310350_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CARULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

Type of Visit: mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: �9►Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: eparture Time: (L County:/ Regiorl:�.(
Farm Name: xner Owner Email:
ti
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish-
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I E3
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
D Cow
-
Non-DaIty
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Design Current
D_ , P■onI , Ca aci P,o
Farrow to Finish I
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
113eef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Imnacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes r[;�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
W;=No
❑ NA
0 NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
0 No
0 NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

IFacilit
y Number; - Date of Inspection: Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage i apacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? 0 Yes E2�No D NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [;FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): r7,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑_No C] NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 7
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes [20No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan? T
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �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 ❑�tO ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 7
Waste Anulication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes M Xp ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records _& Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes 12-No
❑ Yes ,E]�No
❑ Yes 10-No
❑ Yes ❑
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes f%lo
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? [—]Yes VNO
o
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 214120I5 Continued

Facili Number: 11- Date of Inspection L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? E:�Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ID_Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below. -
Q11'ailure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes EJJ,o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 12-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
�jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
[—,I-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
[-JXo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to..question #):_Explain any YES answersand/or any additional recommendationsor any,.other,comments.
Use'drawings of facility ta,better`explain'situations (use additional pages as necessary).
111,211 ca
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /lam, ' _ Date:
Page 3 of 3
21412015

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Fallow -up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Arrival Time: T% Departure Time: County:
Q /L
Region:
Farm Name:
/; 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: / ' ` A2;
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish [—]Layer
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pap.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Nan -La er
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design r e n Dry Cow
D . P■oul_ . Ca aci. P,o P. Non-Dai
La ers Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharses 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 _[D_�4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
�To
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �` o
❑ Yes EFNo
[—]Yes ❑-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: 3 1 - Date of Inspection: t _ L-Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes J'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: E
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes allo
❑ 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 ,❑�lo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes 2 ^No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes ETNo
❑ 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 EJINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[:]Yes ID -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes �o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[:]Yes Q-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes E]Mo
❑ 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 J;��o
❑ 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 '�No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes E5No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 42 Z
24' Did'the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑moo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑Yes 7�.Tto ❑ 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 F';I-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes � o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues �"
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor ar air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
34. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAW MP?
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 P] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA D NE
❑ Yes [2-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [D'Rlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes JE:f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer:twquestion;#) )Explain any YES answers'andlor any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
ReviewerfInspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: y// (p
Date:
2ia�0r

2 oilivision of Water Resources
Facility Number ICJ - Division qt Sgil and Water Conservatign
,, r -� Q Qther Agency
Type of Visit: Q-Co—mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (DAoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
� r r•
Date of Visit: D Z Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:` !&
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: �j ��%`f/f S'
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: �i�
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish
Current
Pop.
I
Design Curren#
Wet Poultry C►apacity Pop. C►attle
ILayer I Dairy Cow
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er I
E] Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
—Dairy
Design Current Pry Cow
D . P■ouI Ea a_ ci P.o Non -Daily
Layers I Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other JEJ
Ttukeys
Turkey Poults
I 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 P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes p No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: f3 1 - Date of Inspection:
lazwl
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 42� ZL—
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes V' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes UT�4o ❑ 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
maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
NA ,
❑ NE
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 101bs. ❑ 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
VN�rA
NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? El Yes
L
Vf No
� NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes
[:]No
VrNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
Reouired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[2 NA 0 NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
[:]No
�JNA ❑ 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
Z f NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 ° Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ZNA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
VNA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: Zr
24. Didthe facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes No PTNA ❑ NE
25 01s the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes [:]No ONA ❑ 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?
0 Yes
0 No
0 NA 0 NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
VNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
Yes
L;?<0
0 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
0No
NA ONE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
W No
J:I NA NE
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
V�TNo
0 NA NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA NE
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
NA NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situation& (use additional pagesas necessary).
• l X�7cZ)ers 46 11z7/f�! i�J�ll e1jalark
yeall'
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
NO
Phone:
Date: A 153
214 O14

(Type of Visit: QICom fiance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance j
Reason for Visit: q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency ,O Other; O Denied Access I
Qj
Date of Visit:' Tt Z2 Arrival Time: t 10 Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: M t kg_ �,30 L 1� S
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator: jyt 149
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Region:
7Design
inish
r[
Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry
Layer
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Da' Cow
eeder
Non -La -Layer `� .
Da Calf
FEederFinish
Da Heifer
Farrowto Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, l;oult ,
Layers
Design Current
Ca aci P,o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other Turkey Poults
Other I 10ther
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? .
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes,,dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Ej No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
C�'No
❑ NA
[:]'NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection: 11
Was.te Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes /P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ['No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: L
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �i ^No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) �"'
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a [:]Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �KNo ❑ 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 EZ'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Aaulication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes r No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or M 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 ;'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination? T
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ,fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ;2!FNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [?(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers D 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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faer ' Number: Date of tns ection: �. L
24 pid.the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes .0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes J�jNo ❑ 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?
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 jam. o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ YesZT No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yeseo f jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'Jallo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 6No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J21,10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ZrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes C21No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.,.-
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
l.70
ReviewerAnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �j! 7OC
Date: If Z Ll
/4/20I

