310564_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

' Division of Water Resources
Fac' N tuber 'j - S% Division of Soil and Water Conservation
© Other Agency
Type of Visit: omphance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival
Time: �-1- Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: c�y� 1 �/ V'�[,C" Y Owner Email:
Owner Name: _6 , O �ey- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:q Iti 249 1 Z�
Onsite Representative: --)Ahyl y S61G r Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
C**opacity Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Design
Cattle Capacity
Dairy Cow
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er I
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Design
Q _FylP,oult , Ca aci P,o
Layers
Non -La ers
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pu11e15
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Turkey Points
Other
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes M 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
❑ Na
U NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑Yes
❑ No
[?] NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑Yes
EA No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑Yes
[y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page. I of 3 2/4/20I5 Continued

lFacility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No [�D NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): L
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes ® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes [4 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): —;aQr'fT- ! ,Q ` u P
13. Soil Type(s): `
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [;A 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 [I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
❑ Yes 59 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
FA 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
V] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
5h No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ No
(DNA [A NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of inspection: I
24. Did,the faCitty fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes ❑ 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: V Ca`4--
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No [DNA ❑ 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?
24. 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 the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ bther:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ❑ No,_ .❑ NA g�-NE
❑ Yes
rQoNo
' ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
7] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name: �� �`'Z �` Phone: qJ6 7 3 41
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015 rr�

" Ili'vi:"sion of Water Resources
Facility Number, 3i - -S'G Division of 5oii and Water Conservation
` DQ Other Agency
Type of Visit: „Q-ftmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: JZMautine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: /,t c a Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: T ,S'la�-�, ,��, Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title: Phone:
Latitude:
Integrator: Q ' /r
Certification Number: / i&0,
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
C►apacity Pop.
Design Current
Wet Poultry Caparit'y Pop.
Layer
RNNon-Layer
Design Current
Cattle C•aparity Pop.
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design
Layers
29 Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes,.ETNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[]Yes
ETNo
[DNA
❑ NE
[—]Yes
P]"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes P No
[:]Yes VNo
❑ Yes ❑'No
[DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: 3 1 - 5 r jDate of Inspection: 2- L
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is s� capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 2�`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ;14o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: !�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): _
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes E2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes ff'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 ❑'Af o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes C;3'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) TT
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �l+do
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? TT
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes 5�Ao
❑ 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 VTNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reauired Records & Documents
[:]Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
;�J'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
[—]Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
P'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
VNo
❑ NA
C ] NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

[Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: rr
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes C;JoRo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes l�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes J2'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
❑ Yes _eNo
❑ 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 L2'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 Q'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
T
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ;5qNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage�Pohd ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non' compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes PKNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewhi spection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ONO
0 NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes F21No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better ezplain "situations (use additional pages as necessary).
51uc�,e suru.b AA-A-t- BLS Iry
Y
r lrm a-- rG CU r-c� S t v - 4�yo & 0'r a_e
,.;
Reviewer/Inspector Name:r//�, �a, _ r� Phone: ��fiT2
�p/v
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 1L Date: Z
Page 3 of 3 40 214 OI S
L;

Type of Visit: Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: /p Arrival Time: eparture Time: County: DLtohn Region:
Farm Name: r S r Owner Email: ��TJ
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: E)Q J SW a r - Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number: a !
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I La er
Design Current
C•attte Capacity Pap.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
T�y Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
D . P,oult , C►a aci_ P,o ,
Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes)z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ZfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes ;Z*No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
[:]Yes rJ o
C] NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

l+acili Number: jDate of Inspection: 6 /
24, Did the'facili fail to calibrate waste application equipment as re required b the ermit. Yes No NA NE
tY PPq Y P ❑ ❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes PrNo ❑ 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 structures) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [—]Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes JZNo ❑ 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?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes "No
[:]Yes 0No
❑ Yes X-A'N
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[3 NA ❑NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAW T? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
c
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 V� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
WO PJ ucPse exF- avvi-a ao/ V
7�rK e recdds
I[ 61)q /. q /3 f cl"�.� Y'3 F la V�_ -Cr W I I
q/61 ly 1,13 dU S e c avqcQo�_ .
Reviewer/Inspector Name: OPhone: 1?1'/S,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /t 116 /
Page 3 of 3 121412114

