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens
Division of Water Quality
Enclosed please find a copy of the Compliance Site Inspection (as viewed in the DWQ database) conducted at the referenced
facility by the Division of Water Quality from the Washington Regional Office. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, these inspections included verifying that: (1) the farm has a Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP);
(2) the farm is complying with requir=rnts of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, and the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan; (3) the farm operation's waste management system is being operated properly under the direction of a
Certified Operator; (4) the required records are being kept; and (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or runoff -
As a reminder, please note the following comments, which are conditions of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan and
the General Permit; therefore, these items must be implemented:
q) The maximum waste level in lagoons/storage ponds shall not exceed that specified in the CAWMP. At a minimum,
maximum waste level for waste for lagoons/storage ponds must not exceed the level that provides adequate storage to
contain 25 year, 24 hour storm event phis an additional foot of structural freeboard
of An analysis of the liquid animal waste from the lagoon shall be conducted as close to the time of application as practical and
at least within 60 days (before or after) of the date of application. This analysis shall include the following parameters:
Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Zinc and Copper.
cp Soil analysis is required annually. Lime is to be applied to each receiving crop as recommended by the soil analysis_
cp The following records are required: off -site solids removal, maintenance, repair, waste/soil analysis and land irrigation
records. These records should be maintained by the facility owner/manager in chronological and legible form for a
minimum ofthree years.
q) Land application rates shall be in accordance with the CAWMP. In no case shall land application rates exceed the Plant
Available Nitrogen (PAN) rate for the receiving crop or result in nmoff during anv Riven application.
(p All grassed waterways shall have a stable outlet with adequate rapacity to prevent ponding or flooding damages. The outlet
can be another vegetated channel, an earth ditch, stabilization structure, or other suitable outlets.
rp It is suggested, not a reouireni to keep crop yield information for future use to update your waste management plan.
You will need three years of crop yield data before your plan can be updated
For your information, any swine facility that has a disdiarge to surface waters of the State will have to apply for a National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit with the Division of Water Quality, effective January 1, 2001.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any questions, please contact me at 252-946-
6481, east. 321 or your Technical Specialist.
Cc: WaRO
..E)9'C Files
943 Washington Square Mall Washington, NC 27889 252-946-6481 (Telephone) 252-946-9215 (Fax)

It
Type of Visit DQ Compliance Inspection d Dperation Review Q Lagoon Evaluatton
Reason for Visit O Routine 0 Complaint ❑ Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 6T2001 9:50am Tune: Painted on: 7l2l 001
Facility- Number Z5 39
l - �..,....�.� Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted G Certified ® Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: FLU1.ChPj=.5»:Wc arp.._..................... County:
Owner Name: P.aui-GA !.&.Reb=&.._. Me= ............................ ................. ........... Phone No: (2=.53J 5940.,atotd.(252).521.:=..............
Mailing Address: P...�. �Q�........................................ ............... ... 28563....---------
FacilityContact: ........................... .. ................... ........... .................. Title: .... ............................. ............................ Phone No:.................................................
Onsite Representative: AsWey..81ealA .. airy. ................................................ Integrator: aMat'm&.....................................
Certified Operator: Petal ........................................ BkeaJ—......._..................................... Operator Certification Number: 16.32,Q ............................
Location of Farm:
arm is located off NC Highway 55 in Craven County. Farm entrance is located on the north side of NC Highway 55 +
approximately 1.5 mile east of Lanes Chapel T
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 57 µ Longitude 77 • 0�
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, ►ray the conveyance roan -made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is obscaved, did it reach Water of the State? (Ifye5. notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flora' in gal/min?
d. Does discharge by'pa;s a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
►��
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 9 No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.- Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Strucnire I Structure 2 5tnicture 3 Sinicture 4 Structiue 5 Stnicture 6-
Ideut iiicr:................................................................. .......
Freeboard (inches):...............16...............

05103101 Lvii4NlM Gu
'Facility Number: 25-39 Date of Inspection 6-6-2001 Printed on.• 7=001
+ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes ®Na
seepage, etc.)
6, Are theme structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancehinprovement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pondmg ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
{iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.}
Yes
No
19. Does record keeping heed improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/mspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency 9
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ® No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit» You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
-.e.-..,....-„- ..:a ,.. .._.. F ..5 d k m.. a—...-6a: ... . _..___:..:...: _ ,.:..::...:...a: d.., r ., :'7Y.d:�1-- � C:S:a".: .,,-s..... .....a-..�...="�5 �.. .: •is :"' ,-
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
aste analysis 5/14/2001, 0.53 lbs./1000 gals.; need to get copy of March sample analysis for CAWW.
►il analysis 3/6/01 - No lime needed
rigation records complete with a nitrogen balance.
;R-2 records recalculated using 0.73 lbs./1000 gals, analysis on samll grain.
-ccboard levels maintained per General Permit.
z
�.
Reviewerlins actor Name ne B.C�liom:�....._�::�..:......_..._._...----._._.:......_.:..._........r........
......... .
Reviewer/Insmtor Signature: l n a� Date: `% e)