Facility Number
Division of Wa#er,Qualtty'
0 Division"of Soil and Water Conservation -
Other Agencys �
Type of Visit 91compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
r Date of Visit: Arrival Time: d - epar`ture Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email: _ �r
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: a116 &j'j.'4s
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = d = Longitude: 0 ° 0 6 = S,
Design ;Current Desagii `, Curreut m "_DesignCu rr ent»
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity'Population Cattle " Capacity Populahon
rta w
❑ Wean to Finish :K ❑ Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean -
Dry Poultry
❑ Farrow to Feeder mr
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Otlier
❑ Lavers
Division of Wa#er,Qualtty'
0 Division"of Soil and Water Conservation -
Other Agencys �
Type of Visit 91compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
r Date of Visit: Arrival Time: d - epar`ture Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email: _ �r
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: a116 &j'j.'4s
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = d = Longitude: 0 ° 0 6 = S,
Design ;Current Desagii `, Curreut m "_DesignCu rr ent»
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity'Population Cattle " Capacity Populahon
rta w
❑ Wean to Finish :K ❑ Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean -
Dry Poultry
❑ Farrow to Feeder mr
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Otlier
❑ Lavers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
[]Yes 12No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
J'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

4
Faeility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [;pNo ❑ 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 ;2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes 42 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures
require ❑ Yes [;2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes Wf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes f Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 tbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes J�j'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [—]Yes [2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes P�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?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes P' No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [� No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis �2oil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Ef No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes P'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

t
lFaciftity Nuthber: - Date of Inspection: Z
24. 4d the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permi .
k] Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes [2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes L2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No� ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes ,� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes �[/] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. „ ..
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Wa �Q C"Mf6�-p
� SUII 4-es"5 -
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Cam- [
Phone: - 7r6" 7 ,>,.
Date: L
21412011

.. m> - Vlsion of Water Quality-
`aCllity Nilll7beI' 0 DEvision of Soil and�Watei-Cooservatmon
�e k
- 3 �0 0,
ther'tlgency w-
Type of Visit ,la'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 ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ";r""z-r
rrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name:Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ❑ o ❑ I ❑is Longitude: ❑ o = 1 ❑ «
Design Current Design Current ' x � Dess gW C re
h.Capacity Population ry ' `Capacity Population'„4Cattle �Cspa ci`ts Population
Swine Wet Poult
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er
❑ Wean to Feeder _ ❑ Non -La er
=, ❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Farrow to WeanDry Poultry ,Q
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Gilts
Boars
Other
L
❑ a ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
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
Discharges & Stream Imoacts
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
1 ElNon-Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
,allo
❑ Yes
❑•No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Struc re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 32-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes 13 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [2rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o/ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XEfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? /
Waste Aonlication
M. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Xf 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?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ef No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�2(,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comrrients.(fefer:to question ##) : Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations ors -any other,comments ,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)
AL
Reviewer/Inspector Name a Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 1 12128104 Continued

Facilitx Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes ,❑ No I--]NAEl NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes I� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ wup ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [3<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
;;rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
'24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
,Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
[ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ 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
P,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
dNo
❑ 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or, Drawings:, wz��
/llee61 /4 jel.4, Cqj�l
call'�4_allol s U�
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Type of Visit ,E
Reason for Visit
Date of visit:
Farm Name: y
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
lance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
tine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Arrival Time: Departure Time: L� County:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: `
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
�
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: //�,
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = I = Longitude: = o =1 [� `4
Design Current Design Current
Design
Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet»Poultry C-apacity Population
Cattle Capacity
Population
❑ an to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ an to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
El
❑ Farrow to Feeder
LayersEl Farrow to Finish ❑ La ers
El Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts Non -Layers
ElBeef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
ElBeef Brood Co
El Turkeys
Other ❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other I I
Number of Structures:
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ElApplication 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
ILl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
PfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I 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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Struc e 2 Structure 3Structure 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
(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 P'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes /El -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? �,�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IJ 1vo ❑ 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
J"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
YJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments:(r'efer.to'questi6n;#) Explain any YES answers and/or, any:' recommendations4or4any!otlleF� corninent5:
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Fr7 �J �,.,��r A/y
•
Reviewer/Inspector Name,
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 2
Rettuired Records & Documents
&id the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have al] components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections El Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes dNo []NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes AgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
,10 Yes
[INA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
,❑�No
❑ Yes •LI No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes El'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes -ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
E!fNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Need- +-0 oomple-fe
1 7 dSS/Zr
PIM51
12128104