Facility Number: -C Date of Inspection: p
`
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
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
,,Z
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
[�To
T�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
[ o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
12"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
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
;;J-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
171, }o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes '�2'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Renuired Records _& Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
[;�No
El NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
TT
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes r-1,No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

division of Water Quality '
Fac> ity Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservatb
Type of Visit .QfCompliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit_A?(Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: s/'' Region: &
Farm Name:Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: I Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: rllicf/!%�% c�/[� Integrator:
t 79-7
l v'
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number: �-7 T,
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
I
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ o [= , Longitude:
Ca age Po"" Design Curren# m -sign Current .
� ��.
Swine„ pa v,ty Population Wet Poultry _CapacityPoPiilati6ii CattEe Capacity Population
Wean to Finish ❑ L
Wean to Feeder ❑lNN
Feeder to Finish —
Farrow to Wean
F F d D
arrow to ee er
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
ier �~
w
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
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?
f
❑Yes�No El ❑NE
❑ Yes 6 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 31— Date of Inspection /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes ;yNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes P-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: I
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes [INo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes E�(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 Z�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
ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2r�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ 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
[VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16_ Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17, Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
VrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[)No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to questiom#): Explain any YES answers and/or any "recommendations or any',other comments .
Use .drawings of facility to.better explain situations (I se additional pages as necessary} r.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
Page 2 of 3 1
12f28/04 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes J;rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes E;�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V 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
2—No
ElNA
ElNE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[IYes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
.,ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ 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
ZNo
❑ 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
[,TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
�-
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

ATLI, W�
NCDENR
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves Perdue Coleen H. Sullins Dee Freeman
Governor Director Secretary
July 23, 2010
I. B. Sholar yy
Dan B. Nursery '
2387 Ash Davis Rd '
Pink Hill, NC 28572 31
Subject: Sludge Survey Testing Dates
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS310564
Dan B. Nursery
Animal Waste Management System
• • • Duplin County
Dear I. B. Sholar:
The Divisiod�of.Water Quality (Division)received your sludge survey information on -July 16;• a
2010. With the survey results, you'requested an extension of the sludge survey requirement for, r .
the lagoon at the Dan B. Nursery facility. Due to the amount of treatment volume available, the -
Division agrees that a. sludge, survey is- not. needed until 2014 foryour lagoon. _
The next sludge survey for the.lagoon at;Dan B. Nursery'facility should be performed before ,.
December 31, 2014.'Thauk you for your`attcntion to this matter. Please call meat (919).715- " , •
6937 if you have any questions.
C�IV
D
' Sincerely,
BST
• n R
Miressa D. Garoma
. fr
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
cc: Wihnii gton Regional Office;' AquiferProtection.Section
Permit File AWS310564 : .
1636 Mail Service Center. Raleigh, North Cardiina 27599-1636 One
Location: 2728 Ca-,ltat Bled.. Raleigh. North Carolina 27504 NorthCaroiina.x qa �7tr�t N���
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone]aa 1 Customer fr/�
Service: 1-877-623-674B y
Intamsi: www.n(.wafernwPiitv.nr'n
An Farr,il Onw tun it' Atfirmhfivs Action .YEnt.im r

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name: _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: / /�` 'i al'-
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator•
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: �'"t5
Latitude: = Q = 6 Longitude: = ° =
Design Current
Swine C*ap�acrity Population
Wet Poultry
Design
Capacity
Current Design Current
Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
Dry Poultry ❑ Dry Cow
ElNon-Dairy
❑ Layers ❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets El Feeder
❑ Turke s ❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other Number of Structures:
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
)�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
,0'<o
❑ 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 WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes ,E 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 P�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 R 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 ff 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?
IL Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑'&o ❑ NA El NE
El Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) /
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or ] O lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
,O'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
,ZI-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
J2No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Er —No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Po
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comm (refer to question. #} Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
ZUse c rawings4of facility.to better explan�situahons (use,addtttonal pages as necessary,):
f
Reviewer/Inspector Name f �!� Phone: 7 _5 6
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: // / d
rage L of ) IZiZwUlf 4.vnunura

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WDp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22,
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes P—No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes ) No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes C;k&o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes [::�1No
❑ 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 J:I'1Qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes P*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes ;21�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ;3N
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

,t
Facility INUmDe 17 1
LL__'
J
AO Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O.Other Agency
Type of Visit Q<ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit�Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: _LZ�
Farm Name: �Ca'v7 fir. `i..� rr / Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: 22Q±q
Certified Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: [= o = 6 Longitude: = ° =' 0
k �� rDesign ,Current. `t FDesign Current` Design .,Current;
F>' Swine ,Capacity Pop�Iahon Wet Poultry .:.Capacity ,Population Cattle Capacity Population,
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
tery ;;
Other
Pullets
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
Turkey Poults -
Other Number'of Structures; I.
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
I
❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
-No
❑ Yes
o NA
El NE
El Yes
;Zo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —off Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes,�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. El VrUp ElChecklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ElOther
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
JXNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
(Wyes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
14 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
,Mc,
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
,��
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
El Yes
d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑
El
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
Yes
❑ NA
NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or
� L
0"F3� Y
5VIY16G 0 G �
In
cure j of j
0
f/-0-G/7 g 2

