310128_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental 06

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 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: � ArrivalTime: Departure Time:® County: U i j n Region: bJi 9a
Farm Name: T�n� Owner Email:
i�
Owner Name: T ; �', 1 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity np.
Wean to Finish
Desigu Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Cattle
DairyCow
Design Current
Capacity P.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Desirrent
D . P.ouIt . Ca ao
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
DairyHeifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Boars
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify 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 QXoT ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes [:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
[] NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[��O
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
1-7
Waste Collection !& Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 4a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E&Nu
❑ 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
E,a.M
❑ NA
[] NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[glFo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes
©moo
❑ 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? ❑ Yes 0--11*65 ❑ NA [] NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [J 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?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reouired Records & Documents
❑ Yes QNe [:DNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes t❑.N-o ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
UNo
[] NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑-Vo
❑ 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
[a*'I�.o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
Fg No
DNA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of -inspection: r]
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes []I -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes ED�Xr ❑ 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 g o 2ZA�[:]
NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes n No NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes [ -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes &k<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [EWo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [B o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [g-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
s of facility; to better explain situations (use�additional, pages as necessary)
J/' &CalC15 l k-�
SI �
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: qjn -1q6 737cf
Date: I a I t
21412015

Type of Visit: O�empliance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
[lesson for Visrt/Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: r'�j _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swlne
Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
C*urrent
Pop.
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
La er Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
jNon-Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
MEN,
Design C►urrent Dry Cow
r+ C_a aci l;o , Non -Dairy
Layers Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Othe
Other
Pullets
I Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
urkey 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 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 JZ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ff No
❑ Yes 7No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes ONoEyNo
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 3 i - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes_Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Strucfure 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 J2-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 allo
❑ 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 _12'!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) T//
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA [] NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �No ❑ 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 f!TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes E!fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
'L2'&o
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes ;2No
0 NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑Yes ;I,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 12rNo ❑ 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. D Yes E7`No ❑ NA . ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes J:3�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes &No [DNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

[Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Jallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. lathe facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes j2'No ❑ NA D NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes'p No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes P No [] NA [] NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes VINO ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments,(refer tomgnest onft Explain any YESmanswers and/or anyadditional recommendations or any other coi invents'".
Use drawings -of facility to better explain_ situations (use,additional pages'as necessary):
1l-rrt �-- I"'� dS lfa �o 0
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: w
Date: f
21412015

Type of Visit: _Q4fompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: _Q4outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: /� Q.J,.Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: �/�w9 ji(,/✓yl :I_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Bach -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Design C►nrrent
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity Pop.
Cattle
C►apacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
I) . i;oult,
C•a aci P„o ,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Qther
Turke Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes [�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes FTNj
❑ 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 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Conection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �J /
5. Are there any immediate threats totheintegrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ;Zf 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? 0
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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
L�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
/o 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
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Pr No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
JZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VO
;2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[:]Yes
P�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
P 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 C ❑ 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 ZTNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ��o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: J - / Date of Inspection: ([ 2d /V
24. ipid the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes gNo, ❑ 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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[:]Yes V�4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �`o
❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes
E]�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question # ): Explain any YES answers and/or any.additional recommendations ors any other comments:.:. .
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
;�Ll/Z
/• 7 V
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
' 19C tk AA C) CJ. ruk""Pir"3 w &I,
l 7 0"/' t-J c-s i-e_
lr S y
1, 5Z_
Phone: 9�(�,3 �3
Date:
614 If

Type of Visit: 'Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: /d Arrival Time: ' G eparture Time: County: Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: fiLre /Csw(e j--
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Layer
Dai Cow
Calf
Non -La er I
Feeder to Finish
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
D , loult .
La ers
Design
Ca aci
Current
P,o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
I
Turke s
Turkey Poults
10ther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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 0, No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes [2fNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection:4Z4
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes 7rN0
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Z_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes o/ 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 ZNo
❑ 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 C2,f4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes ;allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes 4E:rNo
❑ 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 /Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes -ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes L2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes �allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes �'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes [Ado
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] Yes L2-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 0 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [:]Yes KNo
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: o
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ETNo ❑ 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 )ZlVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
P"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
,I No
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes _lZfNo
❑ 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
ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
prlqo
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
�'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facilitv to better explain situations (use additional DaEes as necessarv).
5/,,zq 3 6 17
y
(0Z
;-a v 8
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
�ron � /e65r�s look5a,
Phone:
Date:
1412011

Fs�LtyNum�era
i -
1�--�
'DiA
f Water Qpalty
i
- - --.
Type of Visit PMompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Compla�int0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
—
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: R'� Agtparture Time: LCounty: c.t Region:w,(�
Farm Name: A c ryZ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ! f (Gir I[_ /�LI,�Ie� Integrator: rn /13
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = f = Longitude: 0 0 = 6 = 6f
Design Current: =- Design
Gnrrent „ Design Current
Swine
Capacity Population Wet Poultry :Capacity Pop;ulahaa Cattle Capacity Population
�.
_
❑ La er
El Dairy Cow
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ DairyHeifer
ter -
Dry, Poultry a
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
w
❑ Beef Brood Co
774
❑Other -
Number" of�Structures:a;
�.
❑Wean
to Finish
Wean to Feeder
El
Feeder #o Finish
Farrow to Wean
-�
El
Farrow to Feeder
[]
Farrow to Finish
[I
Gilts
Boars
❑ Layers
i
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a.. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes ;2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �i ]Vo
1
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes .Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.'Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes .` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Z'_
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �r No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) T
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes L2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes Z[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes PrNo ❑ NA 0 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 J2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PNo ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes �D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes FrNo ❑ NA 0 NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes -2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ,j 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 V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes WNo
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [—]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: :31- Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes ETNo
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes EffNo
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? jzryes ❑ No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? Yes E!J'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.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes VTNo NA NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? Yes , j No NA NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes gNo NA NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations. or anyy otther comments.
Use4rawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
ee Scab... 4 sa� Sot) �5� *[,3 Sea r
NA NE
�NA NE
NA NE
NA NE
[]Yes j'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo NA Ej NE
Yes �io NA ❑ NE
a� )eze, N
��a�o � -�o � �rhe -�r rr• • t���l �Z t. ra G
11
P6ZPef (J a si LC W t lc (wed- tie /, 5 I g
be sen �- 4-0 Ax ayl ce- 1,31
r7
Ce-fie • 6. �r ,8
50d��30// z Z. 3 s 17
A Y3 "s
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z
Page 3 of 3 4/20 1