05103101 Continued
Facility Number: Date of inspection 6-6-2U01 Printed on: 7/2/2001
i
Odor lssueg
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentltemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No

0 Division of Soil and Water. Conseroation - Operation Review
w; nservation'.-Compliance• rispectiori¢ _ r
0 DiYiisiion of Soil acid Water: Co
_ r
s
�. . • n of W ter .Qllal tV1Sl0 a ityW'•-Compliance eCtion' Iitsp _
Agency r
• _Other A c - O eraaon Revtew
JQFRoutine Q Complain��ollow-up of DWQ inspection a Follow-up of DSWC_review ❑ Other _
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection pp 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[Permitted [y"Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered [j Not D erational Date Last Operated: p ..........................
Farm Name: ..... . `.lr',1` .... .. U.t.CA'T' 17,.3a.a+S� .... ......... County:.... [g Ut ln/ ...............
Owner Name:?Phone No: Q `E �J 'mil` t iCR5-P-63
.! 3.. � ...............................
P.-G...
Facility Contact; ...........................................................................Title:......................................... Phone No:
.......................
Mailing Address:-......-............................................... ........... ....-.. ......5 ....� ..
�..o......13ox.... ..-.
Onsite Representative:. �lN? I ..�j ... W l................... Integrator:...... �............-...........................................
Certified Operator:,...0 QU�... ............. !. .............................. Operator Certification Number:.... L.6.3?�.........
Location of Farm:
Latitude ' 4 •4 Longitude 0 4 0
Design :•. - ° - gn Current. �- ._ Design-.. Current - Design CurTeiit
Swine; opulaon PotltO Capeiy-Cattle
. Capacity Population .: :
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Fe der to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
[RTarrow to Wean
❑ `'
❑ Other Farrow to Feeder - _
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts,..
❑ Boars Total SSLW -
Numberof Lagoons-, 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area I0 Spray Field Area
}-
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1E1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Its
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance: man-made?
b, If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify D1VQ)
c- If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'!
❑ Yes 63'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
d. Dees discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ONO
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 63"No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0Vo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier:
.0i. Freeboard (inches): ....... ....e2.�?.........
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes B No
seepage, etc.)
3/23199 Continued on back

Faciiity Number: — Date of Inspection
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenarice/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
Ll2La�!J
[. Mo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
JZ'No
❑ Yes
2No
❑ Yes
2No
❑ Yes
[a-lqo
❑ Yes
&M
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in We Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
lfi. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Rewords & Documents V
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W 1 checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Na •yioia(i[jnis or defidendiie •were noted• during this.visit. You wii-reeeij+e pia fu titer
'.�carres�on�ence.a�yuttlti5�isit.... -�-.-.- .. ...•...-.�.-.-.�.-.-.-.-.•.•...-.•.�.-.•.-.•. .
❑ Yes Q�No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes i41V ❑
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes 2No
❑ Yes 2'1�o
❑ Yes �To
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes Mo
❑ Yes V�o
❑ Yes [1iv
❑ Yes Gaqo
Comments (refer to gnestion #): •.Explain.any YES:answers and/or any recommendations or any"atlber eorinmeints £_ -
_ _ _
Pse,drawings oato better,exan'suatn: e:adiitbnl.papges as necessary).
tONO If—
re- c a +rrQS Ga
{ : {{�� b�000 akaQ Qo n s ti 5
rGcot' S r�r a- e V��
°mow` o�to� n t n n r n
Reviewer/Inspect r o Name� . � •; • . - �,,:- •_ - - - ; � ' �,� :+' ' �
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �Z(,Z_� t
3/23/99

Facility Number: hate of Inspection Printed on: 119/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 0 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Ge o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes E2rNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable strutters, etc.) ❑ Yes Wio
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes VNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments and/or Drawings::
J
5100