l ype or visit 0 Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: f 04 Departure Time: County: 01 4AL111-
Farm Name: % Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: / Title:
Onsite Representative: �$ �4
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone No:
Integrator
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region: e//lp�
Latitude: = Q = 6 Longitude: ❑ ° = =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
ip ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Finish
21 Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑Other ------ .
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection l a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Strucxure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ,
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ,l No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 1ZNo ❑ 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 ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? [f 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 Wind w ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s) 6/'Oys
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
VfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
❑ Yes
RP$qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
— —i.. ; �. �.i • K� M'4 ''it r� t �'$ -- i � nswers and,.r�[tw
Comments�{trefer�to question4#) Eaplam any YES Alar anyrrge .ommendations or any other comments.
°Use�drawtngs�aflfacthty�tolhetter�+etcplain sttuattonss {use'ad[dittotiel;pages�as necessary):
.� ' .>. .. �, w3 '-:p ,. 4t. �.;.«T:. i . cT,�..z'.. .. �vS+A c_ �-� .. yi✓r �>ie.+NXss�ki:��" t�.iIA'�_ �'
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: �� Q
12/28/0,f Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Reggired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes R5 No . ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. (l WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PNo ElNA ElNE
ElWaste Application ElWeekly Freeboard ElWaste Analysis ElSoil Analysis ElWaste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
L9 NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
(n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
EXNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
VNE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�3 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
WNo
❑ 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
J'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
21 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
joNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:IV
/ 3 ;- i/- h' eGe-,l ivj lr��c oorl . 4re SC n
00 J,
board ' - /-aljw' , l�ave,
12128104

Type of Visit )j'Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OrRoutine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:/
,Pf mittedXC rtified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered
Farm Name:
Owner Name:.
ional O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or AboV Threshold: ..
County:,,
Phone No:
Mading Address:
Facility Contact: . - Title:.. - .. __. __ . _- Phone No:
Onsite Representative- 4d Integrator.
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
_10
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle [] Horse Latitude �' �� Du Longitude �• �Du
Cur�mt
m DesMft-
n
-wSR
+,Swine _ •._ _3� 1�=--�J-...x_ _.- .:iQ
+�%n.- .W�e .., .... '_�.. ..'. 7�� Yon.
Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
Dairy
-
i Non -Layer
Non -Dairy
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to wean
Fan -ow to Feeder
Other
-
z w
Farrow to Finish
Tt►tst'SLW_'
Gilts
Boars
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes JWNo
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/rain?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Pilo
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes lZNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ZNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ,dNo
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: — r .. --
Freeboard
Freeboard (inches): 019
12/l2103 Continued

Facility Number: —3S Date of Inspection
5. .;,.re there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures ob erved? (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
❑ Yes &No
closure plan? '
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancehmprovement?
❑ Yes ZNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancerunprovement?
❑ Yes ,dNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes E!(No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes Elio
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes -ONo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ jiyre Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type r
13. Do the receiving crops differ with drose designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWNP)?
❑ Yes ,E`No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes Eio
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes .45No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes 1314o
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes :ErNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes P_X'o
Odor issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes E!No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
[:]Yes • }', No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
[I Yes �Z] No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑ Yes ,�o
Air Quality representative immediately.
o57,61 -,
arc Ilea
ReviewerlInspector Name
ReviewerAhspector Signature:
el�'�Wll
❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date:
ll/lL/V3 _ [.07ui7ilrse[i

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection F17ale,
Reiuired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes A 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 Of4o
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ErRo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard [3 Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ;].No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes P140
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes .L;?No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes JQ-Ao
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONo
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ yes
"PINo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes j2rgo
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 boa below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