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 7Structure Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
Date of Visit: MA66Arrival Time. /] Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: t�a%- O�V—oc/77S Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
0 Technical Assistance
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: L.[�
Latitude: = o = 4 Longitude: = ° = = u
Design Current
Swine C•apc'sty P, op�ulntion
Design Current Design
Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle . C*apacity
Current
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
�;� ,
❑ Layer
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
'`
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
10 Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Turkey Puults
El Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes P<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
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ;;3"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes E/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
'•'
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
W'es ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure l 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 _2 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 ;2T']Vo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes �?No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ERNo
❑ 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 2"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes Jallo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes i No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu,
Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ YesEj No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes ;Et No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes Ej�io
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes L?No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to. question #)i Explain any YES answers ai3dlor any recommendations or any other comments µ °
Use drawings of facility to better explainsituations. {use adds onal pages as necessary) r
/J ov/.� l�t�,n , rp��,�/e•✓s 46x.% to,
Alt
ew
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 Phone.-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: L- Date: r
_ 12/28101 Continued

-01
1VISlOn of WateC QUallty { p
FaC11it�Nurnber r�. Dl�sion of Soil and Water Conservation
.. __ -
0 Oche -,,-Agency..
x ,
Type of Visit Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit-(?rRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:
'lam Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: d' Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: 1 djl Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up, Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: = e = r Longitude: = ° = ' 0
Design Currentri
Swine
Capacity Populations Wet Poultry
"
❑
Wean to Finish
❑ I er
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
-Dry Poultry;
ElFarrow to Feeder
' "
-` ❑ Layers
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Gilts
Non-LayersEl
❑Boars
ElPullets
❑ Turkeys
-�❑Turke
Other ---
��
Poults
�[] Other
`, [] Other
_ Design Current
Capacity Population Cattle
�xg
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?
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Co
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El NA
El NE
El Yes
❑ Yes
,❑No
LI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: T ZZE Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes .Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes C'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Stru Lure 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 ,j 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 ZrNo ❑ 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 ONo . []NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ 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
ff No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
l 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 > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
;dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
Ef No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ff No
El NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to_question.#):',,Explain;any YESganswe",rs and/or any.recommendat�ons oany�othe�comment`s
Use drawings of facilityto better explain sttuattons. (use addthotial pages as necessary) .;
w
ReviewerlinspectorName
Phone: ?,�
ey;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: a. 3
Page 2 of 3 12128104t Continued

Facility Number:• — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 7No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ W[JP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes JZ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
R1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
['No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
P`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
'`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
P^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
PTNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional':Comments and/or Drawings:`,
�e, 5 use, �o G1 o 4fi is per,
G!�
10/1 q AC7 0, "
0_7 U
0,73
6. s-s
�y
U•q 2
Page 3 of 3 1 .1 U 16/L61 U4

Type of Visit 10compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: F—
Farm Name:
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Follow up 0 Referral / Emergency
Departure Time: County:
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
0 Technical Assistance
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: T / Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region>C W
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 e =' = « Longitude: ❑ ° = L ❑
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
Design
Capacity
Current
lopulation Wet Poultry
10 Layer I
Design
Capacity
or
Population
C*attle
Design Current
Capacity Population
I
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
JEJ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
Dry Poultry
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
ElNon-Dai
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
El Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
El Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
F.?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12128104
Continued

r�
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? 'PYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? XYes ❑ 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
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
JoNo
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
No ElNA ❑ 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
LeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
L9 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
UlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
p No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
'comments. (refer to:question #): Explain any YES.answers and/or..any recommendations or any other comments: C
Use drawings 4 facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary).:
:.vere
��� � I •
_,4
Reviewer/Inspector Name � Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: - Date:
I2128104 Continued

Type of Visit J2rdompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency �1Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: (Jv�yDeparture Time: County: / 1� Region: l�✓f
Farm Name: ` Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone
j,No:
Onsite Representative: i Integrator: t 1101 KJ�
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
0
Latitude:
Back-up Certification Number:
" Longitude: =0=6
«
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Wet Poultry
C►►opacity Population
C*attle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Finish
I
ID Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Non -Layer I
I
❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
El Dry Cow
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
[I Turkeys
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes EMo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
JONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility]Number: 3 1 — P a Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No Cl 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
12 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
ONo
❑ 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
J2 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ 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
L 1Ao
❑ 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?
If. 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)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ 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):
-Few Was i '� sQ I vl Cc� 9PYtSG -6 a YLI� i Pe b[aar` Ca 11 `
I VV c-F ) F ! r, c �vs i , [ oL�ao r p . Ia towel,
U mIT �C � C cba0 _ (�Ts^"'' tr1c3�0J . r
L_ Lve'vt s Ir c, C_ tUle
Reviewer/Inspector Name I &&&/ I Phone: — 7 --
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /C Z Date: / 6
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Type of Visit O-Eompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit .0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
�VIArrival Time: : O U Departure Time: County:
'cr, Wz .�
� Owner Email:
Facility Contact: agle
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone:
h. Region:
Phone No:
Integrator: _22a tA�
Operator Certification umber:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 c ❑ , = Longitude: ❑ ° ❑ 6 ❑ 6,
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
)
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Daia Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ DaiEZ Heifer
❑ Da Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Coyd
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,E:rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes La o ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Nttmber:-3— Date of inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes -El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: l �'
Spillway?: j
Designed Freeboard (in): [ . �r
Observed Freeboard (in): 70 2L-7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 21No ❑ 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 EI-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Apolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �~No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
It- Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop WindowJ1,S6
ElEvidenceof Wind Drift; El Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) s G 1 l d/� o 2
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes .[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes -fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination',[-]
Yes J o
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
rj/l� Cad I Phone:LRevewerllnspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
1212810Continued