Facility Number (%
.@'Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit .compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
0 Routine Q Comp�llaaiin-�t, � 0 Follow up 0 Referral Q Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1, Departure Time: County: ' Region:
Farm Name: P�t/'S ��'� /%�Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title,: Phone No.
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
I Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: =o =' =] Longitude: =°=d
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current I
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: -..I
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge? `
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Date of Inspection
Facilio,Number:
s-'
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
StruYe 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure b
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 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):
s
Reviewer/Inspector Name a Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: G Date: B
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 17=C
ReQuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
0-Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
fidyes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Corninents and/or Drawings:
1VC1
AL
t
12128104

Type of Visit J C,00mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit XRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Q Arrival Time: % : f? Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: ��r'� 1/�Ti�2za CA Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: /r//4i.✓ �_
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude: ❑ 0 0 = Longitude: = ° =1 Q «
Design • Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Puuets
❑ 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
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifej
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: ED
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 JNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
/❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: � Date of Inspection
1�
Waste -Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ,KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): Re
7
Observed Freeboard (in): Z 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0 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 Q 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 p No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes F]�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of 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
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
[,D-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
;allo❑ NA El NE
❑'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[[Wo ❑NA El 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):.
Reviewertinspector Name I Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: (o
Page 2 of-9 12128104 Continued
rA

Facility Number: W—U01Date of Inspection !
Required Records & Documents
19_ Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ZSoil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking E]'C-rop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? Yes �No ❑ NA El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
''NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E�`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
-ONE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[� No
rE:�No
El NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
❑ 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
2Mo
❑ 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
J'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
El
Addifional Comments and/or Drawings::
a v C09V 1 age �' St l�r c,tmr�Yta T�
S�]�---6rc0rr� Sit [ �- I��
• 7fae sfer` Ci�v� Y/C lc�s Xo X f f""e 0 C) a��.� s
y
12128104

(Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit JWRoutine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other 0 Denied Access
Facility Number hate oI Visit: vZ �l Tune: i 3
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
)t(Permittedp�Cert>ified © Conditionally Certifed Registered Date -Last Ope r Above Threshold:
Farm Name: rn County•
Owner Name: - . _ . Phone No:
12ailmg Address:
Facility Contact: __ .. .._...._ .._ _-- ---- _ Tide:.. __ ... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: _�.1 ���_- . _ . Integrator:
Certified Operator: �- , ••• _ • Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
01'S'wine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • " Longitude • 9 0"
es:gnz ;Caurmt.Des:gal '.
::4:..r...-ideiru"■Ea�:rr.. �_ C.atde .. ... !''�,.�:..4�:'
wean to Feeder
Layer
ceder to Finish
077W
3 TO o
Non -Layer
Farrow to Wean
-
Farrow to Feeder
E-4 Other
Farrow to Finish
��M Total MA
_
�a
Gilts
Boars
Discharges & Strearm I pacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? t
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
xT
nCagadty
Aid gSLW
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Stru Ie I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 3
12112/03
❑ YesOgNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;2�10
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure b
Continued

Facility Number: 3 — Date of InspectionQ�
1 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ,!J No
t.'. seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ yes 21fo
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 maintenancetimprovement? ❑ Yes J2M
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancerimprovement? ❑ Yes ;2'fTo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markets with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes 2No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 2 No
11. Is there evidence of over application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes .2rNo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type / !`/Y%l.///�- //-/ 1 , S &=,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWNT)? ❑ Yes ONO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes X
No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?[IYes XNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes JRVo
15_ Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ZrNko
16_ Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ YesIj2'No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ yes )1To
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ,8'qo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes XNo
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 ❑ YesN0
Air Quality representative immediately.
iie- -- - — �- — bay-�-�__-�.•-�,...�xr--- ;cam �-_' ����r�-� -x -
Commen#s (referty ,gas.l}Facplam auYYFS1/cir anytlmmoens.
.�
i�sedraw of fty tobettdr,:ss (-additin PaS� ffi 17' ❑ Feld C ❑ Final Notes
_...
NA
Ple,�s� mIV z o�
Ae, rze-lv/ OF,-
a wMR
Reviewer/Inspector Name .az.i&
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: c3
12112103 e f Continued

Facility Number:. j — Date of ,inspection
t
Re uir Records & Documents
Ti. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
eYes ❑ No
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 RNo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes J2110
❑ 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 Z-^No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �o
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
discharge, freeboard
❑ Yes �o
(ieJ problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewerfimpector fail to discuss reviewCmspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 0<0
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes Jam'"'
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes � TKO
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Foam ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