t.
3 _
�Dtvisian of Water Quality`
y�
�b
O Dtvts�on of $orl and Water Conservation
E
Q Other -Agency '
L
Type of Visit Wcompliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 06outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: � ��� Time: � d Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
NNot O erational O Below Threshold
('] Permitted ;(Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
�J �
Farm Name: ..... C �~ ....D..... 11�-.--:;Te!....................................................... County:.... �1.'1...............................................
OwnerName: ................................................... ........................................................................ Phone No:
Facility Contact: ............... Tale . Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative:..., ............... Integrator:.,,; .1`\t�.r �
Certified Operator: ................................................... .................... Operator Certification Number.............,
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• �0°°
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder ,] ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present HO Lag—n Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Imyact5
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obscn-cd, was the conveyance; man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c- II' 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
Structure I Structure 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier . ....................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes )<(No
❑ Yes P�Io
❑ Yes A No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Faciiky Number: 3 1 — Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes too
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes XNo
(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 XNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes JKNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes )KNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
11. Is there evident of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes bdNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes KNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? N'Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? XYes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes )KrNo
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
0Yes
❑ No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
MNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
UNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
f�(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
RNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
WNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
gNo
0: *-* ati6 is:oi- &fldencte.g were noted- Oirr"ing #his:visit: - Y:oij wiil •reeeive Rio; further
rorr461ridei�ce: abauti 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):
i��-d.2►• l �_''"�9��•-. 1�--.c+. p1c�� . �� �`T o`t- SJL,t.�r t�tr14.
Vr
v�S � � ✓ G•-kQ. � h 5��,~ � 1 .►-� -}- C�-1�1� y�.� Gti . � ` "`�� f Inx^'-"1
Reviewer/Inspector Name k l Q 3 3 x Go�,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: - (3 —CIO 5100

Facifity Number: 3 1 — Date of Inspection G ed Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Isiues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge At/or Mow Oyes )�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 PJ No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
j No
roads, building structure, and/orpublic property)
'' 11
29:
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
ANo
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
0
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
NfNo
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
KNo
Additional-COMMentS'an or.Drawings:
l,.fe� �,.��>,�.� ��-- cep-���--. ���. — �,_,�.e. � pe►-����
n
I� c�� c t-- t`,•'�:\L--� �� cc�.. d�.3� S� �- !' � 1 G`�-��\�ST� �i l'�
r
`his 4q��
J
5100

0©tvtston of Water Quality
r ` ©tvtston of Soil' and Water Conservation
N
x Other Agency ti P
V
n
M �
Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit 95 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other
L
❑ Denied Access
Date. of Visit: j i Ficne:
Z, rrt Printed oil: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
19 Permitted 10 CeeCertified❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......................
Farm Name: ...... e'le,..... ul.............................................................. Countv:..........106
,..... .
.1.e.^..-...-.-............... ..-."..............."-...
Owner Name:..-.-.-....-.-54r1Plst ..................... Phone No:.......... ...................
-...........--.....
Facility Contact:
Title:
MailingAddress: ..... .............. — ................— ............... I.......
Onsite Representative: --,- 44,11; ..................
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Curr
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Phone No:
Integrator: ".-"-"-!�� f/../.n. --
Operator Certification Number: -
Latitude 0 ' " Longitude 9 4 it
Design Current Design Carrent
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle . Ca' : Po iiilation
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW '
Discharges & Stream Imaacks
l_ Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 8[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/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? []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 Cj�No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .-- "-.._....._.................
Freeboard (inches): 27
5/00
Continued on back

Facility Number: 31 — 5 Date of Inspection I !! 0 Z
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, [j Yes [3No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes Vc 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 U(No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancetimprovement? ❑ Yes ®,No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes B No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes M No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes [ANo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettabie acre determination'? ❑ Yes ej 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 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?
! Yi � iQris;e di�fc�encies were pgte ¢t;H`tn..... �.. •You i.. •>feer<........e. •
6firis�6x deice: about: this visit.
❑ Yes j[ No
❑ Yes El No
❑ Yes bq No
❑ Yes ,qNo
❑ Yes jq No
❑ Yes Eq No
❑ Yes Vj No
❑ Yes Ej No
❑ Yes JRNo
❑ Yes B No
❑ Yes. 9 No
r m :Wetta��e ltrt d('f�i�M,�ra bn A&4 &Se� ExfPvtoi /ty�r�nf `� -td �s,Q�e. Ae
4fe- T&c,/►
Reviewer/Inspector Name "M
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: / 1 /1 %Z- 5/00

Facility Number: Date of inspection / /( OZ Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
25. 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 .5 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes RNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes KNo
s/00

Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross, Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
July 3, 2001
Mr. Danny Sholar
301 Lighthouse Road
Wallace, NC 28466
Subject: Wetted Acres Status & Notification
Dan B. Nursery
31-564
Dear Mr. Sholar:
You were sent a letter on .tune 1, 2001 requesting that you provide me with the necessary
information to complete the evaluation of your facility with respect to a Wettable Acres Determination.
The result of this evaluation and the required action to be taken by you is indicated below.
X Based upon the new information your facility is exempt at this time from undergoing a
Wettable Acres Determination. No further action is necessary at this time.
Information that was provided was not sufficient to exempt the facility from a Wettable
Acres Determination. The Division of Water Quality will notify you at a later date by
certified mail detailing the requirements of a Wettable Acres Determination.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at the
Wilmington Regional Office at [phone] ext. 219. Make sure to obtain complete copy of design
and calculations from Starr Maready for your records.
Sincerely,
Dean Hunkele
Environmental Specialist
Cc: DWQ Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
W`IfVington Fites =: 131r-564!)
S:IWQSIANIMALS1DUPLIN12001131-564 Sholar WAD Status.wpd.
Wilmington Regional Office
127 Cardinal Drive Extension Phone: [phone]
Wilmington, NC 28405-3845 Fax: [phone]