Facility Number: '3 — Date of Inspection
P_ *I D
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes -EYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the approprrate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers El Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking !./crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and F Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 2'N'O ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑'hlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
,01T o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
,3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
,0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
''No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
3rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
,0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Addy 1. % I Comments=and/o�..11rawings ..
��L s
De �

of Visit jO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit .6 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: O� Time:
0 Not O erational O Below Threshold
Permitted © Certified © ConditionaBy Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated } or Above Threshold- ....._.. - _. .
o
Farm Name: )_O.� ...... .K ....1 _.�................. county: .?c%�iAe i✓........._ -------._...............
OwnerName: ........... . . . .. .... 4ii�/!11,�................... -Phone No: ....................... ................................. .................
MailingAddress :..................................................... .... ......... ....... ................
Facility Contact: Tide: ................ Phone No: ... ......_.. .......... _...........
Onsite Representative: „�!� .._. Integrator: _r�PP/J�,
Certified Operator:.___. �.....__�_..__ . Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
A
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �� �f° Longitude �• �� ���
Discha
Mes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes XNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUrnin?
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 ZNO
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway 9Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: _1.T...lr�.:.......... .....2719—. ..W-......_
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — 2e I Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ONo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ONo
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes PrNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes )2fNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste A PRUS260ri
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes VNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding 0 PAN PHydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper an Sc Ar Zinc
i2. Crop type 'Q
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ONo
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 XNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 9f No
Odor Lssues
IT Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ;gNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes � No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes VNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes 9No
Air Quality representative immediately.
:Comments {refer to question a}iy YES aasvrrers �ruUor any reecc►endafians oraay ottiei comments.''*
`Use drawings of factl�ty to better eatplarn srtnatsoas (nse a�ttanai pages a� necessary?ice ❑ Fteld Copy ❑Final Note s = ��
9) LAC-on,'J 6ArJk s /vEF© is E /0 0WfF0. &Z2W 5 a,&j 1_ DN Z4CAeo,
tZ G16-oori
Dt4Fle AP��z ��zo,� & �z 2 � Fo•�
70� 2! 70`f,
�DDj(_Q ©r-
f_4'r�
DS 02E�_ i�rJ� c4p_r
T
Reviewer/InspectorName
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12112103 Continued

Fa ' 'ty Number. — S Date of Insspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes 9No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes )ZNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
9No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
9110
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
XNO
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
XNo
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
9Yes
❑ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
VNo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
/Yes
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
J6 No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes )?j No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
g Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Farm ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall Ej Inspection After V Rain
0 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ddrtyonid C6inmcnts:and/6r-Drav4nngs
a S. ......�—.--...a ...v.:. rm+�r', u....,...r..... e.. _ i ,.
.3� 134 5 cuvC.-_ cr' ✓6 NO �2�7Z4iJ Lr�GZ ►/Q���p/�1
x3E voljF Z'.-J&
����
35) -jeErJ %D U5E 7/1f 1—,Cl2_ Z FR01 0 C4ern,cld
nlfFD ��eoRrJ l.�J�sr,E S-r�ueru��
�% �� c rvfz 1Q14�4 L�rnG�crr✓7 OF
nn
15) 15i1 T5 7 A) lr/L- FtiE t� F2o� OFA7-E2 z ✓a7 5 �F_ F D " of
Lc a f` &zc74eie to S ©,a r
�i� P►S� ��� r %i� ot�c,oc v rJ_ FOX In/-772d9n1 70 ti Lt]a�rn
LF cFe �Oc,t�a)E,e s 7v 2-V
�0�• 5 �ECaRrPS
3
121.12103 — � iJ '1 '� iC P LA tj CrJ 5 O f U P' S
OptFnR R Fr_ata;- ,i-rrAs,

Type of Visit I, Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification (&LOther ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Bate of Visit: 9 % Time: i
/ /Z
Nat era 'opal BeloKThreshold
Permitted M Certified © Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or bove Threshold:
Q r
Farm Name: / �`l/�7 S County
Owner Name: Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �//icl�P _ Integrator: v�
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a �• 0 K Longitude a
Qesigii
CurrentDesign "Curretit; Design ,W Current
t2pacirv-Population
Cattle on
P►Po tilation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ La er
�` v
❑ Dauy
Feeder to Finish
(/ Q
❑ Non -La er
`r]
Non -Dairy
I'
❑ Farrow to Wean
µ
y
El Farrow to Feeder
0 Other - -
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Deslgn CaaCit
❑ Gilts
-
❑ Boars
=+ Ttftaf SSLW
Dumber of Lagoons
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area I0 S rav Field Area
Holdizj Ponds'% Solid Traps +: H ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System w
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at. ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves, 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
%Xaste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: l Z
Freeboard (inches): l� Z_
05103101 Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection 9 /S
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ 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 El No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
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?
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/ WL-P, 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?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cvuuuents (refer to guestson 0 - Espiatn any YE5:answers anclJor any rerosttmendateons ar anv ;outer comments;
w
Use draWir ag '4,6 'ciltty tv better _explarn situations a{usii addtttoual page`s_:as necessary) CIF ie]dCopv [] Final Notes
Qt�v�i e� 4 r fJre//4 Kee ih /S
Ale_ A SPY .r e'/f Gtyre'!: d�.�fca✓
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility lumber: — Date of Inspection �S
dor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30_ 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 submersed fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover'
Additional Comments.and/or Drawings:::
Z",74 7i(e
05103101
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
� e �s[5 � �e sn r h , i�, i `��cs /�t ✓ cGt_ Q. r
�/i