. vision of Water Quality ;
_
x
0 Division of Soil and-Water,.Conservation .
r
0 er Ageney
_
w
of Visit JcKompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit R Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: 11 7 (7 Time: I 10 • 4 7 1 Printed on: 7/21/2000
tD Not Operational O Below Threshold
[3 Permitted © Certified [] Conditionally Certified © Registered rrDate Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
j'Y'—q"S Rflk f- f4,1"'lCounty:.- ..lL.prt Farm Name: _.............................................. ..........�........_.........k.......�.lc�......................................................
r/ � -\ ' e
Owner Name: ........................................................................................................................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ........................................
Title:....
Phone No:
MailingAddress: ...................... .............................................................................................................................................. ...........
Onsite Representative:.�.�V.i kti'1L!t .. rY1. ke xYl�j1Cr �}, � ritegrator: __ ............` f � .................
.......... .) -X
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:...........................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 9 66 Longitude �• �` «
Desi .. . Current
. gu
Design,Current
,
Design Correat
di
Ca Po Ikation
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle ..
Ca ' : Po ..: tion
Wean to Feeder
Layer Dairy
Feeder to Finish
10 Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
Gilts
Boars
Total !49LW .
yl
Nnml�er of I,egoaos =
❑ Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lag�x�n Area
❑Spray Field Area
H�oildwgaPandslSoi�d Traps`-
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Im iE acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes ZNo
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/ruin?
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? Xyes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ;?]'No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .................1..........................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 5'61/
5100
❑ Yes ONO
Structure 6
Continued on back

lF'acility Number: 3) — :50 Date of Inspection Printed on, 7/21/2000
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes /No
seepage, etc.)
6.- Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ;?fNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmerttal threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11 _ Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
�j
12. Crop type Ge d--I . Vk) q A V , 6"q 117 reel), ✓j
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those de$ignated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14- a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Document,-;
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
:: Rio •yiolafigris:oc• &fieieucies were potea• during this; visit. - Yolk :will f. ebO*ie Rio fui-ther -
corresporidence' about this visit... ' : ' ::: . :
[]Yes j2'No
❑ Yes RfNo
❑ Yes INO
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ❑.No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes �dNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 0No
❑ Yes ,?fNo
❑ Yes ,ETNo
❑ Yes �2 "No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes )'No
❑ Yes fi.fNo
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes VNo
Comments (refer to question #} Explatn any YES answers and/or say -recommendations or any other—ccontmen ��
Use drawtngs of facilEty to better ezpiarn.situahons (ttse addraonal pages as necessary)
a «
2 of w r Sl-e Cat ^,.e -6re p, A tiv t-tSC d Ve 4o q •
,&?6G�xe1 1,� 41"F Prf. j'�'fI/.��U;•) IcAut„/141_l sal.s bloc �e wcks
-POLL � Z ce>-- ✓'ec�eO4 i ^'1►''tel.R i Ga �"f Wat.>l�e, ctoes 1'zo+ gjpj0er,,- o
L ,tve iQ. + prolog r
. N eP et oil So 1 e j h fe co Y-5,
Reviewer/Inspector Name r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: It 17101 S100

Facility Number: 3 —?sp Date of Inspection % rj
-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 R�No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes .dNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ,®'No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes XNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional,:-omments an o-Drawings:77
k t
IV o4e GreL,ee- .sg.Y%!/as�_epi atbett.+ ► e+ #�[an4iA9 -S► tof ra,n, y
heed 40 (gV11aC4 }eG)Jr7jGA1 SyOeGta11s4 Qbov[+ 44)'r,
J

5
r _ rvt Dsio© of Water Quality
O_Dtvtsion of Soil and Water C©nserr+atton
O;Other-Agency
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation j
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 354 Date of Visit: 11-7-2401 Time: 10:47
NNot Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: _ __ __ __ __ _
Farm Name: MRaimBrandt.fa«a............................................................. County: DjWjU .................................... } IRO ......
Owner Name: "in.----- ------------- M4-------------------------- Phone No: 2j.Q-_285=4Uj46------------------------- --
Mailing Address: 114.W_Clez ent. �t................................................................................W.Allarx..Pic........................... ......... 7.8.46.0 ..............
Facility Contact: ...........................................................Title: ........................... Phone No
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator. Alxlin..C.................................. MO.W.lei............................................ Operator Certification Number: 1809.0............................
Location of Farm:
Nest of Wallace. South side of Hwy 41 approx. 1.7 miles West of SR 1100. Farm is to the right after entering farm path.
® Swine El Poultry ❑Cattle ❑Horse Latitude 34 • 44 ' 13 u Longitude 78 • 07 3044
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
I
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish
2448
JE1 Non -Layer
I I
I0 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,448
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
330,480
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
L
olding 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 gai/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes.. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ® Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Cl Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............. I ............. ........................... -------------- •-------- ..
Freeboard (inches): 56
nrin�ln•

Facility Number: 31-350
Date of Inspection 11-7-2441
uonnnueu
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
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?
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/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to questiiin #fJ Explainany YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments W _
Use drawings of facility to better-explainsituations use additional pages as nce essary) '❑ Field Copy f❑ Final Notes
_ - f
2. A discharge of waste came from a house due to a blockage in the pipe. Mr. Alvin Knowles says blockage was found and corrected
immediately. Waste does not appear to have left the property.
19. Need to have 2001 soil test in records.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis - enteredbyBette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

y 6A3/01 Continued
Facility Number: 31-350 Date of inspection 11-7-2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ®No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
=Ad itrona ommentsaq _.oc_°_ .rawrngs _W
[Note: Grower asked about not planting small grain. Need to contact technical specialist about this.