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretal
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
I.B. Sholar
Dan B. Nursery
301 Lighthouse Rd
Wallace NC 28466
Dear I.B. Sholar.
JUN 12 C001
June 4, 2001
1kr?W'A
•
C cc
DENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Notification for Wettable Acre Determination
Animal Waste Management System
Dan B. Nursery
Facility Number 31-564
Duplin County
A letter dated January 15, 1999 was sent to advise you about concerns associated with Certified Animal
Waste Management Plans and the method by which the irrigated acres within the plans were calculated. Only
the acres that are wetted can be credited in the waste management plan as receiving waste application. Any
acreage within the plan that can not be reached by waste application equipment can not be used as part of your
plan.
An evaluation by Dean Hunkele on 11 /30100 was made to review the actual number of acres at your
facility that receive animal waste during land application. The evaluation of your facility has yielded one of
the following two results as indicated by the box marked with an "X".
Category 1:
The evaluation of your facility could not be completed due to a lack of information. Please
contact your Technical Specialist to assist in providing Dean Hunkele the necessary
information to potentially exempt your facility from undergoing a complete wettable acre
determination. Please submit this information to Dean Hunkele, at 127 Cardinal Drive
Extension, Wilmington, NC 28405-3845, within in 90 days of the receipt of this letter. If you
have any questions please contact Dean Hunkele at [phone]. If within 90 days you
are unable to provide Dean Hunkele with the information you are automatically
required to complete a Wettable Acre Determination as described -by Category 2
below, within 180 days of receipt of this letter.
1
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycle&10% post -consumer paper

Notification for Wettable Acre Determination
Animal Waste Management System
Page 2
Category 2: .
❑ Your facility has been identified by Department of Environment and Natural Resources
as a facility that may have overestimated the number of acres actually receiving animal
waste. Therefore, some or all of your fields may be exceeding the allowable loading rates
set in your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to resolve this issue, please contact a designated Technical Specialist to have him
or her conduct a Wettable Acre Determination for your facility. The Technical Specialist must
be one that has been approved by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission to conduct
Wettable Acre Determinations. Many Technical Specialist with the N.C. Cooperative Extension
Service, the Soil and Water Conservation Districts, the Natural Resources Conservation
Service, and the Division of Soil and Water Conservation have received this' special
designation. You may also contact a private Technical Specialist who has received this
designation, or a Professional Engineer.
All needed modifications to your Animal Waste Management System must be made and
the Wettable Acres Determination Certification must be returned to DWQ within the next
180 days. If the needed modifications are not made and if the form is not returned within the
required time, DWQ will be forced to take appropriate enforcement actions to bring this facility
into compliance. These actions may include civil penalty assessments, permit revocation,
and/or injunctive relief.
Once a Wettable Acre Determination has been completed, a copy of the attached Wettable
Acre Determination Certification must be submitted to the address listed on the form. Please
note that both the owner and the Technical Specialist must sign the certification. A copy of all
the Wettable Acre Determination documentation that applies to your Waste Utilization Plan
must be kept at your facility. DWQ and the Division of Soil & Water Conservation Staff will
review all documentation during their annual visit of your facility. An additional copy must by
kept on file at the local Soil & Water Conservation District Office. -Please note that if you install
or modify your irrigation system, a designated Irrigation Specialist or a Professional Engineer
must also sign the Wettable Acre Determination Certification.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility of
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Sonya Avant of our
Central Office staff at (9I9) 733-5083 ext. 571_
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
Murphy Family Farms

Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
Name of Farm/Facility # � L CUil 1 ,j 6
Location of Farm/Facility`
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Number
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream SIope,xH:IV
Embankment SIiding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
A 3o1 _L[(0y\.t oz�,
- =Z8S 2A
Z Names of Inspectors_ ..
J Freeboard, Feet Z
�r
� Y2_ - 2 Top Width, Feet _
2 Downstream Slope, xH:1 V
Yes o
Seepage? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes) - -
Erosion?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of
Vegetative Cover
(Grass, Trees)
Did Dike Overtop?
Follow -Up Inspection Needed?
Yes
62�ss C>k
Yes �'_­No If Yes, Depth of Overtopping, Feet
Yes -- No
Engineering Study Needed? Yes No
Is Darn Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law of 1967?
Other Comments
Yes /No