of Visit O Compliance Inspection 6 Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Hate of Visit: 2I15120f11 Time: 1 t:3U Printed on: 6/5/2001
25 39
Q Not U erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ©Certified ® Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................
FarmName: ......................._.................. .......................... Count►-: C.rI.V.M ....................................... ...... W A.......
Owner Name: P.aJul.Gaxy..&.Rebwca..... B.leAul................ ...................•--••----......---...--- Phone No:(252).6,33-59.40.And.(252).522-59;52..............
MailingAddress: P-0..Rox.32...... .................................................................................... Ncw.Buena..NC.................................... ............... 2.85.63.............
Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:
Onsite Representative: Ashky-Blum .......................
Phone No:
Integrator: Mux.Ally.-Famjb,..Farms ............................
Certified Operator: Pawl.................. ....................... Ulefull................................................. Operator Certification Number, ,1f ZQ.............................
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NC Highway 55 in Craven Count►. Farm entrance is located on the north side of NC Highway 55
approximately 1.5 mile east of Lanes Chapel.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 19 4 57 u Longitude 77 • 23 4 37 u
.: Des' Current . Desi Current : Desi n Current . '.
Sikine,:. - .:- :.;•..:; Ciii aeity: Po elation :
: Pou1t ry:° ::�:• :. 'Capacity
Population Cattle -:. ::,
Ca.-arity -Po elation .
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
JE1 Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
® Farrow to Wean
2400
2389
❑ Farrow• to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
. .........-
Total Design Capacity .
2,400
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
1,039,200
❑ Soars
Number bf Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area Spray Field Area
Holdin Ponds�l Solid Tra s : No Li uid Waste Management S 'stem
t;.... p.- -- ❑ q7
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
El Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ElLagoon [3Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obsen•ed, was the conveyance wan -made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is ohsetvetl, die{ it reach Water of tire'State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c, if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal(ruiu?
d, Does disciim'ge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes. uotiry DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any parto£the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than tirom a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Struchue 2 Structury 3 5tnicturc 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
Structure f
freeboard (inches) : ...... ......... 28............ -.. ........... ... ......... -

05103101
Continued
Facility Number: 25-39 Bate of inspection 2f151Z[101 Printed on: 6/5i2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
❑Yes
®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑Yes
®Na
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation paces an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenanc:elimprovement?
❑ Yes
N No
9, Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste A lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding []PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).1
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Recordg & _Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
I&
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie1 Wi1P, checklists_ design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes N No
© No violations or defciencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit-
or:
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
* Discussed fRR2/waste analysis scheduling.
* Diesel fuel noted on dike wall and path. Contaminated soil needs to be removed, placed on farm path, layered in and seeded.
* Lagoon levels being recorded weekly as required by Permit.
* Soil test dated 2112/00. Lime not required. Remember to takc soil test for 2001.
* Waste analysis dated 1/24/01, Nitrogen was 0.73 1bs11000 gallons.
* Need to follow crop window for smallgrain oversecd in winter months. Do not irrigate in months December - Januarv.
* Need to rebalance: IRR2 for smallgraiu using analysis of 0.73 1bsl1000 gallons.
....... , .
RevrewerMspectorhame :-,
Reviewerfinstrector Sienature: Date:

Facilit►• Number 25 39 Date of Visit: 7-11-2MiU Time: 82l?
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted 0 Certified ® Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: fln1.C-hWm.5.wJne.CorP............................ .......... Count: Cmmca .............................................. WAB-Q.......
Owner Name: P.autl.G.ary.A.Rebm ...... Aea1t........................................................... Phone No:(251).6.33.59,40.,And.(252).521-:"..52...-
FacilityContact:-....................................••-----•--•----••----••----••----.._..... Title: ......... ....................................................... Phone No: ....................... ..... .-.............. -......
MailingAddress:>a.Q.Box.d.2.............. --......... ..................................--....--....--....--............ N.ew.Kean--NC..................... ................. ....... 225.63 .............
Onsite Representative:Gary.Aleau........ ......... --..---............. ............. -........... -................... Integrator: Murphy:-FwL ly..Larms..................
Certified Operator: PaW..G........... ......................... BleaAt................................................. Operator Certification Number: .16320 ...................... -......
Location of Farm:
Farm is located off NC Highway 55 in Craven County. Farm entrance is located on the north side of NC Highway 55
approximately 1.5 mile east of Lanes Chapel
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 35-1 Longitude 77 • 23F 37 Ti
Design Curreiit. Design Current Design Current. -
Swine. Poultry:Poulatian "Cattleo ..........Ca acPo ulation --Ca eaion..
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
® Farrow to Wean
2400
2395
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Roars
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ other
Total Design Capacity - 2,400
Total SSLW 1,039,200
Naitieii.of.Iagovna ;:::..;'.' 1 ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag a�n �rrea ❑ Spray Field Area
- 00 ...- .: .
HvldingrPondsI Solid Trap ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Sys#em w
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. li• discharge is observed. -vt'as the c mvevance man-ivade?
b. If discharge is observc& did it reach Water of the State? (It -Fes, iiotifi- DWQ)
c. If discharge is obsc.rvcd, n hat is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypasti a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes [3 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Sinrcture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure G
Identifier,. ..... ----.per......... ....................
Freeboard (inches): ...............3i].........................................