Owner Name: ,AJyiA--- ----- -------- I�,uQs.------------- - ----- ---- Phone No:$�Q-Z$444-------------------------- ---
Mailing Address: 114.W... ie�I1C.i1t.Slt............................................. ........ W.ALjjA&C...N.C................................... .................
.......................... ...............
Facility Contact: ........................................................... Title: Phone No
Onsite Representative: �lyau.lZLi]cep_S1�pAlLQyvJ!`--------------------- Integrator:iCpj�y�alpjJLy��-----------------..
Certified Operator: Alyill C.................................. Kl O.W.1ca........................................... Operator Certification Number: JRQQQ................... ..........
Location of Farm:
West of Wallace. South side of Hwy 41 approx. 1.7 miles West of SR 1100. Farm is to the right after entering farm path. f A-
® Swine ElPoultry ❑ Cattle ElHorse Latitude 34 • 44 13 u Longitude 7$ • 07 i 30 µ
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Panulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
2448
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer [INon-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 2,448
Total SSLW 330,480
Number of Lagoons 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 10 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 ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ------------- I------------- -------------•---------------------------•-----•--•------------------------•--•-------------•--•-----•----• ---------------------------
Freeboard (inches): 56
ne in�inr

v�iv �i�1
�.unterruru
Facility Number: 31-35U Date of Inspection 11-7-2001
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
® 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
N No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No'
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WL1P, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question # Explaru_any YES answers arrdlor any,recommendations or -any other,comments -
Use rIrawrngs of facility #o better explain situations (use`additronal pages as necessary) 0 Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
2. A discharge of waste came from a house due to a blockage in the pipe. Mr. Alvin Knowles says blockage was found and corrected
immediately. Waste does not appear to have left the property.
19. Need to have 2001 soil test in records.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis.- -.entered by Bette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

0516/QI
Facility Number: 31-350
Date of Inspection 11-7-2001
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is *ere any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ®No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
A ditiona omments and/or Drawings:
[Note: Grower asked about not planting small grain. Need to contact technical specialist about this.

Facility Number 31 350 Date of Visit: 11-7-2001 Time: 10:47
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: . -- ...- _- -. -.
Farm Name: N.[ltarsBranealk.Farin............................................................. County: D-uoju .................................... )'. IR0 ......
Owner Name: AYiA-------------- --- KAQ1Y-------------------------- Phone No: 43.Q-�$445-_.--------------------- -----
Mailing Address: 11.b..W. leul llt. x ............................... ....... N'.wlau'..NYC............................ ........ 7.8.46.6 ..............
FacilityContact:...........................................................Title:............................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: �ya>hlL4ikes&_SIeDnK[ut2v�. Integrator:
Certified Operator:eilYju_C.................................. Knoxim ........................................... Operator Certification Number: X$QQQ.............................
Location of Farm:
est of Wallace. South side of Hwy 41 approx.1.7 miles West of SR 1100. Farm is to the right after entering farm path.
® Swine ❑ Poultry [IGattle [I Horse Latitude 34 • 44 13 �° Longitude 78 • 07 30 «
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
® Feeder to Finish 2448
JEI Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
2,448
❑ Gilts
El Boars
Total SSLW
330,4$0
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ 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? N Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: -1------------- .............----------------•--•-------------•--•------------------------------•--•--------..
Freeboard (inches): 56

t0J/Ua/tri
Facility Number: 31-350
Date of Inspection 11-7-2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Coastal Bermuda (Hay) Small Grain Overseed
t. Unrrnueu
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
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?
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/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer toquestion #) Explatn_any YES answers and/or any recommendations orany other comments W-
Use drawu►g§of facility to:iietterezplam situations (use"additional pages as necessary) Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
2. A discharge of waste came from a house due to a blockage in the pipe. Mr. Alvin Knowles says blockage was found and corrected
+
immediately. Waste does not appear to have left the property.
19. Need to have 2001 soil test in records.
Reviewer/Inspector Name St Mathis entered 'byBette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

OA3101
Facility Number: 31- 350
Date of Inspection F 11-7-2001
Continued
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 N No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes N 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 N No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes N No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
A ditional;, omments and/or Drawmgs:
------
[Note: Grower asked about not planting small grain. Need to contact technical specialist about this. F&