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment__ _ . .. �— J
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality I
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor,�j;
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
December 13, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
I.B. Sholar
Dan B. Nursery
301 Lighthouse Rd
Wallace NC 28466
Farm Number: 31- 564
Dear T.B. Sholar:
4 • •
NCDENR
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
You are hereby notified that Dan B. Nursery, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply for coverage under
an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sixty 60days to submit the attached
application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular Session
1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subject your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Theresa Nartea at [phone] extension 375 or
Stoney Matthis with the Wilmington Regional Office at [phone].
cerely,
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Wilmington Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Revised April 20, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Numb e- �q --
Farm Name:--- -A
On -Site Representative: "DL,• _1=ni o-1)
Inspector/Reviewer's Name:
Date of site visit:
Date of most recent WUP: "�_q ('�\
Annual farm PAN deficit: 9L4 pounds
Operation is flagged for a wettable
acre determination due to failure of
Part 11 eligibility items sj F1 F2 F3 F4
Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
P
Operation - ended for wettable acre
P
determination based on <D' P2 P3
Irrigation System(s). - circle #: 1. hard -lose traveler; 2. center:pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
(f stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wlportable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system w/portabie pipe
PART 1. WA Determination Exemptions (Efigibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
Ell Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D2/D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including ;nap
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is.complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part Ill. (NO i E:-75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that rail the eligibility checklist in Part H. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11- F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part 111).
PART 11. 75% Rule -Eligibility Checklist and .Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required.because.operation falls one of the .eligibliity
requirements listedhelow:
_ F1 Lack .oi:acreaae-which TesuitediniDver.mpplicairan-:Of-v+rastew-ater-(PAN) on:spray-
field(s) nccoraina-io:tarm'slas-twoyearsmf-.imcaiion7ecoi ds.7--
i=2 Unclear; if eoibler -or lack of Tniormationhnap_
F3 Obviousfeld-limitations -(numerous hitches;:faiium:—io;deductTequired:-_.._.
bufferlsetbackmcreage;.or25%:ofiotat_acreage-identmed:iril_CA`lllMP,71riciudes
_ _
small; irregularly-shapedfelds--iieids:lesst tan-5:acresIfor-travelers or_less-1han
2 acres sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP creditsfieid(s)'s acreage -in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part 111.

Revised April 20, 1999
Facility Number - ----- -
Part Ili. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA -Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBER'
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
'-TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
3` i
,off
g,g
r73
FIELD NUMBER'- hydrant, pull, zone, or:point numbers may be used in place of field numbers depending on CAWMP
and type of irrication system. If pulls, etc. cross -more -than -one field, inspectodreviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% held by field determination for exemption; -otherwise operation will be subject to WA determination.
FIELD NUMB_zR-' - must be clearly delineated an -map.
COMMENTS'- back-up fields with CAWMP acF°age=�exceeding75°fQ of its total:acres -and havingTeceived less .than 50%
of his annual PAN as documented h-the tarm's-Drevious-two years' (1997 & .1998) of irrioationTecords,­ cannot serve -as -the
sole basis iorTeauiring a WA Determination --:.Back-up fields must -be -noted in the-commentzecUonand mustbe accessible
by irrigation -s stem -
:mart IV. Pending -WA'Determinations -
-" P1 Plan lacks 1ollowing information;
P2 Plan Tevision -may_satisfy-75% rule based on adequate overall PAN deficit and by ar
adjusting -all feid:acreageao below 75% use rate
P3 Other (iefin process of installing new irrigation system):

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
I.B. Sholar
Dan B. Nursery
301 Lighthouse Rd
Wallace NC 28466
Dear I.B. Sholar:
1 • •
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
December 30, 1999
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 31-564
Duplin County
This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers_
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRR1, IRR2, DRY1, DRY2, DRY3, SLURI, SLUR2,
SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext. 571.
Sincere ,
X /00�
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50%n recycled/10% post -consumer paper