5100
Continued on back
Facility' Number: 25-34 Date of Inspection 7-11-2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
❑yes
®No
seepage. etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovemeuo.
❑ Yes
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, ganged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application`? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records dig Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WIT, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
to No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback- criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(icl discharge, freeboard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23, Did Reyiewerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
No Violations ur:defi66666 were'noted'duiring t'his'visit.: You we ill:r&ei�'no further: ' -
corres andence about this visit.. ,
* Lagoon lovels up to 18 inches at end of January and February but Mr. 131cau relayed he had reported problem to DWQ. Lagoon's stop
pump elevation is 47 inches from top of marker
* Back-up operators are Rebecca B. Blean, #19889, and Paul A. Bleau. #16319
* Last waste analysis dated 2-14-00 at 0.89 lbs/1000 gal. Previous report dated 11-22-99 at 0.50 lbs/l000 gal.
* Last soils report dated 2-12-00 with 0.6-0.8 T/acre lime needed - planning to lime this fall
* Operation utilizes both a solid set and traveling gun system
* Waste plan dated 5-1-96 with a PAN deficit of 845 lbs.
* Oats (overseed) cut on 4-20-00 - unable to out earlier due to wet conditions �
Reviewer/Inspector Name - _ - _- _.-- .- -.. _- .. __ ...

Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r _ Date: 5100
Facility Number: 25-39 Date of In%pection 7-11-2tlOt]
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters_ etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
IRP2 are complete and balanced. Double check all acreages to match waste plan (total of pulls or solid set zones should match plan)
5. Coastal Bermuda continues to improve - continue efforts to manage weeds. Contact Cooperative Extension or NCDA Agronomist
)r grass management assistance_

i n Revi Division of Soil and Water. Consei nation � =' Uperativ ew
[� Division of Soil -and Water Conservation = Coin- Ii nee Lispectiori . = -
b . - _.
-_
. • G 'r' ®Division of Water birality - Cninpliaacc Inspection µ l x
_ El Other. Agency -. U eration
10 Routine 0 Complaint ❑ Follow-up of DWR inspection Q Follow -tip of DSWC review Q Other
• Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 13 Not U erational Date Last Operated p ..........................
FarmName �e................... County:................................................................................
Owner Name: -,... , ,'.....i
Uc •, j• 4�1�t"A- g "-4L Phone No: ... 15 �.
t
........................................................................ .> ..-..�? -. �`r ........... .... ..... ......
25� 43-:3— 544�
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No: .2. `-.uG.1. # ... �..�atl)
Mailing Address: ....... .................................... .. ..... .. ! ... r' .....................►..` e.......
Unsite Representative: ... ......45............................................................ Intel;r:itnr:...... Ml..�r...i'................... ................. .....................
Certified Operator:....Lk.:Uri.............:............ F.. ............. ..................... Operator Certification Numhrr:....... �...,�. 2...........
Location of Farm:
.................... .............. ................... .. ....................................................................... ,
Latitude 0 Longitude �• �4 "
Design Current
Swine...- Cauacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
ED Farrow to Wean
17
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
R lYnmher.of.Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
oldtng:Ponds 1 Solid Traps H'. _ ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System ;
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min''
❑ Yes © No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
rn l F.-
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ...... P....:.4. ............
® Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? tie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, e(c.)
3123/99
❑ Yes RNo
Continued on back

c
Py
Facility Number: � � � l I)atV of, I nspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions a-G was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application; Excessive Ponding [:]PAN
12. Crop type
_ Toa
❑ Yes
9No
w'es
(Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
[rj-No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with tho�. eVdesignated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a] Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c] This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
I S. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigatie�fi-jreeMMrd, waste an' alysis & soil sarkV Kereports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
viQlatidris:or deticiejncies -mere h fed• diWing (h.s.v. sit. • You 'W1114-e" *'6 fjo fui-thelr •
Jcarres� oridenke. abai u' f this visit.. - . .
❑ Yes [FNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Ej No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ij No
❑ Yes B No
❑ Yes [B:No
aYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to queA' n.#1]: Explain any..YES aiaswers and/or any mcommendations"or any;o#her tom
_- -
Use drawings of facility to better ex la (use additionalpages as necessary A.
A6
�ty�l
l Z I e I V A S — .2-10 6I sh r9 rr [
nlprkt95 15 7-0.(ej -1 1oIm0 �r�. 16 -Z laar-
},- 1► .
67 , 5 LO , �L 6a4,pt c ..Q C-r- -1- -7- Q a
Reviewer/Inspector Name ..: .,' _` • .;^
,
t�. �� }
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: j Date: ;;I- -
3/23199

-51
Facility Number: — Date of IIIspccti0n 2—I 1- 0
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid levei of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, ctc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins Fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes [:]No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
AdditionalComments a ommenu v or. raings:
41 . ❑ L�, GtG re P-vti rye- W
2-
p�IJ.
114,
• �� �� r i � •ram --�� �•�' �
a.a
C C
LV.J
9 . 1" --CLA
_
U� ,, 1' -4-- G • v 3123/99
an^ -A,/)- 4+�-u ' 6LY-6 , -114 e- G 4 f �e.�f ► > .