(Type of Visit ?j Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facitity Number Bate of Visit:
Permitted 0 Certified D Conditionally Certified E3Registered
Farm Name: i �RQrn1-1 1 & "Z
Owner Name: &Ll R8-ko :5 _
Mailing Address:
Time:
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ICJ County: l&71y
Phone No:
Facility Contact: f�77 Title: Phone No:
{'l lxL�VP Pto us 7�r a�r-QS
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
0Swine []Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0a 06 0" Longitude 0' Di Du
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
S.wi_ne C+a aci P,o ulation
Poultry Ga aci P,o ulation Cattle Ca aci P.o ulation
Feeder
❑ Layer Dairy I
Finish 2 a
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dai
Lf Wean
Feeder
rFarrow
❑Other
Finish
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons
❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑ La oon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes P6 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [(Z, No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes VrNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway 56Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 2''+! /�- �q-! $
Freeboard (inches): IA �iVr/
05103101 Con inued

Facility Number: — f 2 Date of Inspection �O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes WrNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
4. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over applicatioV. -, ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ HydrViulic Overload 1 ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type Jn I'(ZM L9-DR [ t-V!-k) . ��tl+N[_C, C j4tPv2lJ 1 l` QF_K5[=F_P )
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
Reg.
ired 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 Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
14.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
XNo
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
JZ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
( #) ExpIii any YES4nswers`and/or any e recommndations"or any.other commenti`' „�
referto Qnest�on=
�Conxments _ �
Use. drawings of facility to better eaplam situations.(useladditronal pages as"neces`sary) ❑Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
... __
Akre.s ` 1105,rY IVO[(CYEp tCAW5E Ryc�lgFzCrq tZost! ,�C'�` tJE,p iC�n?
ealve oe ruelve, L,�co�✓ LF'✓ j/v'
/&,Z�ry 2117
z7, Y �l 'zZ 1�Af5 ,GEE, % +06POP4- Z-A--E,00 /)o
qPr
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �a O
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: — 2'S Date of Inspection
or Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. 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 fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
NpTzc�,p
42a/V_7
'.5Z1VGE f'4 kM
/N y f (� t;?-
45
r��/�45_eAv
❑ Yes ❑ No
A,
Si.�,e /0 395
�� 6'a'r- C O'd S',F'_ � q50 - /mD
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
M
05103101

Type of Visit t&Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ORoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: g Time:
Zg
Not Operational 0 Below- Threshold
Permitted ❑ Certified 13ConditionaHv Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �_. ��"'f �/rj County: 11��
Owner Name: // k� �D Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: 4Arkei _ _ Integrator: //1^ _
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0' 0' 0 " Longitude ' 0 0
D charges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes V2 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 6No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes �5No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes M[No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Z7/ / _ 2
Freeboard (inches): Z ��
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 31 —1 22SC
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?
S. 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?
❑ Yes W,No
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes t!!�No
❑ Yes ff No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
allo
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
IKNo
12.
Crop type ,WAIX
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
B No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N 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
29 No
16.
is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
J'No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
X No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
;K No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®,No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
" No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes MNo
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 M No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes DgNo
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
- _
Comments (refer to questiion tl) ' Eio-Win n.zn YES46veers a'_Wor_-any reeosntrt%indations or -any otheixommen0-_
g ( acicEttronal
iJse drrawin s of facility Eo_ better explain situstrotrs. u pag 'as necessary)❑Field CoDv ❑Final Notes -
''`` ��jj -- II /
N4�G i I%'CB� �D Wax4zh C Z4 Od/A 47L A.,ef-
6
rlGd�/L:J�B.s'%G�T�tE�
S �%lD,a�f •
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name � .� ` 2x
­
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z7 QZ
05103101 i �—f Continued

M
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes —CK.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 DR 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 ;S No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or �.�'
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc.) ❑ Yes Ly =Vo
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 RNo
Additional Comrnents:and/or.Drawia1gs:._
O510310I

evision of Water.417
Quality .
s -. 0 Division of Soil andEWater ConseF= ati:oti _
T OOtheir Agency. _
Type of Visit 7FCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit '01"houtine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number j Z � Date of visit: 11 Z 1 Time: Printed on: 7/21/2000
10 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted ❑ Certified 0 Conditiona 1 Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............. .
�P
Farm Name: ............i.,.,. *„'" �..................... .. Z.............................. .... Countv:.__�-4!P .. .. I .......
Owner Name: ........... I.�..! .......4va:Ii1.G(.Yl Vf Phone No: ........
Facility Contact: ..........................................................✓.................... Title:........................ ..... Phone No:
Mailing Address:
OnsiteRepresentative: .... ......_rr i . ...['2�Z... c+^V integrator:..,[r�.11�' fkj
........
h
`........ ..__._.:f ............
Certified Operator: .......................................... Operator Certification Number:........
Location'of Farm:
© Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' �� ��� Longitude �• �� ���
Design Current Design Current Design Current
--Ca iaci .- Po ulation Poultry Capacity Population CattleCaoidtv..-
'3?
Wean to Feeder I0 Layer P[] Dairy
i=Feeder to Finish ❑Non -Layer Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
'';' ❑ Other
t Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
' Gilts
v` Boars Total SSLW
�' of Lago©as ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag^nii Area ❑ Spray Field Area
IIolldiugPetnds/Solyd',Traps j ❑ 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?
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/ruin?
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?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Ide ntificr 61 d Afe t-i
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ YeXNo
❑ Yes/No
Structure 5 Structure 6
..................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): ( 7
5100
Continued on back

Facility Number::) — iz8 Date cf Inspection 1J Z d} Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are,+.here any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes �INo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes f2rNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ❑'No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes jWNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes16No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes XNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes WO
12. Crop type $ e r,.� v 0� q S q ell i ►7
/
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ YesA No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes )2°,"o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes �No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ YesIZNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes PoNo
J�
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
ElYes No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ,ZNo
I& Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes ONO
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes XNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes XNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes IZNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes IzNo
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? []Yes g'No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes �11'No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ;2'No
:. K4 -.violaiigris:or- di feieucies were potted. di[ iAii this:visiC . Y:oi} Will �eceiye lid luf ftr
. • . • correspondence: shout: this .visit.::::.:::....::....:::...:.: :

Facility Number: 3% -- 2 Date of l.uspection 1 6
Odor slues
• - w
+ 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',-�o
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [1'111
0
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, etc.) ❑ Yes 0
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
Additional_Comments an or- rawings:- r < <
s ry
J

Division of Soil and=Water Coi
w�s Division of Soil and Water Coi
3 „ Division of Water Qualify Ca
` - Other -Agency Operaii6iiC
D Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspecti
Facility Number
on` ':Operation Review
on ;Compliance Inspection -
re Inspection
Follow-up of DSWC review 4&Other
Date of Inspection ,1$—
Time of Inspection f 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [] Registered JE3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ...... f .1?f . far.cY> County: ................1y lik...---............................................
OwnerName:.... 4•..6'1..�\k ......A......... 'GAI ml.................................... Phone No: .......................................................................................
Facility Contact: . Title : ......................................... ...................... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
OnsiteRepresentative:........................................................................................................... Integrator:......V..........................................
Certified Operator:,,_.................................................. .. Operator Certification Number:
......................................................... ..................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 0 6 i Longitude • 6 46
Design Current Design _Current,_- Design Ct►rreiit
CattlCa achy Population _ Capacity Populatio
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other ;
Total Design Capacity
::Tota1-SSLW
Nunithir of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holden Pon'., � ;.... - _._.. _._.-. .. .. ,
Soli Traps _ tem
❑ No Liquid Waste Management Sysw.
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, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon s stun'? 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 XYes ❑ No
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ..........la........................................................................ .......... ........... .....................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc-)
3/23199 Continued on back

" Facility Number: 31— a, Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?' � ❑ Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
S. Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require main ten ahcelimprovement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1 I.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
❑ No
12.
Crop type
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?
El Yes
El No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
l&
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewedlnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
... . .it. . ....... en... mere .... dint . 9 ..... You :vvitl reeeiye do further
...........
corr461i fie' * * ab' f this :visit........ .......
:Comments (refer#o question #) Explain any�YES answers a�d(ar: any recommendations or-anyother co iiments
.;..,m mom. t
m
Use'drawings of facility to better explamAtuatians {ase additional pages;as necessary)
_.
A4. tfol vi S e-d rbwtr -b SAaf� i )q 11i l A� �
r�
OWYL.� kr
�.
ll rc-5
-� I-}aut vv�•a•r tr I r� �
r S. 0 Ca 15 WI�.
�,pda� Vj A KAi J - Oc4be r . (Cor3l s-3 j da
-�- 2ZD
Reviewer/Inspector Name ='
Aff
Reviewer/Inspector Signatureye
Date: bYr__J 1C-
3/23/99

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Location of Farm/Facility
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream Slope,xH: IV
Embankment SIiding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Ll— 2 o )00 _T L SA l
a� Names of Inspectors (P)A A 0AV
SFreeboard, Feet C�
qq
G C- Top Width, Feet 1
o� Downstream Slope, xH:1V -
Yes _ � No
Seepage? Yes $_ No- - f c �(
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
411E (e Qrc
Erosion? Yes _ No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of
Vegetative Cover
(Grass, Trees)
Did Dike Overtop? Yes /K., No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Fallow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes _X No
Engineering Study Needed? Yes No -
Is Dam Jurisdictional to the Dare Safety Law of 1967? Yes jNo
Other Comments IBC �� c`' /L U V,

I &,-A() N4V
Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Name. -of Farm/Facility
i
Location of Farm/Faciiity
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream S1ope,xH:IV
Embankment Sliding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
S
AAA 9 Names of Inspectors � �/�J✓
l
Freeboard, Feet /
i? �cc kc- Top Width, Feet
Downstream Slope, xH:1V
Yes No
'
LNo-
. . a c c: �
�
p
Yes
X, No d0. _A.
a
_Pia I L
Condition of , f 2 r �? rib - _ G-/ 4 I U / L ✓ S('r Q,-c
Vegetative Cover
(Grass, Trees) Love / p 04
lls►.✓ i ^5 p, k
Did Dike Overtop? Yes _ No If Yes, epth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? IL
_Yes No ll I
Engineering Study Needed? Yes Na�61� ,a`f ,�✓� �� gy"5e
.� .7 J � - N 1,(� !! }��e+oO 1-e��1
Is Darn�3unsdictional to the Dam Safety Law of I )67?o� Yes No i �C v�
Other Comments A I" J f -e V e r t4e—
re rep.5 a f---:Tokc
��e eVD,�.- OPT ��/� �

F

pox)
Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
� 0P
name or rarm/racuiry
Location of Farm/Facility
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream Slope,xH:1V
Embankment Sliding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
d
���sS fee l` F.c�h.
2S_ G*,2g ego,945
aNames of Inspectors SAY
f fj
Freeboard, Feet U_
G C- Top Width, Feet Q
Downstream Slope, xH:IV
Yes ^�No
Yes j�_ No -
(
Yes )_ No _
l4 t ,
x-,_ L, e. � 0 (-/3ecP "I-, f11tlj
c
Condition of d l ( CT o u., cf , ,k
Vegetative Cover
(Grass, Trees)
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes_ No
Engineering Study Needed? Yes N&
Is Daze Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967? Yes No
Other Comments ��� �� c
C_

(>-A- b (-)U N A e
,.
Name of Farm/Facility
Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Location of Farm/Facility
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet,
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream Slope,xH:1V
Embankment Sliding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Names of inspectors �J✓ d�
! Freeboard, Feet /
Top Width, Feet _
I Downstream Slope, xH:IV
Yes `� No
Seepage? Y1s
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Erosion? Yes
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
j
U�r �vtL�Tt AGnl�ln
r` } r
N ,�1 0 — A.) b a �_ P o s, c,--
Condition of Q 0 G O2_ /0,0 t S tJ S�'f Pic
Vegetative Cover k4ve
��(Grass, Trees) Qtlefv� �e -• o O f�
rl.3,,✓ i �1j 0.--
Did Dike Overtop? Yes X No If Yes, epth of Overtopping, Feet
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes No
Engineering Study Needed? _ Yes N¢�b n o4
�� 5 � D �7e terse o Joy Po !.. + '
s am Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1 67? Yes
Other Cornmen pun A S A
rit r
4x ^1
`. Lie- I G
b11
cl C D r �e�41.z�
n I A
.*Ik V�e

0
v
a

*e zw a' �ivlsioll OSOiI and Water Conservation .Operation Review x x
'Dmsion of $i►il and Water Conservation Compliance Inspectioi<i
Divisipii of Water Quality 'Compllance Ilspection
Other -Agency Operation Review s �=
Routine O Com Taint
Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection
Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection
—0a
Time of Inspection
114M 124 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 0
Certified
0 Conditionally Certified
[] Registered
Date Last Operated:
10 Not OperationalOperationaj
................................__._.............................................
County:........
FarmName: ................. ........
.. . p�.1.
-.................................................
Owner Name:
Facility Contact: ...Title:
MailingAddress:.............................................................................................
Onsite Representative: __ ilsp"`ei�:
Certified Operator....
..........................................................................
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:............" qr..... ..............
Operator Certification Number: .....................................","„
Latitude �� �� ��� Longitude
Design CurrentDesign ' Current' Design Current
.a aciPolationCSwine Poultry ation Cattle y;"
, _.
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer El Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish J6tat.MAgn Capacity.'
❑ Gilts
❑ soars Total SSL.W' ..
Number of Lagoons. _ �` ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
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, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes gNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes XNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes XNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ..L.. .......................................................................................................................................... .......................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
*0
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
,Yes
❑ No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
[]Yes
�(No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
11. Is there evide tceof over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
XNo
12. Crop type s
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
XNo
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
ONO
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
)�No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
kYes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal.Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ YesNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
XNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
o
rNO
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
9No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
MNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
A No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
&rNo
.10'i'l4 fwgtis'O. def cien6a.9 •were pbte� d&i#g �hjs:visit' - You :wiil•reeeiye do further
corresporideizce' about; this :visit: ..:.... I .. ..... .
Co' mments"(refer tosgu"6i#) -Explaia'"jYES answer
,awings'of faciLty to: betterexplain situations (use'ai
4211(_ 't l_-.r
l
ditioinal pages asmecessary)
�► �y ass
Coe ie�
91 R—'733-SoS3
1" cc I L".-'
t5Qa rf _
5_
Reviewer/Inspector Name b
{'
_ 0 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �_ "t-.1 Date:

Facility Number: -3( — )- I)ate of inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below Yes ❑ 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 k No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes d(No
roads, building structure, and/or public property) 11
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ONo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ro
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes RNO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent temporary cover? ❑ Yes &;'No
Additional omments and/or . rawings:.
r _ -
s5 �-�,
(��) et'-
`1'10-3 SO -ac1oH
J

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
® Division of Water Quality 1
O Routine Coni taint O Follow-up of DW ins ection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection I Ri
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm}
[] Registered P Certified © Applied for Permit [3 Permitted JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:..,
Farm Name: ................. _k ± L...--- i rrti ......... i'? L .. .t..---- Countv:.....�-l..............................I.............
(( rr.!�.(.�..................6. r�ai1S............................................. Phone No:.....� `.��1...'�................
Owner Name: ..............�.Jl�a�
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title Phone No:
MailingAddress: ........Z:� ........... "................................................ ............. :.............................. .. 531...---
Onsite Representative: ..............�A I �j
......i�.......iI.zftwS.......................................... Integrator :...... .....tlt�hal............................................
Certified Operator........................................................................................................ .. Operator Certification Number....................
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude �• ��"
`Deli ; ;; Current Desi Current Derr Current
^P �.
Swine Cioiicrty `F"opulataon Poultry ' 'Capacity Population GaEtle Capacity Populahon
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer JE1 Dairy
Feeder to Finish {, ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Feeder .. . ...
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts x x
Total �S,81 i`
❑Boars - -
v
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding' Ponds Z ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Yes
❑ No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds} require
[AYes
❑ No
maintenance/improvement?
6. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
7/25/97

Futility Number: -1 ) —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structures (LagoonsXolding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Yes
❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: t.4�71� ziZ1,11 ............... .................................... ...................................
................ ...................,..I .....................
...................................
Freeboard(ft): n............ ....1. `.............................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Yes
IQ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Out
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25. Weee any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[]°No.vitilations•6id6riciencies.were-ilnti d-during this.visit. You'w'ill recei've•nti•furtlierr:
eorrespandeilce tihout this'vWL, ::::: :
L7i3c a t�r•i4r� �noaze3 inJas < �oa-Li �I �- '�/G�r•IL jOLA �uk
U9eY i IlVot tw► _ U Ue&— 4-4,V.y.f i r- br-m-i c,5, a,, ,G ) ,7 S, C- -CO C{�i5eryf3,
telc+ 4�uio �+� loa( aar.s, s C %o ak3.
1 �tp°�`5 ( r �� 1�-ffWc�'�,— w�S 4ro,S�c�rc�
& jc'yC o' S6_0 be. Co r'PLfe
1 } ( 1
1L�2S• ZtrtM i.t�, �i JZ 1 rt8`. C�a�acvl5 SLJO b1.) cWtrt� 4- o� �rcS QOm'iiL ,,, °t" AWAY
+�- wC[ c,et� aJbukkc '.j.(( a10-r" I �pssi �. Segcjc.
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: l Date:

Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
14 Division of Water Quality
L%Routine 0 Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
' � Date-oflnspectian tG
Facility Number 3 ZS
Time of Inspection Iao 124 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Registered 13 Certified [3 Applied for Permit fA Permitted 113 Not Opera Date Last Operated: ..........................
-
t-....bk> �In....:......I.........
Farm Name: _:E:..�. .tG.Y..eB.............� l -� �Z Countr.............................................
Owner Name:........L.'fnlA'4 .......... ........................................................ Phone No:..�9�. � :.. lob'a...........................................
Facility Contact: .............................................`......y............................. Title:......................... Phone No:
Mailing Address:..,, ZQ-,.,.. fsi 1C... rx .... �..
Onsite Representative: ....... ......6.t rrilfa....................................................
Certified Operator: ..............................................
Location of Farm:
.......................................................................................
..........................................
Integrator: ...... . ..
ntegrator:........ .. .............................................................
Operator Certification Number:-. J.1. -b.Yo..............
en i .�.... S&...1 �1.�..a.......[k1.lf...........A.......i�r...� l!. .............. I................
,.... sal xs ......a.5 ...............:.54 . o. ..... �.a a...
... . ............... ....I............ ........................................ .
Latitude 0'.0' �" Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design , '. Current
Swine''." Capacity Population Poultry ­ X pacity Population Cattle r Capacity -;Population.
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑Dairy
ff Feeder to Finish 12b = ❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy[
❑ Farrow to Wean -
❑ Farrow to Feeder [j Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Ca keity:,JA
❑ Gilts
z ❑ Roars Total _SSLW • `2r�
Number of Lagoons 1 Holding Ponds :0 XJ Subsurface Drains Presentjp Lagoon Area
ID Spray Field
Area
❑ N Liquid Management Syst f o td Waste Man ent em
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
Od No
2. 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[91 No
c. If discharge is observed, what"is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[,No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
R1 No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
Yes
❑ No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
11 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
P No
7/25/97
Continued on back

Facility Number: 3 — Z�
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lauoons.Holding Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Yes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .............t................ ......--.- .Z............................
Freeboard (ft):........................... I
r............................................................................................................................. .
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? tR Yes ❑ No
Is erosion, or any other threats to the intearitv of anv of the structures observed'? ®Yes ❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
r
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate: minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
[5d No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
❑ Yes
EA No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ...........)1 Y.ey j.t]A.......................................... 5`t&�.A--- .).11pt.1........ ............. ............................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW,VIP)?
] Yes
19 No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[A No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
f
Yes
❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
® Yes
- ❑ No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
X] No
• l
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
53 No
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
(A Yes
❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
53 Yes
❑ No
0 No.violations-or de-fieiencies.were-noted-during this. visit.-.Y.ou.wi11 re'cei've no further
correspondence about this:visit.-
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any.YES answers and/or any recommendations or any, other codmments.
Use drawings of faeiiity to better explain situations.'(.use additional pages as necessary): e
5• ceh�a{tnr-" � wt c slno:llt� b 11V ak rises", i-LA -f1kS
p rt- � y. { j ( 5 r I`
LOI3ey. *Z k&G '<htU1f°it+[.iW, N_tz6&kVj, LA, 0Ah 6A <.Wd 6_ !8� ih eL re Vnsti�e. f r L MAMruit
"T
tta. to+�EihiK ni4fi� '� ai5io{OcC� ow4i. ar]- �L sii. A Gyay,
•i
144t
a_
{13e�[L�t'G1�6r O'KO- 0, CLAW a,VA twil �kao\b be �'-►heel � 1eSC[d2UOr• ir'9Lb'.�4��. QWt M[CS Sl+piii4 �-
tr- 6t'h-JcL 56,)16 ;5" SQHsys as sear. c's �osst;lAt. dote i`s zf ls'�%,
LZ. 'TV-4- COTV%iA7' N%t1,(, t.ue,.ba_ 5 r LQ toe u5�@ 'to, *i-, 16"rh%V�l Y"- r rn p 5 . Rt( 4f- OV4
6e CIVIAA%� 4o -.6o IL+f4,L. &VQtlea• So���Sa it %6LM be, v�it&W-
�,r.ci 7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name r,
rip, L ]A t�hfi�•
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

x
G
bo€
a
�
qr
c
r
cam,
N
V
W
Ic
�
'R5
U
o-
d
'O
y
o
b
�
d
�

Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
F— Facility Number
Farm Status:. - d.
Total Time (in hours) Spent onReti7ety S
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: Z �- A..�� �!�..- - County.'
Owner Natne:.�.— Phone
Z �No:.L^-f-.3/Z�
Alailing Address: (
�./
Onsite Representative:JLe,�-�Q�U _. Integrator:..!
Certified Operator. '" _��%�U,� Operator Certification Number: _.... _-----•--T -
Location of Farm:
- - - -- - -
0
Latitude Longitude �• ��
❑ \ot U erational Date Last Operated:
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
"
j Y ='
d ..
Swtie y s�Potil rntnber
= Number STY.
Cattle
Nurnber g
w ...
El Wean to Feder
.. �._
❑Laver
'T❑ Dziry
i
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Laver I
$e�f
� y
T
�
'El Farrow to Wean
�'..
"F•b ,fir e - a,+cx 5
V - � Lx, -Y.a 3. r3ra� i `1..
Farrow to Feeder
�
f
Farrow to Finish
Ocher Type of Lrvestoc3c
-
# W
x,
Number otLsaoans f HoldmgPonds 7i �� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
• -fa `�' 'Y xx �` .ra--cas...�� air. �x t s� � '�.,�y �w i '�.,'w�^'�'- � "Yry. a �� t
❑ re.e❑ Field Area
-( Lagoon Aa � Sprav Fiz •, �d ���: �..3: ^C-. ms'--- ��':� f . .
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes 12 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes EW No
a. If discharge is observed,, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DW Q) El Yes Q'No
Y. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
^Y4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require R3 Yes ❑ No
maintenanc e/improvemen t?
rnwinfird ravr hark

6. Is facility not Ma compliance with any applicable setback criteria? ❑ Yes O `'o `
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after,1111.97.)1— ❑ Yes jz•No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds}
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?- � - ❑ Yes EgNo
Freeboard (ft): La oon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
10. Is seepage observed'from any of the structures? ❑ Yes Sf No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? Yes ❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancel'unprovement? (3Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
11 Do any -of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
[I Yes
® No
Waste application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15: Crop type
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
❑ Yes
® No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?.
❑ Yes
RIRio
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
['Yes
CQ No
19. Is there a lack of available irrigadon equipment?
❑ Yes
21 N'o
For Certified Facilities Only
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
J! No
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal. Waste Management Plan in any way?
❑ Yes
R3 No
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewliinspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
Camnients (refer to quest�ot��) �Eilaui any YE5.answers anfilor anv re .otnmendattons or nay atizer comments
,xw 'z+a,� w�°'"�` _°�_' �.rtq -+..r .:�;- +"{?a�-; s.v � 4r � - 7•- =b,.sx—..+c-z ';�-,1�':.��, i .._-� � � .. _
rise drawmgsffaciiit r�to better exglam.sitiat2ons ;use additional �ages;as necessa�r +), ��, � �-��� -z:. . ,.
�
�� / l�35 �L��Srn� p� P.0h1
tfadjpv'�'� "a�lln
S `j`v/g �. (' S >�v A-!* err, r i4N 0 As i✓V%�-�G -
A�vvP ferns,
!a a
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96

17J
Site Requires Immediate Attention: !v
Facility No. 3 1 - i Z 8
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATION4 SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: .1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: Jo C�-
Mailing Address: s7y_
County: D11p6hy
Integrator: Phone: 4
On Site Representative: //%L,% /�'Gl� Phone: C�
Physical Address/Location: `tom &J) LQi� 4F yA/LC
,2", &oV_V— I$P-7 A7_ DA/SLoAJ (_7Q. �vc�
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: ,P ' Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: ° V:� -3k" Longitude: 3 CGIP Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have ufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches Ye r No Actual Freeboard4'-3-Ft. -&- Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes Na as any erasion observed? Yes No
Is adequate land available for spray Yes r No I the cover crop adequate? es No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings. es r No
100 Feet from Wells? e r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or No
Is animal waste Iand applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or'other
similar man-made devices? Yes r No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific eage with cover crop) Yes No
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name
cc. Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed.

"r9 .{: �:(�-�t"Y �G:- .i:. _ �i� '� ,- "ii.fir. �J''�rr i" _r,'�: `=�.-Y •�fr_�u_-. ;'r -aa r.- -r.�.; :
Requires diaie Attention
-Facility. Number '
. SITE VISITATION. RECORD,
l . DATE: - - 199S
J f
Owner, " r l 1 IJO 61A teo. r+--5 F - 'N.. '.,e
arm amE ,
County:
Agent Vzsiting Site: r� Phone:
Operator: Phone:
On Site Representative:
Physical Address:
MaMng Address:
phone-
Type of Operation: Swine Ponitry Cattle
Design Capacity: .3G 7.-Z Number of Animals on Site: e.1
Latitude: o Longitude: a „
Type of Inspection: Ground Aerial
0 Circle Yes or No
•
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot i 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inch es or No Actual Freeboard::,:, Feet Inches
For facilities with more than one agoon, please address the other Iagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed from the Iagoon(s)? Yes No as there erosion of the dam?: Yes o •N
Is adequate land available for land application? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Additional Comments:
1_1
Fax to (919) ? IS-3S59 %/ . Signature o