` .[3 Division of Soil an&Water:Gonservatton ».Operation' Review
r` � oil , %a Division of Sand Water Cvnseri%ation :Complianee lraspection x -
i G �Division of Water Quality : Compliance IinspectionS 3x
Other Agency. Opeiraaon.ReAew �_
HP Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 30
Time of Inspection j 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted Certified j] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
.�rA. ! ....f�.-....., � county:...-. c/P.1/ ....id....
Farm Name: ......... ...
Owner Name: ........... ...a.. r..... �% - dL Phone Na:-..........%Q
............................................................... g..............��....9...... .............................
Facility Contact: .......... ,.�idrz:......................................... Title:..........................
MailingAddress:1 C l �7%}f
........................................................0........................
Onsite Representative: /� A
n...........................Q.........................................................................
Certified Operator: .... �/.�..✓../!Y� ........ l ..-.....3[r��S.r,.......................
Location of Farm:_ i , -
Phone No:
/YL AJG................... ..... .�
Integrator: ..........JI-AR-Opl
...............................................
Operator Certification Number:..O1. „
.............T..............................
,
Latitude 0•° Longitude • 4 4: 0-% /1/, OA/ 6, S/bt--
Design Current Design; Cu 4 rit� Design Carl ent
Swine Ca acity Population, .Poultry, acity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder U[j ❑ Layer I Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer =- ❑ Nan -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other `
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ GiIts
[]Boars
Total SSLW Lr�o
�Nvi nber 4iagoons.. - � ` ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area IDSpray Field Area ;
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ENN:ooLiquid Waste Management System
_ .
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes x No
Discharge originated au ❑ 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. Dees discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 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 XNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: }}1
Freeboard (inches): ..........;[0.................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.) .
3/23/99 Continued on back

Date of Inspection
Facili Number: / — �(�
4'. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
�J
closure plan?
El Yes
�� No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
11
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
K Yes
[]No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenarice/improvement?
❑ Yes
X No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
;(No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ONO
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
0 No
12. Cra t e �
p yp ���y,:. �,OL1 SPi /3oc/�In/ES @ C.4C.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
ONo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
Vo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
jW No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
J�rNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
A No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Yes
No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑
4%
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
A No
20_ Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
gNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
MNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
ANo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
KNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
Po
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
............ .. .. . ................. . . .
�'Vo yi6iafigris:or• dacie>nties Wiz re noted during 4his:visit: • Y:op :wi�i•feeetye •no fufther
co,ri e- Sporidenke: about this visit:
Comments (refer to;question #f) :Explain any YES answers"and/or any.recommendations or."any.other comments--, Zr
Use.drawtngs of facilxty,to..better explain.situations (use ad[htional pages as -necessary)
r .
-aWO)e aW * IA/S;_Pf-- hl-ee- aJk LS Or ✓&7€11Yflon�
,�raugs , 6-fG .
-- aln n&, D" -�
11c�i9 S A4 t � 6-P A r t&,IJ al M^167C - CirU&-f-- AIA-1 ? 65- 7
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
- _14�s W
Date: I1 .30
3/23/99

J�
Faciky Number: �Date of Ins ection !
3
6r or Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes JKNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27: Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 06 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes XTNo
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 ANo
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 XNo
31. Do the animals feed storage binsTail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ANo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Addifional Comments and/or Drawings
i
3/23/99

J
Division of Soil and Water Conservation [] Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
=. v
Routine OComplaint 0 Follow-u 'of DV4' ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection i
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 13.36 24 hr. (hh:mm)
D Registered 0 Certified ©Applied for Permit' © Permitted JUNot Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: lCounty ii .........
OwnerName: ............................. ...... a .......... .:..� i��lr.............................................. Phone No:....������.�.��.���.......................................
Facility Contact:
................... Title:
k
Mailing Address: ..Lai......1-':4A.�o(!��r ....IrLwl ..................
Onsite Representative:................
Certified Operator:..........................................................................
Location of Farm:
............................................... Phone No:...................................................
......... ...... .f 11". x j..NL..................................................
Integrator:....... N.i ir.011............................ ...........
Operator Certification Number- ......................................
! ......QaS....... ``s....i?.......... J...... -1..1 4.....a.:...... .................................................................................
J
....................................................... ..... .... .... _ _ .... ................... .....
Latitude Longitude �• 0� ���
General
L Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes wo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ] No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon' ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in sal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 0 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 P No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require ❑ Yes �] No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes [) No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes O No
7/25/97 Continued on back