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
.lames B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Wayne McDevitt, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
October 13, 1999
Mr. Paul G. Bleau
First Choice Swine Corp.
P. O. Box 32
New Bern, North Carolina 28563
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
First Choice Swine Corp.
Facility No. # 25-39
Craven County
Dear Mr. B1eau:
Enclosed please find a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection (as it is
viewed in DWQ database) conducted at the referenced facility by the Division of Water
Quality from the Washington Regional mice. Please read this inspection and keep it
with all other documents pertaining to your animal operation for future inspections.
In general, this inspection included verifying that: (1) the farm is complying with
requirements of the State Rules 15 NCAC 2H.0217, Senate Bill 1217, the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan and/or General Permit; (2) determine whether the waste
utilization plan is based on total or actual wetted acres; (3) the farm operation's waste
management system is being operated properly under the direction of a Certified Operator;
(4) the required records are being kept; (5) there are no signs of seepage, erosion, and/or
runoff.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation during the inspection. If you have any
questions, please contact me at 2521946r6481, ext. 318 or your Technical Specialist.
Sincerely,
Y�,�X e •-G�
Lyn B. Hardison
Environmental Specialist
Cc: Dr. Garth Boyd, Murphy Family Farm
Craven NRC S
WaRO
LBH files
943 Washington Square Mail, Washington, North Carolina 27889 Telephone [phone] FAX 252$46-9215
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation.- Operation Review 1
E3 Division'of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection I
® Division of Water Quality- - Compliance Inspection j
Other Agepc► - Operation Review' . i
IO Routine Q Complaint a Fuliu►►--up of DVN'Q inspectiean Q Follo►►-utt�f ❑SWC re.-iie►► Q Other
�Facilit� NumberM 25 39 i Date of Inspection 54-99
Time of inspection 900 24 hr. (hh:mrn)
Permitted Certified M Conditionaliv Certified Registered 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ...................... ................ Count•: Crxv.en..................... .......................... 3?!'AIIQ_.....
Owner Name: Pau1.QaxxA.ReIxara;..... BleAlL.......................... Phone No: f,25.21.6,33-S9.40.atid.f2Ua.522.:;59S1 _.....
Facilit►' Contact:.............................................................................. Title :............................................................... Plione No: ...................................................
Mailin- Address: P..Q..Box.32--------- ............................. ........................ - ...........................'.Beiu..!Vii..................... ............. .......... ......... . 285.63 ......
Onsite Representative: AT1. Ic 1R......................-....................................................-.... Integrator: �KE7Cpf11:.F.#7galll:��e[ExS......................................
Certified Operator: ...... ........ ..... ........ dealt... ............... ....... ................... -... Operator Certification Number: .15,32Q........ .....................
Location of Farm:
EFatamaslacat,�tl. .IXC. iiigll a .S .iut.Craven.Gataat�....Fa �eatraEace.is.du�atcduE�.ibenat7hhsidc.oL IC.High�a�:S{-----••.............
ap�xxtsinoEate .LS milt �as�t.nf .............. ........... ... ................... ................... .... ................................ ................ ........ ............ ............ �
Latitude. 35 ; ` ` 19 !• 1 57 Longitude 77 ! • ! 23 37
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poaltry
Capacity Po ulation Cattle
Ca acihPopulation
f ❑ Wean to Feeder
Laver
Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
JE1 Non -Laver
I
PO Non -Dairy
E
® Farrow to Wean
2400
2394
❑ Farrow to Feeder❑
_
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2400
1❑ Gills
Total SSLW
1,Q3912fl{}
❑ Bvars
Number of Lagoons 1 I❑ Subsurface Drains Present 1101,agoonArea JDSprayFieidArea
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischar!�e� & SIream Ininayi
I - Is anti- discharge obsened from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes X, No
!.}ice Liar L crri.-malcd ::t: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If di.char�-e i• obsen c:d- ► as tite con. a an::e man -oracle". L! Yes IR No
n. Jf'gi• lt:irtc i= oh e-n zd_ did it reaz i M titer of tlic SMC't L 1 ,- nntif" I)«'Q) ❑ Yes JR No
c. if di:.bart_,e ►hat is Ili,-, e,wnzi :d film ire real nrin:' n/a
d. Doe: d charge bvpa5s H 1;woou3 [it ►e:. 1100r ID1VQ) ❑ Yes IN No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there anv adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
%Vaete Collection & Treatment
4- is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) lcss than adequate? ❑ Spillway° ❑ Yes ® No
Sirucnire 1 Structure ' Structure 3 Structure 4 StrUCIVIe 5 54ructure 6
Identifiers ..............
Frecboar'd {inches); .... ......... 2-5*................ ................................... .-.... ...... ...................... .............. .......... .................... - ............. -.................................
7. Are there anv immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees_ severe erosion_, ❑ Yes No
seepage_ etc.)
;17;149 C.'onlinued an haek