Drvesagn oCWater Quality
ivisioii of Still and Wa Conser"vation
ter
ri
s -
_
0the
4a.,
,
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: r1 f 0 Gene: 7: Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number 3 S�
Q Not Operational Q Belov. Threshold
Permitted [j Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......-.......
2)
Farm Name: 5 Y Countv i........ ...............
! .... -�f.N-........."--..Is l��}l.�'-/Il........ .................. _ • . .lz fd.l.........
Owner Name: ............ r.l.. ! L' L� (_ . ,C_ l2UJ(�.��........ Phone No:
Facility Contact:
Title: - .....................
Phone No:
MailingAddress:................................................................................................ ............------.........................................._.._........... .
Onsite Representative: ..:........... ./%/��...� ��......-.-..-...... Integrator: .....
..........�%�....._.-....-........
. �l�loLt�I�P
5
Certified Operator:.._............................................................................................................. Operator Certification Numb er:.............
.
Location of Farm:
`Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude * �° �'4 Longitude 0 4 «
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Weeder to Finish a?y �/ ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons , ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lag--n Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1�No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-ruade-? ❑ 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 11()W in gal min-? V N
d. Drees 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 UfNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes MrNo
Waste Collection &. Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ZeNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure - Structure -) Structure 5 Structure 6
r�
Identifier: .............. ........................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection U Printed on.• 7/21/2000
I. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures obs rve - (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 a
closure plan? ❑ Yes INo
(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? es ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? 2rYes ElNo
9. Doany- stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes RNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes WNo
U. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes E(No
12. Croptype.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 00
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ''No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes RN\ o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes '�Ro
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes Wo .
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ONO
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
WNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Yes
26No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
fl�'No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
,ZNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
P�No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
J9No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
P10
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
f ZNo
1a•Yi6hAi6ris'oi- defciendii g were noted -during 4bis:visit:-Y:oii will-�'e�eiye iio rUfther -: •. -
. ' cor'res aridei�ce: a�otit this :visit.
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):
Reviewer/Inspector Name v✓� r U� - L
Reviewer/Inspector 5ignatuF r�
Date:
5100

Facility Number: — Date of inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
�)dor issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge AJor bglow "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 E2=No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes RNo
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 J'gNNo
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 Wo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes [110
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ONo
Additional Comments: and/or _Drawings:
o�d
aujL--
/41
J
5100

- -_
Division of Soil and,Water,_Conservai,on
x El Division of Soil and Water Conservabon - Compliance Inspection F
r o `Division of Water Quality £ G(implrsfnce Inspect,On
Other Agency Operad6fiRevt;ew
- r e _
Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow -, of DWQ ins ection 0 Follow-uE of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 3 Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection QQ 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted Certified © Conditionally Certified E3 Registered 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.!...`..r4.....i'.o...................................................................... County:....0.4'1 �.
Owner Name:..........................................................
Facility Contact:................................................:............................. Title:
MailingAddress: .................,.............................................................
Onsite Representative: ""
�
....... .....................................................................
Certified Operator: ...................................
Location of Farm:
PhoneNo: .................................................
Phone No:.....
.................................................................................. ..........................
Integrator:.......!/ ......... ................................................
Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
.......................................................................... ...-- .......................................................................................
Latitude �' �� ��° Longitude
Design Current __ Design TCurrent Design Current .-
Capacity Po ulation Poultry XCapacity Population _Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons= ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Feld 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 O(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 Dallo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes KNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure C
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): ......... L 0............................................................................................................................................................ . .................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc:)
3/23/99
Yes [iNo
Continued on back

I
Facility Nuimber: Date of Inspection
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 stealth or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenarice/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
1 l . Is there evidence f over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12- Crop'type ls1 , rG
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (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?
0' �'Vo viola.idiis.or. d. icieacies were poted• dtfdhg this:visit. - Yoi� WRI-ceeeiive iio fuirthe� ...
.corresporider�ce. abouf this :visit_ . ..............
❑ Yes Arpo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes rw&o
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes M�No
❑ Yes [;No
❑ Yes JKNo
❑ Yes )<No
❑ Yes 6<No
❑ Yes trNo
❑ Yes AZNo
❑ Yes O(No
❑ Yes ,(No
['Yes ❑ No
JZ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes Q�No
❑ Yes Coo
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes f �No
❑ Yes 1�fNo
Comments (refer to.question #)::Explain any YES answers atid/or any recommendattons'bi�.any other coiiments: -
Use xdrawings of facility 1dbetteroZplain situations (tile additional pages as necessary) - va
tl,—S
(07) �e ts l � �wAe_ bV S p ! , FM _ r
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 i d S I o0 I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ( 0 -�
3/23/99

. Facility Number: -356 Date of Inspection
Odor .Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below P(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 N No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes t<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 xNo
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 N(No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes qNo
32. Do the [lush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? . <Yes ❑ No
AddifionalComments, an or rawings
c
3/23/99