Faci4y.Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.fiolding Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes P No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft)............ ................................................................. .................... ........ ......... .
l0. Is seepage observed from any of the structures*?
❑ Yes
No
l 1. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
❑ Yes
No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Y, 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
1P No
Waste_ pplication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
Cl Yes
(� No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ................. V. .%,Ue......................................... ........................................ ...................................... ............................... ........
...................:.....................
..
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWIvIP)?
❑ Yes
M-No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�XNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
N 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
LANo
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
P 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 L 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
0 No.violations or deficiencies were -noted -during this:visit..You.will receive no further
correspondence about -this: visit'. -
and/or
'
Cotntments`(iefer to question #} , Explain any YES answers atiy recommendations or anyother comments
Use drawings `of ftctlity"to better explam`siivatittns (use additional pages as nec:essarv} u
F�Y`<-G- GV{dtivttW l 4L V-�' � 1 � Q !S►LQUI
mowed.
1 . F�Scue- sj,loUj� L — mveJt
We.<JC sav,�6 '36kW� o0M. Cc-,�� ex�ior,,
O,,W CAI yeY'toc 0^ f �Scue . se"or OJ L­or,�- Wr tW
fir. SI.� Gr
r SUtn► atvL1� >.i'r v+ -u t rwa� ra�,y iar r rr►w t�c. �x ^� n
U l�, V`e ( tii S 1rt V15t 7/25197qF
Reviewer/Inspector Name i 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review
3
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection r,
11PRoutine O Com laint O Follow-up of MN ins ection O Follow-tt of I)SAVC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection 19
Facility Number 3
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:tnm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: 13 Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection Oncludes travel and processing)
13 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ................................................................................. I ......... I ........
Farm Name:........ ...13..... 3tCS� ................... County: .......
.D1 A.................... ..................
OwnerNarne:.....1.1..... 5k )a) r......................................................................................... Phone \o:.. �lff?.] . .r.... ).:'...............................................
Facility Contact: ... .�...�,....Swar............................................Title:......Qkks,li,-._...................................... Phone No:$`ie .................
Mailing rldtlress:.... G.i...
L.i wfv5�.......................................................................... ....G��GL�.r..I�l.�:................................................ Z l...........
On -site Representative:... _I ... b..... 5614 r Integrator: �+ .......................... ...............
Certified Operator: ........................................... .... Operator Certification Number:- �b 1 Z 1
Location of Farm:
...... a ...-.�lu...S..na.......�.T,urr1.... e...-.... Qn.... -.... .. A..w�s.......... .....� .. 14.... .....a.........,,.....
;......�n..�Lr.....s.[......Lei.?,......... ���!".....5......,��... !+t.....a,r►..-.�FiS.........i..e....C+T.............................................;
Latitude E-1' C 4L Longitude • ram` ;'
Type of Operation
"Swine
Design.,... Current :::, Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population = Poultry Capacity Population Cattle, . "Capacity Population x
Wean to Feeder
Z& 00
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds ; ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
'�
General
1.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
2.
is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
KNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
EA No
b. If'discharge is observed; did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[A No
c. If disch tr•�e is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/nun?
d- Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑Yes
No
3.
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes'
15'No
4.
Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
R No
5.
Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
$No
maintenance/improvement?
4/30/97
Continued on back

Facility \umber: 3� —
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes Q No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes jy No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds'on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
Structures tLagQpns and/or Molding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes N No
Freeboard (ft):, Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
.............. J cj..................................................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes 99 No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ............... k,;C.(d.G.......................... ...................................................................................................................... .
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Onl
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management PIan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
Reviewer/Inspector Name
❑ Yes No
'4Q Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [4 No
❑ Yes 5& No
................................
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes INNo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®i No
❑ Yes IZI No
❑ Yes No
Yes ❑ No
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
November 13, 1996
I.B. Sholar
Ian B. Nursery
301 Lighthouse Rd
Wallace NC 28466
SUBJECT: Operator In Charge Designation
Facility: Ian B. Nursery
Facility ID#: 31-564
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Sholar:
Senate Bill 1217, An Act to Implement Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Study
Commission on Agricultural Waste, enacted by the 1996 North Carolina General Assembly,
requires a certified operator for each animal waste management system that serves 250 or more
swine by January 1, 1997. The owner of each animal waste management system must submit a
designation form to the Technical Assistance and Certification Group which designates an
Operator in Charge and is countersigned by the certified operator. The enclosed form must be
submitted by January 1, 1997 for all facilities in operation as of that date. Failure to designate a
certified operator for your animal waste management system is a violation of 15A NCAC 2H
.0224 and may result in the assessment of a civil penalty.
If you have questions concerning operator training or examinations for certification, please
contact your local North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service agent or our office.
Examinations have been offered on an on -going basis in many counties throughout the state for
the past several months and will continue to be offered through December 31, 1996.
Thank you for your cooperation. If you have any questions concerning this requirement please
call Beth Buffington or Barry Huneycutt of our staff at 9191733-0026.
Sincerely,
A. reston Howard, Jr., P. ., erector
Division of Water Quality
Enclosure
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Water Quality Files
P.O. Box 27687, N�y�CRaleigh, North Carolina 27611-
7687 An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-715-4100 50% recycled/10°,6 post -consumer paper