Facility Number. 25-39 I?aie of lr;-lTwvflon.
6- Are there Aructures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do an), of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
XIL'a.�tc. ArTlication
I0. Are there any buffers that need maintenancehmprovement?
l I . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crap type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
5-4_99
❑ Yes
g No
❑ Yes
IR No
E] Yes
9 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facilih- is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & N) ,,,unients
17. Fail to leave Certificate of Coveraec & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readih, available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard. waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20- is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design"
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge_ freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
0-�No violationsor;defidencies were noted during this visit.- Yotiwill-receive nn further:
correspondence about this visit.
❑ Yes 9 No
1E] Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [K. No
iJ Yes ® No
[J Yes [j No
C Yes 0 No
Yes (KI No
❑ Yes ® No
iD Yes No
❑Yes ®No
Yes No
❑ Yes gj No
r] Yes Z No
Comments (refer to question #1): 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):
Records available for review, +
Irrigation_ lagoon level, waste and soil records found satisfacton-.
On vour IRR 2, it is suggested to calculate the wetted acres per nozzle and use this info to calculate the applied nitrogen given tht not all
nozzles are used durine one irrigation event. By keeping your records this way. the computation will be more accurate.
T - 5327. field 4 has been cleared and seeded (cleared 576 ` by 341' resulting in 450" by 268' = 2.77 wetted acs.)
It appears that the waste plan waswritten on wetted acres therefore a wetted acres determination is not required. The available info.
from Crocket indicates this- however it is suggested to obtain a Irrigation Design parameter worksheet illustrating the wetted acres of
each pull. Please fax this info. upon receipt at 252-946-9215.
V"
Reviewer/Inspector Name Lr n S. Hardison'
Reviewer/Insnector Signature: J Date:

3/23/99
lFacilit► Number: 25-39 Date of incpertinn F 5-1-99
Odor is%ues
26. Does the discbarge 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?
2T Are there an}' dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
2& 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 properly)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fau(s) noted? (i.e_ broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes: ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flash tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a penmanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No

:w �
Di�isiart.of.Stiil and Watier Conservation= Opet atitiir Review:. '
[;Division of Soil arid Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection _
EI'Division pf Water Quality- Compliance Inspection
_ C1 Other Agency'- Operation Review
14D Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection ❑ Follow -tip of DSWC review Q Other �
Facility Number 25 3 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection CJC3 Z4 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 13 Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: F� r5 ��+Oic ..fir! '. n ......,C• p.{ Q.... county:........�!a�l.k�:................................ �� � �
.......................... ...................
Owner Name: otx I t7.R-?t`� brer� �Zx? ........................ PhoneNo:.. � .`. .�� .��rr�`fp„: 2�2-52]. gam
..........................
FacilityContact: .... .......... -...... ...................... ................................ -Title:.— ..... —.—.... -... ................................... .... Phone No:
Mailing Address: .... 1.1..'?4°....... s�+s1�� 5...... !S`f-.??►rtr+r.....................................�......---..... ........ ��.?ti�
�1 ■ ;Z
Onsite Representative: ....... �"l.tax.,........... .!.................. .. Integrator: .....1.!tik!��•y �n'' .....r���,-.........
Certified Oper:ator:.....-,j>aU-.4....... (T .............. ........ 13A.ea,................................... Operator Certification Number: ......... f L.,A .U................
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 4 •' Longitude • ' °'
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
ED Farrow to Wean
Z 4t) 4
2 -:5�
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
... . ...... . ...... . .... ......... ................... .......... .... .. .
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
r•
LA
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding.Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Disr�har Les I& Stream imu:�cts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made:'
b. It'discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observcd. what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure l Structure 2
Identifier:
Freeboard (niches): ............5.
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
n /4-
❑ Yes
© No
❑ Yes
© No
❑ Yes
© No
❑ Yes
© No
Structure 6
l 1b199
k
Continued on back

Facility Number: -- 3 9 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
S. Does any pail of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancchinprove inent?
11. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
12. Crop type ........................... .................. :1 .-...............
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'?
Required Records _& Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Pcrmit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ie/ irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes © No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes B No
❑ Yes JgNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes E9 No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes BNo
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes ® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No
0• Nlo.vi aitions'or deficiencies .were'noted during s'visit. Yeti wrill.re�ceive na Mrther
eor:respocidence: about: this 'visit
.:.:...........:.:.....................
::
Comments (refer to question #}: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations.or any voter comments. • j, e,,
Used awings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
-53 �'7 - rfid - lets be,e- v c1,eAs-edt. 4 SeA� - G f ear-4-57b' x 34�1 r re��f�►f
f { In.�,_����.OJ+�X�}�.� � � = �• � � Cc1L��y�+1tiu/���lj'" I�..' -y-f , r t 1 I [% � , �l� l ■.�-]��"� L �•
At 1 W +/�yN - w-�'Y ayff ] �} 1 `�^ , e,_y %- M, 4 . W V T W ^w V• M f S
n /J y r 5 C4_Z aV t- VV
�JT/LJ' i
hro�-� I.Cs
U d[ Ve A. I.t,k �h s .�,� ect 4 cc �-�
pXA
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Yh [i , f�r�� �A•��
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: �_� -�9 11/6/99