Division of Soil and Water Conservation [3 Other Agency
13 Division of Water Quality
10 Routine O Com lain( O Follow-u ' of DWQ ins ection O FoHow-ue of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 3 3S� Tiime of Inspection 1 = S' 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered 0 Certified 0 Applied for Permit (] Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
FarmDame:........ kunwl........... -4_. ............................................. I...... County: ..... D.f,k*......................................... .......................
Owner Name: ....... AAX.,'!............................ ......� 1L1.Qf tS........................................... Phone No:...L�i4�..z�
FacilityContact: ...................................:.......................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:.....i.. ....... (i :.,,.. i.G . �-................................................. ...............1�c�S e. �i.4....................................... �? ........
r... .
Onsite Representative ........ Al r . ..... ILoA)LL.... Integrator:--..- .ill d............................................
Certified Operator;-------------------- -- Operator Certification Number, D.v..v.........................................................................
Location of Farm:
k��rr......ty....asz...5cu..- "- - .�i ....ct.�....1# .....L,...a ..... ax}��C,-,rx!an� .....r.. .... c�:.iln....wi..........R..t€3,2.............................
................. ...... ...... ..........................................._... ..... .......................I......
Latitude �•� ��� Longitude �• �� �«
Design .:.Current
Design Current ,Design Current
SwmeF Capacity"` Population
Poultry ,'Cap Population Cattle CapacityPopulatrnn -
•
❑ Wean to Feeder
ID Layer
10 Dairy
(j Feeder to Finish
y
❑ Non -Layer
1
10 Non-Dairy
�
❑ Farrow to Wean
-
C] Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
3
,
'Total Design Capacity
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
[I Boars
rTotal SSLW'
„+
Number 4.Lagoons ! HoldrngT -o , p4kf
JE1 Subsurface Drains Present JOLagoonArea ID Spray Field Area
d
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
L 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
13 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
09 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
j No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
maintenancelimprovement?
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 Continued on back

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage Ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes (A No
Structures (Lagoons.tIolding Ponds, Flush Pits, W.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0 Yes Ell No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier
Freeboard(ft): ............... ........... I ........................ ................................... .................................. . .....................................
.. .......
... ...........
M
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
C�
❑ Yes
[6 No
I.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
El Yes
[S No
12..
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
N Yes
El 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
[A 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 ............. �Pzu-w�� ................................ " Am� ...... .1_ , ..............50.
.............. Lf. <&%JAM . . ...............................................................
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'
El Yes
0 No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
El Yes
M No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
IN No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ED Yes
U.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 Only
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.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit"
❑ Yes
%No
:I.No.viola'tions or'defi'cienkies. were noted - during this 'visit. -.Yoil.will receive no further
rther
correspondence about this'.visiL-'-'-'-
Comments �,(refer to question!#): Exp!ain any YES answers and/or any recommendations, o-r,'any othe'r.
,U
% se,urawsugs of facility to;hetfer explain situatioDs. ( use .additional pages as necessary).
72.. skoA3 (Ice
Kt t
7125/97
7 1
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector Signature:— Date:

� .J a�SNF��
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health, and -Natural Resources
Wilmington Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr. Division of Water Quality Jonathan B. Howes
Governor
August 1, 1997
ae�.�tu.: .'; .
Alvin Knowles
Mears Branch Farm
110 W. Clement Street
Wallace, NC 28466
Subject: NOTICE OF DEFICIENCY
Mears Branch Farm
Facility Number: 31-350
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Knowles:
Secretary
On July 31, 1997 Staff from the Wilmington Regional Office of the Division of Water Quality,
inspected your animal operation and the lagoon(s) serving this operation. It was observed that some erosion
of the clay liner has occurred on the lagoon. Large cuts were observed in various sections of the inner dike
wall of the lagoon. It is our concern that some of these gullies may become deep enough to cut through the
liner material and sacrifice the integrity of the structure.
As discussed at the time of the inspection, the cuts should be filled with a suitable clay material,
compacted and reseeded with an appropriate vegetative cover. In addition, the inner wall of the lagoon
should be mowed, and the coastal bermuda crop in. field #13 should be improved. We suggest that you
contact your service company, local NRCS or Soil and Water District office for any assistance they may
be able to provide to correct the situation
To remain a deemed permitted facility, you must notify this office in writing within fourteen (14) days
of the receipt of this notice, what actions will be taken to comply with your waste management plan. Failure
to do so may result in the facility losing it's deemed permitted status, requiring it to obtain an individual non
discharge permit.
127 Cardinal Drive Extension, Wilmington, N.C. 28405-3845 a Telephone [phone] a Fax [phone]
An Eque1 opportunity Affirmative Action Employer

Alvin Knowles
August 1, 1997
Page -
Please be aware it is a violation of North Carolina General Statutes and Rules to discharge wastewater
to the surface waters of the State without a permit and/or to fail to follow a certified waste management plan.
The Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources has the authority to levy a civil penalty of
not more than $10,000 per day per violation.
When the required corrective actions are complete, please notify this office in writing at the address
below. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please call David Holsinger, Andy Heminger or
Brian Wrenn at 910-395-3900.
Sincerely,
&'--l' /J/I�--
Brian L. Wrenn
Environmental Specialist
cc: Billy Houston, County Soil and Water Conservation
Sandra Weitzel, NC Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Garth Boyd, Murphy Family Farms
Operations Branch
Wilmington -Files--_

Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
�
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection f3' zo 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: __.__ ... .. _ .... .... .... __....... L.'....... _ .... .... _ .... _ ..
Farm Name: ___. m...�h...... .... ... ............... County: ........
�t�,L} 1t._ .... .... .... _.... ......_ ....
Land Owner Name: . �.Wa 1L1......QI�.S .............. _.... ..... ....... Phone No: ._... .... .......... _....
,
Facility Conctact:... e V ..�_... r 1- l................................... Title: --Wuram Phone No: ._.......
Mailing
OnsiteRepresentative: .,�1�.k+R....�„ol,�...._.......__. Integrator: iVx1p�
Certified Operator: illl3 .0 .... .._............... Operator Certification Number: �(.Q�'t�,..... ..-...... .....,
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®'` K Longitude ®• 0` 0 u
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Swine D gn Current:
.Ca aci r Fo` ulatian
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
h...................
❑ Other
- Design Current . Design - CurrenE p
_ poultry ` Ca aci "�Po ulation �F Rte Ca aci : Po ulatQ
h
r La er ,. ❑ D 'ry
❑ Non La er ❑Non Da
v
h Total Design Capaety 2�
h xMO e
fltal SSL30
"Number of Lagoons) Holding Ponds ❑Subsurface Drams Present _..__... f
7
U Lagoon Area 3 ❑ Spray Field Area
MN
General
I. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes I& No
❑ Yes (KNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes
allo
❑ Yes
1;j No
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ Yes
f� No
Continued
on back

Facility Number:...A.).._ Z...307
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
El No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
® No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
No
Structures 3l,agoons and/or Holding_Pondsl
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
-.._!?e..i _....__.. ........... ..... _ ...._......_. .... ......... ._...... _.... .._...... __.... _....
........ .............--
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
[9 No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(4 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
WNo
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
1
15. Crop type gr!hLe .__....... ....................................... 50 .- ------- ----.......----------------------- -------
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
V No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EZNo
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
IN No
For Certified,Facilitie5 Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
(a No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
00 No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
19 Yes
❑ No
Comments {refer to question-# Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments„
Use dcawmgs of facilrty to3better axplarn situatrons (use additional pages as necessary} '
Il•�12. EY'03i6h OsrAS ay. :nKar (( 6' 1 Dn SiWu�d be �+� i,= CAA+ .0.nJ reSee&j. 4
Ihr+,ur ualt rk r►•olvo
j7_ Coa.s4'At CAP ,., l'idd zfS 3 s6u1d sae. irtiprr3vcd-
z.A. Stow ctcOH% 5� 0Uu bC_ Kett by riS rlrutti huw��e�` cw•c� �P�fJ �Vm�' fdiGsit cu�
Say [ otNa�s1� S�cv�ci � e �a[�en.
a
cc: Division a) Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Site Requires immediate Attention:
Facility No. 3 f - 3
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISTTATIOI`r PIPMRn
DATE: Z - Z t , 1991
Time:P
Farm Name/Owner: A i V I Len 2
Mailing Address:
County: 1
Integrator: Yyw-t `l , _ Phone: On Site Representative: _ A V i w � � Phone: !q f!�q &
Physical Address/Location: E, & e�t u jam; a crc _ C"',
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 2.44 I Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) 0or No Actual Freeboard: �t. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes oqo was any erosion observed or No
Is adequate land available�for spray? Yv1 or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes �o�� -
Crop(s) being utilized: L Qa_s &k / Y GSG. u 5 g22y.- 04A" . "Vooy- _ UJ A
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? V!Por No
100 Feet from Wells? Y56r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or(e
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or(o
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage
Additional Comments: r- (
11.1 /, _
cover cryp)? Y
'f r , >`.. `I �,.rJ11 P.uO► ,.a2 e,C/ f P ,4Ye ��/ it& et -
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

r Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. 3-SZ
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIlVIAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE_ Z'Z� , 1999, C_c3mPirL�` cP�5�5�.
Time:
Farm Name/Owner:�-
Mailing Address:
County: -_D-1121 yr1
Integrator: - V "(,t
Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone: 53 -2 - Z-3Za _
Physical Address/Location:.-VLOW''Ll I ,00ro,X I KZ ,ILG e5:c i Aj( Ate.
OYL Sou S rclz O; w ,
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle ;
Design Capacity: 1700.. Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE . DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3_' 44 ' Z Z- " Longitude: -11° 0 �' 75 " Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) 1e o Actual Freeboard: 1 Ft_ A— Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or(!3> Was any erosion observecr dpor No
Is adequate land available for spray?d!�g or No Is the cover crop adequate? ge or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? er No'
100 Feet from Wells? ' s r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes ore
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes oil
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man -glade devices? 'des or No If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or9
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Z 312 639 816
US Postal Service
Receipt for Certified Mail
No Insurance Coverage Provided.
Do not use for International Mail See reverse
Sent to
}
Street & NLIMbet
,
ce, & Z
I
Postage
$
. 3 Z_
CenHied Fae
Spedal Deihrery Fee
Restricted DeSverp Fee
Retum Receipt Showing to
` !�
Whom & Date Delivered
Fam Rtx* Stlo* to Whom,
Dale, A Addressee's
//
TOTAL Postage'&
r
7
�1=
Postmark or Dili `