Facility Number: rs — Date of Inspection
Auditivnal.CotirtrEtents andlor Drawings
* S J"
7/25/97

Facility Number slate of Inspection
'ime of Inspection ��� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit 0 Permitted In Not 0perationa Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: First.Chuicz.Swint.C,arp......... ............................................................... County: Craven WARD
Owner Name: Pau1.Gary..&.Rebccca.... Rican ................................
Facility Contact: ................................... ............................................ Title;
Mailing Address: 1144A.Highway.55.W..est............................................
Onsite Representative,. Gary..Blcau........................................................••--
............. Phone No: .............
.............. Phone No:....................................................
............ JOti►:cr..NC............................................................... 28526 ..............
....... Integrator: Mu rphy.Familly.Farms......................................
Certified Operator: Pant.G................................... Bleam ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 1020 ............ ................
Location of Farm:
arm.as. Q xxalr ut. raxext.. tzu�t ....arm. ratue.Is !?aqi. aua s e.:a may .. ................ 4.
pxgxiurnately;:L...;milx.... uiLanes;pChageL;:::::::..::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:
Latitude ©� ®� ©« Longitude ©• ©6 ©K
..,.., :..;v::. s� nn..:. u rren :: Y --es
ffi_
.: .
So.wine ;� �." _ -- :Po
ulatEun�w=Pauitry- : _ .::
Capactty;:;:Papuiatton : =:Cattle = `_. Ca city=Population:'.:: x
w. ;wCapacity
_ ... .
an to ee er
°: ';
p ayer
;
p airy
Fe er to misx
p on- ayer
p on- airy
row to can
_.-:
_ -
=�
p arrow to Feeder
er
s-- _ - -
-
m'
;o
arrow to Finis
:..._ -. -,..:. =
T[ faI=.D @S1gIl.� R�1aCltyw
,
W.
G
�._ .:_.._ _ .-......
- - -
.
61,039,200
ta1 SSLW
Boars
- -
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes ®No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes N No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require p Yes ® No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes N No
7/25/97

Facility um r: 25_39 Date or Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (La2oons,Holdine Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): 2.8
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
15. Crop type .....Coastai3emuda.Gr_ass......................... Pixie.Trees................... ................... ........................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q .. a'nohons•or ereneles_were -noted ring Is visit; - na will.receive no u er .:.
• : �a�`xespnAde�ie� a�vut= z�iis �yisi�:: • . • � ......:::: • .... • . • .:. • _ - :...:: • . • . • :::: • . • .
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
pYes ®No
p Yes ® No
N Yes p No
p Yes ®No
l7 Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewerllnspector Signature:(4-x�j ,2 L . Uk.JAb C"\ _ - _ Date: q _.-Lq —cos

Mr t ter an r Agency '" ' 0 Div' ion of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other g y
-i s a
It i�i i n of Water Quality
N
Q y
'G
.:, .. .... - ,e
Follow. -up of
Facility Number
© Registered B Certified 0 Applied for Permit Ea-fermitted
................
Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection1—`{
Time of Inspection
�24 hr. (hh:mm)
113 Not ❑ erational I
Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name:+C..�1�►+�t}.ti-!?y?�!---.. County:.... C:.e!t- ..............................
Owner Name: ....... ....... Phone lo:c��� ' �a..�.t •ti-J
Facility Contact: Title: 1� t mil_ Phone No:. ..................................................
- ii ,, ll--
Mailing Address: . T`f.Q..... u,� �� M.-a ............. ......... \/.]QVe t..-... ....... ......................
...... .. ..... .h.......................... ... 1.y�..! ... ....... ......y ...............
Onsite Representative: .� ...... Integrator:..- ::4"�!! t-- J—rA-+ti'LS
_.. ............................. fit.. n. .
CertiCed Operator;,...:, QLo ... �.....--:.................................................................... Operator Certification Number, ... Up..:�- 0.. .........
........
Location of Farm:
Latitude 13 ' k , °` Longitude • I f ° 3 -7
Niiimber;oi.Lagoons:tHolding Ponds I0 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
10 No Liquid Waste Management Sy stem E;
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaU nin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes
La o
❑ Yes
o
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑, No
❑ Yes
Is�'ivo
❑ Yes
0<0
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
91<10
❑ Yes
2<o
Continued on back

W
Faeility Number: S -•
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
StMetures goons,Folding Ponds. Flush fits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft): c..:.i.►.............................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes G17va
❑ Yes ❑-1110
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 63<o
❑ Yes ,,..,,__Ko 2 ❑ Yes 'No
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes ( Itiio
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes [►, KO
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop +-!!`s?—........................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWb P)? 2 es ❑Info
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
2<0
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
&No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E lv��o
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
LtJ'P+o
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
rZeKo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
GWo
F2r
Certifted or PermUted FacilitiesOnly
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ YesP�O
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
O
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
El Yes
,Ls��i'
2<0
0 No.vio'litioni-vr. defii ienc'ies'were,nvted-during this'. visit. - You.'will receive -no ftirthei- .-
correspindence about this: visit.- ..... .
'Com new . efer #a� €gn: :x -E 1 ::ari `t'E 'ausivers ari fl r atr ::ri ri latiiiiiiis:or
u...................... .......... y y ...
..... .. .. y ... .r.......t..o.......:.. ..e.d.
� n e A
Y
.. '11ie•�i i. y .. H ..H.... '.:.
o ....tpbet.:�py�Iatit:situativ�anse:addttiorial:
.. „_-.....iT :..:.... .. ,":'^'�• ..... _ .......... I�._:1 211': rrecessan.,��.) "FY:
AL
Jo - -7- 13 - R 8 ' �Lu.
�Cn L 0..S reC Q +fA-
1 Y
Nr�tc tAki-0, �C'='
L�
11 ---t bs i1 f !] . .11 . 1 _ . _ Y 1 _ J 1 _ _ lI - - _ n , �5)
Reviewer ns Pectvr am r=.: " -- -
.l
'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: AA Date: —qp)

10 Kouune 0 c..ompiaint Q ronaw-up or V W V mspecr.iun p rouow-up of u3w'k review p miner
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection ® 24 hr. (hh:mm)
a Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit N Permitted in Not 0pera Iona Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Furst.ChW=.S:w ne.CnEpp ............................................................... County: Craven WARO
OwnerName: Gary ....................................... RLean............................ ............................... Phone No: 252-=.595Z.farm..............................................
Facility Contact: Gam. Blean...................... •Title: a►.aeC...........................................•••.... Phone No: ................. ...................................
Mailing Address: 11.44.Q.Hw'.r.5S.W.est........................................................................... fllnverr...NC............................................................... 2852& .............
Onsite Representative: Gary..Bleau+.lkl keA2Mr1.................................................... Integrator: Murphy..F.amilx.Earms......................................
Certified Operator: Paul.G.................................... BleatL ................................................. Operator Certification Number: 16320 ............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude
13 Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to m is
® Farrow to Wean
13 Farrow to Feeder
Cl Farrow to Finish
p Gilts
p Boars
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gat/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
not applicable
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes ® No

r
ace14 Niamber: 25_39 Date of Inspection
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes
® No
Structures (LagoonsHoldinp Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes
® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: ............... U............... ...
Freeboard (8): 3.1 ft.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
p Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-I2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
p Yes
® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
p Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop hype ....... Coastal..Bermuda$ay......... Sm all.Gzaittt I<ii�fhe����a��t, Earl �r.......................................................................... ............................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the' AnWal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
p Yes
® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
p Yes
®No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
p Yes
ONO
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
p Yes
®No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
p Yes
®No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
p Yes
®No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
® Yes
p No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
p Yes
®No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
p Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
g No
R - oYons.orr'eeies'were-o a ring this visit. as will .receive noer - • .
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

p Division of Soil and Water Conservation p
0 Division of Water Quality
Routine p Com plaint p ❑ ow -up of DWQ inspection p Follow-up of review p Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number r��
Time of Inspection 124 hr. (hh:mm)
p Registered ■ Certified p Applied for Permit N Permitted 0 of Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Eirst.CbDiee-Swin&.Cnrp....................... .................................................. I County: Craven WARD
Owner Name: John.LY"ols-..... -- ......... -•---- &_Gary.Bleau......................................... Phone No: 219-9.4.CrS02.--•----...........................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title: . Phone No:
Mailing Address: ].144fk.Hater.55.W..est........................................................................... JDa►!er..B.0............................................ ................... 2 S2E..............
Onsite Representative: Gary..Bleau....................................................... .. .... Integrator: Murpy...F.alrft.Eairum.................
Certified Operator: P.aulG................................... Blew.................................................. Operator Certification Number: lei.32Q.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ©� ®� ©u Longitude ©■ ©©u
f_anarai
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field p Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? p Yes p No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) p Yes p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? p Yes N No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes ® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require E3 Yes H No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes N No
7/25/97

Facitity NamDer: 25_
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
p Yes ® No
Structures (Lagoons,HoldingPonds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier.................................... ....................................................
Freeboard (ft): 5
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
p Yes
® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
® Yes
p No
15. Crop type ......Coa"Bemuda-Grass............................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AV/MP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q . o:viu ions. or renencies'were.note ring is visit. - on will.rcceive no further . .
ei`xe8�11oAde�elr abut attiis visit::...... ....... • . • .. • ... • ... • ... • ..... • .
j Reviewer/Inspector Name
pYes ®No
p Yes N No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes N No
p Yes ® No
0 Yes ®No
p Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
p Yes p No
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Date: