310581_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

Type of Visit: aCompliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: routine O Complaint O Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: �O> S . _ Departure Time: Wip I County: Ls ji I Region: _h%11go
FarmName: %�y„fj..j�, Owner Email:
Owner Name:f�l� �� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number: '-f/� f�
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design C►urrent
Design
C►urrent
Design Gurreot
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Paul#ry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
"FINon-Layer
Dairy Calf
ceder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D —rp P.nult ,
Ca aci
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? _
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[—]Yes El No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ONo []NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �T<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes �fo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page l of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 113ate of Inspection: 2 J_
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ WE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ WE
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
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
[�fNo
❑ NA
❑ WE
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 El No ❑ NA ❑ WE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes jj"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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Z/No ❑ NA ❑ WE
❑ 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
❑ WE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
r
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Wwo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ WE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[] Yes
�rNo
❑ NA
❑ WE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑/ No ❑ NA ❑ WE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes FE[*No ❑ NA ❑ WE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ WE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard [:]Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
[:]Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections [:]Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - 5Date of Inspection: Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes do ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �10 ❑ 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 PIONo [] NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes E2<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
[:]Yes L�fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes / No ❑ NA ❑ NE
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
No
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[] Yes
2
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
VN9
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
0 NA
❑ NE
i6nieits' (refe-r louestioo,#)• Eiiplam auy YE54answei^s ndlor` any additional recoinnend°ations flr a©yother comments.;' ° p
�.. •. s •_ .: 3 . -� .:�
,. =
. worawmgs uf�facility�to teettee explain s�tuatroos:(u"se additional pag€s as necessary). e „ _._ i. ,
e_� ";�� lzwlf
Reviewerfinspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
Page 3 of 3
41 � /7' /a" - h k / �
Phone:ftp) YfOZ 1
Date: l �lS''A
21412015

4
Type of Visit: (D Co ance Inspection O 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: L (, Arrival Time: A Q Departure Time: L County: Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: 116tr1 S �'nl 4/_ Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number: 7 z
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design
Swine Capacity
Wean to Finish
C*urrent Design Current
Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I JLayer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
can to Feeder
I INon-Layer
I
Feeder to Finish VT259
Design Current
I) , P,oultr Ca aci $o
I Layers
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to FinishI
Gilts
Non -Lavers
113cefFeeder
Boars
IPullets
Turke s
Turke Poults
jBeef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑N ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes F3ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facie Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.A storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I ca,,,r4tvcture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: fife CZ--
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): O 3 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E3<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a 0 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 No NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes Cj 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 [�.Pdo ❑ 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 [f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable [:]Yes No 0 NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a tack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
F4No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Require_ d Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
EZNO ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[:]Yes
F5'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other: 421
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ t20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes dlN�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes Fj--No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

J
Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:Ljz !
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes E3 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:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? 0 Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No E�NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Z No [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Vj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
No NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
P In I� �-�-�f �L Reviewer/Ins ector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 21412015

Type of Visit: om ance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow=up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: I ( Arrival Time: �7 Departure Time: 3 20 County:
Farm Name:
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: a ( L �'.'L S /_ru "'— Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Region:
Certification Number: / 72 tw)�O
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design C+urrent
Swine C►►specify Pap.
Wean to Finish FFNon-L
Design Current Design Current
Wet RRUMMAIRCOpacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
er airyCow
W an to Feeder
a er
Dai Calf
eeder to Finish 3)p
Z4
airy4leifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
MDesign C►urrent Dry Cow
D , P,ouitr Ca acity P,o P. Non -Dairy
Layers Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify 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
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
El Yes
o
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili `.Number: - 5 1 Date of Inspection: f 2
Waste Collection & Treatment �
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes I_! No ❑ NA
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
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?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
0 NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment hreat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application.
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
ffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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
DINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ YesTNo
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
To
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP/*provement?
ecklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Lease Agreements ❑Othe
21. Does record keeping neIf yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application y Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis oil 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 LJ o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

JjFacifit�'Number: 3 - Date of Inspection: t /
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes IVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
[:)No ❑ NA
[:]No ErNA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes
2 rNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
No ❑,NA
[] NE
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
Co❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ID Yes LJ ° ❑ NA ❑ N13
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ��No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any ,YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better.eaplain situations (use additional pages'as necessary}.
CJ—
❑ Yes
Ci••� — K I c [ t �-
t +_
t
h G c+ e-,% n j / � 10 3.S D 2-C2 Q (i
ReviewerAnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
J
Phone: 7 &
Date:A
/Z
214,201 S

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:\t, IX.!'✓ Region:
FarmName: f t`M Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: �iGN�}0..� s ta'. -
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator:
� � y
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
1,309 Re -
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
I
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
JLayer IDairvCow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Lf b
DairyHeifer
Design Cnrrent Cow
Dry P,oul . , Ca aci. P,o , Non -Dairy
JLayers Beef Stocker
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -La ers
I Beef Feeder
Boars
1pullets
I Beef Brood Co-,
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream_ Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify 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 PkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes t6No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: / - Date of Ins ection: j
1.
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?
❑ Ycs
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: Lboy
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): -�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
14 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
9NO
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
tEZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Of No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M_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): &act4e- sz
13. Soil Type(s): G6 Wj)F5T6JY F
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
0 WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes t No
❑ Yes _J�LNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ) ] No
0 Waste Application 0 Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis [] Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections 0 Monthly and I" 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
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility. Ntunber: -S F jDate of Inspection: / /
24. 15id the facility 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:
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 property dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
T
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
1[] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
77��
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
JS�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: /ld 3�
Date: it 1),019
21412014

Type of Visit: XCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: eRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time:® County: Region: W-Ao
Farm Name: &2Q}' i , T S___ _ _ _ _ _ _ Owner Email: �^'7
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Certified Operator: J/"
Sack -up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator: {�
Certification Number: 19
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pap.
Design
Cattle Capacity
Da' Cow
Current
Pop.
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
0D
D . P,oul
Design
Ca aci
Current
P,a ,
airy Heifer
D Cow
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars WERE
Other
Other
Layers
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turkeys
TurkeyPoults
Other
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
W I
Dischar es and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure 0 Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes [:]No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [—]No
❑ Yes No
[—]Yes r�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

FaciliNumber: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is heavy less than
Yes
storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus rainfall) adequate?
❑ 4!1'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �1
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): `
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes EINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes 4'Ro
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? [:]Yes ZNo D NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 9No [DNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [:]Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
[:]Yes
Vj"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
M. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
j —No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
T
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
�TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
4No
❑ 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 PNo ❑ 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 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes ENo
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes �o
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes { �No
TT
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ 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 ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes PfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes k� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes 2fNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or -any other comments..
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional panes as necessarv).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412011
r

Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit �j Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I ({ / (p//otl Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: �� - - County:
Farm Name:
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: �C-1GnIAGZt� no(raR-
Certified Operator: (�q G� Q�-� e S t-IOLW(_
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Region:
Phone No:
integrator: �
O�ado/Certification Number: I �+Darz
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 0 e 0 1 Longitude: 0°=,=
Design„ Current Design Current a Design "Current
Swine Capacity • Population Wet Poultry "`Capacity Population Caftle:,Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Q
Cap
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
hILJ Non -Layer
Dry P ultry�,��' r
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Calf
LJ D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood
''� Plumber�of�
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3 12128104 Continued

l
F'Uility Iqumber: - Date of Ins ection: 1111
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
77❑D
❑ 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: LAK_kOad
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
I ]� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
1l
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes i 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? 01
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [3 Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 100/6 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): resS ; C cc (i�(S L-1 `I- '
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0, No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
TT`` No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
94Ao
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
QWUP [3 Checklists Q Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes No
ElWaste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard Q Waste Analysis E Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Trans ers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking 0/op Yield Q 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes XNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes f1`"C No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Weather Code
EE Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faeili �Number: - 5& 1 Date of Ins ection: /
24. Did the facility 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:
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
[] NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface file drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0—No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
IV_No
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes}
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations,or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations fuse additional pages as necessary).
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: O�
21412011

Divislon of Water Quality
Facility Number ©- SS- i ®Division of soil and Water Conservation
+� Other Ag�nty
Type of Visit: Compliance 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: Departure Time: i LvCounty: l�c.t J1/ Region:
Farm Name: `LI Cii(441C'� S HO -RQ rC4R r& Owner Email:
Owner Name: ?�=Jcp o� _'6. S t+0L'Q 2 Phone:
Mailing Address: \ \CPI ©EEC) C�70�1A � WAC-LACC- ,NC
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: '�A ' C.N AU- , J AOLA R-
Certified Operator: � 4C- FOM-�1 IL .'3 HOL4(Z
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Cer ifi �ation Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
1 --cW>
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
o Finish
o Feeder
Dn Current Design Current
apacity Pap. Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry [eI
La er Da' Cow
Non -La er
Dai Calf
to Finish
,'ifer
Design Current D Cow
1) . P,oultr� Ca aci P,o , Non-Dairyto
to Wean
to Feeder
EFarrow
Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
OtherI
Other
Turke s
I Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes XNO
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes tN
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili limber: 1 - j Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1 1"1 a
Spillway?: Q
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):T
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 DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 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 it ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12, Crop Type(s): ""P
13. Soil Type(s): Goczys &:j�o r �o�LE%7cw ��07>.'Vc-yc1✓
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes fffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes <No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes h No
❑ Yes �No
QWUP ❑Checklists []Design Q Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
2 L Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[-1 Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard 0 Waste Analysis 0 Soil Analysis QYa'ste T sfers ❑ Weather Code
[] Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield Q 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections 0 Sludge Survey
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 VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

01,
Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25..19 the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 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
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]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
7�
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes , No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes 2N_o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments p , ,,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)..'
CPA-l6Ra4Tj0A.1 ��C " — B — jq,tl,4nr O i �4-rGI �CL CO *A ?C ETF 17
w-A.
07*1
�T G a � ap►Q.�Lc�bS — Lip �rC
�L 4 ,,,,t ��T� �T �rasE ��uF oivF guS��vn o��F�
MOT � P
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: q10 _ 4q&-43g4
Date: 1I 1C')Q1I I
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 5 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ] Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: +�� �=✓ Region:.
Farm Name: �HA��_H�A t2 �s�� (1'� Owner Email:
Owner Name: S� Phone: IT10r995_�_A/30
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: r Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: V—i�Q� ..J 1�� Integrator:
Certified Operator: _ 1���-� e• (2 015W or`Certification Number: 0
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = S = « Longitude: = ° ❑ i 0
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedei
Farrow to Finish
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design- Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -La ers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifej
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: .
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes O�do ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3l —5 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ''o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ElYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 13Ls--> CC1�
Spillway?: a C
Designed Freeboard (in): 19.
J
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ElNA ElNE
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 9No ❑ 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 DNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste A lication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑NA El NE
❑NA El NE
❑ 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 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 1'o
o El NA [I NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 9) Explain, any .YES answers antl/ar any`recommendatfions or any other comments
.Use drawings°bf facility td better explain situations (use addrtio©al pages as necessary,)+ .'
Reviewer/inspector Name fti b Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection i IQ
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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. 0 VAJp ❑ Checklists 0 Design 0 Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
El�No Yes
ElNA
ElNE
ElWaste Application 0 Weekly Freeboard 0 Waste Analysis 0 Soil Analysis ❑ jaste Transfers ❑ynnual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ kop Yield El120 Minute Inspections 0 Monthly and 1 °I/Rain
Inspections 0
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
_4No
���'
❑ NA
[I NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[Ell Yes
\\\\ No
El NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[0]Yes
No
❑ NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
YYY❑No
0 NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ yes
A 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
PfNo
❑ 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
[ANo
[A
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
OiLIJ-o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional'Comments and/or Drawings:
r1
YJ30)P C' '7
I �o • Q Sc�t,rS ~ O�yG w
I�G e�AT1
mA) L 7t-)aSC-
1,/vi} 7 �
I Pi W4 CO
O� 5 c.u0
Page 3 of 3 12128104

RMEN
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Beverly Eaves perdue Coleen F ;. Sullins Dee freeman
Governor Director Secretary
February 14, 2011 =
Richard Sholar
Richard Shofar Farm
1191 Deep Bottom Rd
Wallace. NC 28466
Subject: Sludge Survey Testing Dates
Certificate of Coverage No. AWS310581
Richard Sholar Farm
Animal Waste Management System
Duplin County
Dear Richard Sholar:
The Division of Water Quality (Division) received your sludge survey information on January 6,
2011. With the survey results, you requested an extension of the sludge survey requirement for
the two lagoons at Richard Sholar Farm facility. Due to the amount of treatment volume
available. and the rate of sludge accumulation for the lagoons, the Division feels that an
extension is not appropriate for both lagoons at this time.
The next sludge survey for the two lagoons at Richard Sholar Farm facility should be performed
before December 31, 2011. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Please call me at (919)
715-6937 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
�—A�
BY:
Miressa D. Garoma
Animal Feeding Operations Unit
cc: Wilmington Regional -Office -Aquifer Protection_ Section
Permit File AWS310581
1536 MO Service = enter, Raleigh. North Carolina 27699-1636
ooauon: 2728 Capital Blvd.. Raleigh, North Carolina 276�1
pnone: 9t9-733-3221 ti AX: 919 71 {J533' -ustome- r e f-577-62'-574r
Intem�.: u�ww.nrw.arQmiiaii ! nr=
FED 16 zoil
Noi hCai-ofina
4 -0 .101p oiniiv'.fiFi•ruIG-.A-iloflEi,tdnvF

0
Type of Visit W Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit xRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 6 69 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: _ I�Q� �'��� ��2m Owner Email:
Owner Name: ^`F-1G�A�� �AQ Phone:
Mailing Address: +�� &Eyb10 d y d
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: I Title: Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: 1��c�/AQ� S1JLPZ- Integrator:
Certified Operator: V=l C 14 MU) 1b• S N oca 2 Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = [ = Longitude: = o = 6 ❑ «
Design Current Design Current
Design C*anent
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish O
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non-DaiEy
El Farrow to Finish
El Layers
El Beef Stocker
Gilts
❑Non -La Non -Layers
❑ Beef Feeder
POBoars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
Number of Structures:
❑ Other ❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at; ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does 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
�kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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: co
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ✓✓✓✓✓�No El NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El �No El El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Apolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 1(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes] No ElNA El NE
❑ Excessive Ponding [I Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground El Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) \\
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) CL F_ {_ �>
13. Soil type(s) (f cnLoSygeo
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes _1� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ElNA ElNE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ,O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question:##). Explain any YES answers and/or anyrecommendations pyany#other comments. .
_
Use dri*ings of facility to better explain situations. (use.additional pages as necessary}: -
W.A.
Lllg/69 DI
Reviewer/Inspector Name N j -..I Phone: d- fl(D-- Sod I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: la
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection O�
Required Records & Documents
l9. 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 ✓✓✓)✓✓✓j{��lN»► o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. 0 W­Up r❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n 0 Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Waste Application [] Weekly Freeboard 0 Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Yaste Transfers ❑ ual Certification
0 Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Cop Yield El 120 Minute Inspections 0 Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections 0 Weather Codc
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
)d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
�(NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
)kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
14No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspcction with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
W No
El NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
PcC_ASC. SeIvf:) CdPL� O ldg �Lc�D�� SI��ZU TD:
ATTN : Amptgvp C-�ow s
n R --bwC4
) rd-j CQq_a I n4L �LR • 'ExT
L),�)LM N6TON, 1Vc�
DsgcsS
V-- RX
a P-rT . A rrl A AI D� (2A enf G 5
C b - 3S0- cal
12128104

i
Division of Water Quality '
Facility Number j O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
---- -- -- --- - - Q Other Agency
Type of Visit i6compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 19LRoutine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:_J Departure Time: C� County: L1 Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: G bi�-� S Nd LA R- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: e
Certified Operator: '�_% HQ4 J
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number: t _:� Oil00o
11
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = { Longitude: = o = c
Design "'° Current Design Current : ` Design Current'
Swine Capacity Population Wet'Poulfry Capacity Population,, Cattle Capacity :Population
a: ❑ Wean to finish ❑ Layer
❑ Wean to Feeder [] Non -Layer
r ® Feeder to Finish 144,3960
Ll Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Other
❑ Other
E Dry Poultry.'.
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharp-es & 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?
❑ Daity Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ D Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
,N
Number of Structures 5 .r
J.
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 l of 3
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
)�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection UMEW
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes �4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: a
Designed Freeboard (in): /•
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes IM 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 4 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? El Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
5Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
.Comments (refer to question ft 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):"
Faq,A c-)Ov::L s Cao L .
Reviewer/Inspector Name € 4,# - U S t I Phone: /U' —T . -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 1,6
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 3 -rj$j Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps
p ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P9 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
Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
;KNo
❑ 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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
b�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
JZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0'
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or D
Page 3 of 3 12128104

14
i
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit i0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ti g Arrival Time: $uf j� Departure Time: County: P V PLT-N Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Facility Contact: Title: I Phone No:
!�
Onsite Representative: h T CAA.-7 0 3CI-io1 AFL _ Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = 0 = = Longitude: ° = I = 11
Design Current Design _Current Design Current
Swine C*apacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle _Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder I0 Non -Layer I ❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish 1(43U Ii/Ov o
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean pry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non
-Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers
❑ Gilts ❑ Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
IQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ NA
El NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes
VNq
El NA
[I NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 31 — 1 f
Date of Inspection ,1 iF o v
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: L016 wn,/ I &0LXL ,-A'
❑ Yes �o
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes Vxo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 01
No ❑ NA El
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes j/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 V No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) F CG) 9 " Q ( c,-)
13. Soil type(s) &-L-0 &QPj 0 �a fLk ST 00 Woo mt4o 64-6 t'-) ,
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
E] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ld No ❑ NA ❑ NE
O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
.Comments (refer to question#):, Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to. better explain situations. (use additional pages as -necessary):°
Reviewer/Inspector Name V1 Phone( �t 1 V� r]�7 6 w'13 f(
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: nap,Date: I ' % 8fb (j
■ "K V 1, vj

Faciiity Number: 31 — Date of Inspection h 1 v{v
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box. ❑ Urf Tp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes [/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes f3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Cade
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
cf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
w o
ElNA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
ElYes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
IQ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[:IINo
❑ 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
Ld No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
El NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
VNp'
32. Did Reviewer/Inspeetor fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
El Yes
[I NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ElNA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Page 3 of 3 12128104

i H S$
Type of Visit 6 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: o I Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: !ZEcw A fzD E N O L-Arz-
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [=o =6 �Longitude: =° =' =1 u
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine CapacityPopulation LLetP. ou�ltryCapacity,Population" ` ` CatEle Capaci ty Papulation
❑ Wean. to Finish ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Non -La et I I ❑ Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
3 ZO
I
Dry Poultry
EJDairy
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
Heife)
Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Non -Dairy
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Farrow to Finish
Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
Beef Brood Cowl
I
Other
❑ Turkeys__
❑ Turkey Points
❑ Other
el i I '
III I; i
Structures:
Number ofal
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
El ❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: IjF-5 Date of Inspection is J a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Q�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LAbLVN ) laa0tkJG
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): ► S __ �L] .
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? El Yes
�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
2 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
<0 ❑ 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
EZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
[N0 NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN> 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
Fe, ")c C (s) S GO
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
VN❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes
;NX❑ NA
❑ NE
t7. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ir:-1, 6 A,J N U A L, CGYRTTkL C Ate 10 A4 D 5 TotKZW(S_ FOV-1v,
KE C0 e'os
F—P, R-rw Eto Cry d S A AK_-,
Reviewer/Inspector Namea!wk�joL, Phone: `j /b 7 96
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: i dh? aS
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection o 3 a
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
El Yes
,�,�
[2 No
❑ NA
Cl NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
E.dwo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. WUP ❑ Checklists
El❑Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicat' ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers 2Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall OStocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
EliYesZN(El
NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fait to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�70
[1 NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facilityfail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
Y P g❑
❑ Yes�No
❑ NA
NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
L
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?
30.
At the -time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
0 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
Z No
ElNA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
IIGNoNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104

Q
ANIMAL FACILITY ANNUAL CERTIFICATION FORM
Certificate of Coverage or Permit Number 1WLA,131511 County. buo)) ►'\ Year 200-3
Facility Name (as shown on Certificate of Coverage or Permit) , L h A( S ho a r F-o, r v ,,
Operator in Charge for this Facility �(J&J ,5 L Ictr Certification # U►/ 2
Land application of anizrial waste as allowed by the above permit occurred during the past calendar year
� 1z YES NO. If NO, skip Part I and Part II and proceed to the certification. Also, if animal waste
was generated but not land applied, please attach an explanation on how the animal waste was handled.
PartI : Facility Information:
1. Total number of application Fields ❑ or Pulls (((please check the appropriate box) in the Certified Animal
Waste Management Plan (CAWMP): - Total Useable Acres approved in the CAWMP
gals3
2. Total number of Fields ❑ or Pulls (please check the appropriate box) on which land application
occurred during the year: 1 �j Total Acres on which waste was applied _ .-j 5 1 %
3. Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) applied during the year for all application sites:
-7-- ...rt
4. Total pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN) allowed to be land applied annually by the CAWMP and
the permit:
5. Estimated amount of total manure, litter and process wastewater sold or given to other persons and taken
off site during the year _ tons ❑ or gallons ❑ (please check the appropriate box)
6. Annual average number of animals by type at this facility during the previous year:
7. Largest and smallest number of animals by type at this facility at any one time during the previous year:
Largest q 5 O a
Smallest -3600
(These numbers are for informational purposes only since the only permit limit on the number of animals
at the facility is the annual average numbers)
8. Facility's Integrator if applicable: -M to { fJ — 6 r
Part 11: Facffit� Status:
IF THE ANSWER TO ANY STATEMENT BELOW IS "NO", PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN
DESCRIPTION AS TO WHY THE FACILITY WAS NOT COMPLIANT, THE DATES OF ANY NON
COMPLIANCE, AND EXPLAIN CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN OR PROPOSED TO BE TAKEN TO
BRING THIS FACILITY BACK INTO COMPLIANCE.
1. Only animal waste generated at this facility was applied to the permitted sites during LEI Yes ❑ No
the past calendar year.
AFACF 3-14-03

2. The facility was operated in such a way that there was no direct runoff of waste from Byes ❑ No
the facility (including the houses, lagoons/storage ponds and the application sites) during
the past calendar year.
3. There was no discharge of waste to surface water from this facility during the past Yes - ❑ No
calendar year.
4. There was no freeboard violation in any lagoons or storage pon s at s facility during El yes IX0
the past calendar year.�A l'Drrinq f'i on + Fe(,n„% 4 +0 - _ _ boar I tJ ,��, } � ar$ wq5 SPn� f0 ��c
a ati ce5 . ® NJ Yes El No
5. There was no PAN application to any fields or crops at this facility greater than the
levels specified in this facility's CAWMP during the past calendar year.
6. AVE d pplicat'o equipment as calibrate at least once during the past calendar year. ❑ Yes dNo
� [ ! e Cell �C At'pc� bo4or p App. i -xg4kJ a oo Li.
7. Sludge accumulation in all lagoons did not exceed the volume for which the lagoon ❑ Yes C, No
was designed or reduce the lagoon's minj mum trea en volum to less than the volume
for which the lagoon was designed. W, I f b e �,JP o1 w, -4r ►, q 0 d 0.y 9 ,
8. A cony of the Annual Sludge Survey Form for this facility is attached to this Certification. ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Annual soils analysis were performed on each field receiving animal waste during the
past calendar year.
10. Soil pH was maintained as specified in the permit during the past calendar Year?
11. All required monitoring and reporting was performed in accordance with the facility's
permit during the past calendar year.
12. All operations and maintenance requirements in the permit were complied with during
the past calendar year or, in the case of a deviation, prior authorization was yeceived
from the Division of Water Quality. 5 2 e t o e5
13. Crops as specified in the CAWMP were maintained during the past calendar year on all
sites receiving animal waste and the crops grown were removed in accordance with
the facility's permit.
14. All buffer requirements as specified on the permit and the CAWMP for this facility were
maintained during each application of animal waste during the past calendar year.
VYes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
P' Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes PNo
Ltd' Yes ❑ No
VYes ❑ No
" 1 certify under penalty of law that this document and all attachments were prepared under my direction or
supervision in accordance with a system designed to assure that qualified personnel properly gather and
evaluate the information submitted. Based on my inquiry of the person or persons who manage the system, or
those persons directly responsible for gathering the information, the information submitted is, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for
submitting false information, including the possibility of fines and imprisonment for knowing violations."
Signature of Operator in Charge
(if different from Permittee)
AFACF 3-14-03 s.
E
Z - 2 ?_a 411�
Date
Date

O� WA7F Michael F. Easley, Governor
`(n� 9pG William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
December 10, 2003
Mr. Richard Sholar
1191 Deep Bottom Rd
Wallace, NC 28466
Subject: Rescission of Notice of Violation /
Issuance of Notice of Deficiency
Richard Sholar Farm
Facility # 31-581
Duplin County
Dear Mr. Sholar:
Thank you for your recent submittal of the information requested in our letter dated April 15,
2003. We greatly appreciate the effort that you made in compiling this information and sending
it to our Wilmington Regional Office by the date required. We also appreciate the fact that you
reported the problem with high freeboard to our staff as required by your permit and worked with
our staff to manage the problem once it occurred.
y..
Upon review and consideration of the information submitted, the Wilmington Regional Office has
determined that no further compliance/enforcement actions will be taken by the Division for
these high freeboards.
Also, based on your actions to properly operate your facility, the Division of Water Quality
hereby rescinds the Notice of Violation that was issued to you on April 15, 2003 and replaces it
with this Notice of Deficiency.
In the future, please continue to evaluate ways to maintain freeboard levels in the required range.
These methods include, but are not limited to, water conservation practices, adding additional
application sites, updating your cropping systems, adding additional and/or more flexible
application equipment, and maintaining the lagoon levels at the lowest allowable and appropriate
levels throughout the year. Our staff looks forward to continuing to work with you and your
Technical Specialist to evaluate and implement any needed changes to your system.
ARM
WDENR
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone] Location:
1 800 623-7748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax: [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01 -01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity / Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled 1 10% post -consumer paper
http:/ih2o.enr.state.nc. us

Inadequate Freeboard
Richard Sholar
December 10, 2003
Page 2
Thank you again for your cooperation. ' If you have any questioiis;-please do'not hesitate to _
contact the staff of our Wilmington Regional Office at 910-395-3900.,
Sincerely,
Rick Shiver
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
CC: Kraig Westerbeek, Murphy -Brown, LLC
Billy Houston, Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Patrick Fussell, DSWC
Wilmington Files 31-581
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Central Files

o�0� WA
r
April 16, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Richard Sholar
1191 Deep Bottom Rd
Wallace NC 28466
SUBJECT: Notice of Violation
Request for Information
Inadequate Freeboard
Richard Sholar Farm
#31-581
Duplin County
Dear Sir or Madam:
Michael F. Easley
Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of Water Quality
On April 14, 2003, a representative of your animal operation informed the Division of
Water Quality (DWQ) that there was inadequate freeboard in the Iagoon(s) serving this facility.
This lack of adequate freeboard is in non-compliance with the Certificate of Coverage
issued to this facility on December 1, 1997. In addition to this Notice of Violation (NOV), this
non-compliance is subject to an appropriate enforcement action by DWQ. This action can
consist of one or more of the following: a civil or criminal enforcement action; an injunction;
and/or a requirement to apply for coverage under an individual permit. The action chosen will
be based on complete evaluation of all factors that resulted in the inadequate freeboard; the
actions taken to restore the needed freeboard; and the actions being proposed to prevent the
problem from reoccurring.
To assist us in our review; please provide the Wilmington Regional Office with an
evaluation of the reasons for the freeboard violation(s) and a. strategy to prevent future freeboard
violation(s). This evaluation and strategy must include but is not limited to the following:
Current Freeboard level(s)
Freeboard level records in the lagoon(s) for the past 12 months up to the date of submittal
Spraying records for the past 12 months up to the date of submittal
Customer Service. Mailing Address: Telephone [phone]
1-877-623-6748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01-01
An Equal Opportunity/Atfimiative Action Employer
50% recycledl 10% post -consumer paper
http✓/h2o.enrstate.nc. us
Location:
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

Inadequate Freeboard
Page 2
Rainfall records for the past 12 months for this site up to the date of submittal (if
available)
Cropping system and PAN specified in the CAWMP. If the cropping system was not in
compliance with the facility's CAWMP, provide details of the cropping system in place
for the past 12 months.
A summary of actions taken to restore the needed freeboard in the lagoon(s) including but
not limited to removal of animals from the site, delay of restocking of animals, pumping
and hauling waste to another site (specify site), securing additional irrigation equipment,
and securing additional spray sites.
A description of water conservation measures in use at the facility and the date(s)
installed.
If the lagoon level(s) are still in violation of the facility's CAWMP and Permit, provide
an updated Plan of Action as to how the facility will return to compliance.
Provide a detailed description of the actions taken or proposed to be taken to insure that
there are no further freeboard violations at this facility.
This information must be received by the Wilmington Regional Office at the following
address no later than 10 days following receipt of this letter.
Division of Water Quality
127 Cardinal Drive Extension
Wilmington, NC 28405-2845
Once this information is received and evaluated by the DWQ staff, a determination will
be made as to the appropriate compliance/enforcement actions to be taken. Each case will be
evaluated on its own merit. The efforts by the owner/producer to notify DWQ of the problem,
efforts made to resolve the problem once identified, and efforts proposed to prevent future
problems will be positive factors in this detenmination.
Nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you either the responsibility or
liability for this non-compliance or future cases of non-compliance. If you have any questions
regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact our Wilmington Regional Office Staff at
[phone].
Sincerely,
an W. Klimek, P.E.
Director
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Non -Discharge Compliance/Enforcement Unit
Central Files

Type of Visit 5 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilih- Number Date of Visit: Time:
IQ Not Operational Below Threshold
Permitted 0 C rtified 0 Condiiionally Certified ©Registered Date Last OperatA or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �� S� jG County: 411«l'y
Owner Name: SL�,� Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: `� L', _, Integrator: r
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillwav
Strucpre I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: I.Q
/,,
Freeboard (inches): 347 ,
❑ Yes )zNo
❑Yes El No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ANo
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?. (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do anv of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Ainplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over
12. Crop type �, �/nd / 6A_F'+7_F
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certi
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(W discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [ZNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes, ®No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
JVNo
Q�No
�No
�No
VNo
❑ Yes 1J No
❑ Yes E No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes VINo
❑ Yes V1 No
❑ Yes dNo
❑ Yes VNo
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
-
Comments (refer to:questiori #1) `Ezplarn ariy YES answers, artdloi .any tetommetidattobs.flr ally, -outer eoatmeats: p
�
Use_ drawings of facility to better^ezpili sitstatrons.,(use additional pages as necessary)
r Con Final Notes 1 ❑ Field v �❑
+� L�cp� �s� .��Fv,� �-Tza.•I Gr/<�>� ��co,�s �SF� �'om,ocx,�✓�F
®_
Reviewer/Inspector Name 47
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 w Continued

Facility Dumber: g Date of Inspection 14a,
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ![ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Cmments and/or Drawings:
15) Oc,�nr'2 %��,o�r,� L�/11,eF 7& !�<s ,�jflnuDsp- cps
s4w 4
MOW
O5103101

Type of Visit 0 pliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Co7outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of visit: � Tune: I /0 00
rO—N'otOperational O Below Threshold
Permitted [3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: S f A'.),Iia_ . J�aw_ County: .---- ayekxt� ....... . »�
. o Owner Name. Phone o: �_......._.,.�._............... - -- ----- - -----
Mailing Address: ___.... _..... �. .. _ ... .._ .. _ . _ .. . .
Facility Contact: _ _ ----Tide: _ . _. _ _ . _ .. Phone No:-
Onsite Representative: T �_S1�OLAi2
Certified Operator: - _ , _._.... - - _-.. _ , - -- , - , Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ horse Latitude • 4 " Longitude • 4 «
Design
= -.current-...'.r
` Current Desgn r ' Cnrreat
Swme._ ... City
# N
Po tioII�
'Po oa; Cattle Lion -.r'•
...
Wean to Feeder
Layer
r
Dairy
Feeder to Finish
3 Z D
❑Non -Layer
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
1
-.
'
Farrow to Feeder
=� Other
C-
Farrow to Finish
es� Total _
�?gl#
- �Y r
Gilts
Tt>ttal SS%W
Boars
_
Discharges & Stream irn acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [f No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 31110
Waste Collection & Treatment �
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? [:I0J �0 Spillway ❑ Yes
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: . _ - _rL�. 2
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

Facility' Number: 3 - 5 g t Date of Inspection /o 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
' No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑yes
o
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
Yes
��/
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancefimprovement?
❑
Ed o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
Edo
9_ Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
To
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanceJimprovement?
❑ Yes
90
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0111,
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type 13Eft,y✓�yOfl ( o 1` s we l.G \1 JG-O
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes B'90
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? [I Yes [�, � fo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? [I Yes 644-o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes 9-11fo'
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ca-I''o
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ako
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ET o
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, [IYes
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 io
Air Quality representative immediately.
(etLo )plaenaYES am�vers aad6r day ora any�thcr cotnmeat.�
'Cap �q
Use drswm� oaf faa'Gtyatp'bet�ex�ezplatn s,4sadon�s�Yn� a�ddttiarsal pggrs ;as �ry�� ❑ F' ld opy p F' Notes
.21.) uee copy ar CoUC4(t ANr) PEn. -ir hvxrn P,46 s
-
z tAP Pc5T 41wl> 6979-0J Nt'w Col'q F"M S1�1),
35 o B-TA-x.0 5-rar-i4l uG AV&t A rO t�JIE (9 -q W. I �C EP L6P � aG
Reviewer/Inspector Name ��" � �� �' 5 - - g "
..
Reviewer for Signature: Date: 1► �
121.12103 Continued

Facility Number: 3 —. +5 g ( Date of Inspection b 1 0
Required Records & Documents
2r. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Mocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute inspections [Annual Certification Form
0/yes ❑ No
❑ Yes WNOO
❑Yes
❑ Yes ((No
❑ Yes 7No
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes &�No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes (/NNo
la x � ❑
❑-Yes Ez
❑ Yes rno
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
Q'Yes ❑ No
12112103

A Dmswn of Soil and Water Conservation
iQ Routine 0 Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection a.3t7 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated
Farm Name .1.�`. rd .S.YW�r��t! County:..............u�li.i�...................�..........................
......, . y ............... .....
Owner Name:l.aAr.P!4 ..... ...51-1G�a�.... Phone No ................
.}... tD.Ak�'
Facility Contact: ..... �f _ �h4 .... k-sue...... Title:.......�1 ......................... Phone No: ...................................................
MailingAddress:........................................................................................................................................................��.......................... .........................,
Onsite Representative: .......................... ... Integrator:
........................................................................................
.......................................................... I—.........
t
Certified Operator:.....C�--a�.i;c!L I .. .i............................ Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
.. ...................: ............................................................................ ..... ............. ....
Latitude Longitude
Desi Current` Desi - Current S:Dest gn gn •, gn Current
=Swine .,Ca achy Po'ulation Poultry Ca acity.:Po elation Cattle- Ga ci Po' elation
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑Dairy
Feeder to Finish 113 L a ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other = k • .
❑ Farrow to Finish Total.Deszgp Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars ;;Total SSLW: ;
Number of Lagoons -- y ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Tiraps IF No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes O(No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gatlmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: f �'
..ec.
Freeboard (inches): ...................................................................
I..
5. Are there any immediate'threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes ❑ No
IVA-
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [X No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes I�RLNo
Structure 5
❑ Yes [(No
Continued on back
3/23/99

Facility Number: 3 —•S i Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? fie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? y El Yes �No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ONO
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes WO
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
❑ Yes
KNo
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
4No
11,
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
❑ Yes
PkNo
12.
Crop type.. �.......gt �......SA...... CA...
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
r9fNo
14.
Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
❑ Yes
ANo
15_
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment'? &Jaycs
9No
Re uired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
A No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
[ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
IV, No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes *0
23. Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes PNO
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes
El. M)'violations:or: deficiencies were noted during .this: visit:: Yoti w' lfrekceive nu further
correspaideh4e:abotit;this;visit.: : . :
Cornmegts'{refer to question#); Explain any YES answers and/or any;recommendatians or.any other _eoinments ri
Use drawin s. of facilityto better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)is
g_
r
►� M-C - S Kbola r Its %1\1 b {- jra vv+ i rw,�n�o� i V �,` evs 4 0s
1� c-C a-F scu L , e i x -- �.ro� �,i t 1l b•e. ► KQV I
5�,1 14va.� s � 10,, cam. off-•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
NOW
t ' �' s�

Facility Number: 3 Date of Imspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
[ZNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
Q&O
2$_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
4No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
XNo
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
KNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
WNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
ANO
Additional. Comments an or, rrawings:
T

in
+Type of Visit _,G2ompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 'All"outine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Not fication O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 1 r7f Time: S Z D
.�1 S 1
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
© Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......._......
Farm Name: ► C_ A.—Ot s .lq ..... �'i................. ... Cozen i i ri
............................... ty :.................................... ....._.. _ .. _.
OwnerName: .......��.!. L49 r ...`�`a r.................................................... Phone No: ................. ............................... ....... ...... ......... ..__.._ �.
FacilityContact: ............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:
MailingAddress: ......................... ........................................................................................................................... ............. .................................... ....................... .......
Onsite Representative: ' �` °i i-Q( Sk bl �� g rr r ' S
................................................................................._.............. Integrator:_ _........................ _ ......__
Certified Operator: ..................... ..................................................................... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 6 44 Longitude 0 «
Design Cui
5w�ne -capacity Po u
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
u, _ ❑ Farrow to Finish
Gilts
❑ Boars
Desi gn C_ ft+ent Design `.- : C
P,aaltry. > Ca aci `.:Population, Cattle 'Ca acl ' - Po .
HILayer ❑ DairyNon-Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW. -
Number of Lagoons -2-0 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Ho)Eding Ponds'/ Solid-T❑No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes JYNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ONO
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? -A C 0.
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes Oko
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 'A
No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? []Yes PNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes jNo
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....I... b.-.................................................. .............................
Freeboard (inches): 40
5/00
Continued on back

Facility Number: 3 j - 5 oil Date of Inspection !/ O
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes J:allo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Cl Yes J;2'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 oNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes J244o
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes 'ONO
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ZNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ,QNo
12. Crop type F-eSL -v _- 2�e ) Be r ►^-w 4e, &✓zx-L%f t S-v--►A I i i ea i h
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)2,7j2r'�'es #'No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? Y 54A ❑ Yes [].No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ONO
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ,Yes ❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Slo
_Reuuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) XYes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes XNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes JVNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? /
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes o
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes P(No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONO
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? j2ryes ❑ No
yiolp>�i¢njs;vp defcienc{es vt re A9 during phis.v�siti wii Yon jreegive Rio fuij
• rorres�ondettce atwut this visit. • • •
Ctrtrunents (refer tn. questzoa #) -.Ex plsui-any YES answers and/or aay:_recohin"datioh or any other, cnmmens .
y wr
Use drawiidgs of facility to better.expisin situations (use addrtional.pages as_necessaiy}
Y
1 , PJ e ed ar Goaeraro 4 Generc J..
PeY ^VPa �`i ab e, star 1 r c1
8. hJ eea I agaor� l�e�;orti i+�t ovrnq-��c�, �Q� - W� O� �✓WI ��lgaon.
v?. A)-eed 4o kc-er zrza, i s a►�d , 9ra�.�e� nee �o S; �t cr�l � pit
rec,erd i ar vex^;-Fi t�,'s a► +ecr.e�-? w �-f+, -�bte reoa.-4r.
13. F`l e f d 3 11 w, n.s-� I,r w+- LP� ti ►•� -}h e -� elm( 6 �,} s d e s; y na-cd ) s -Ferwe
i>'1 -�L1e ��an.17`f�. �n�gi �ZGvtS-TD IJAVC �2a� cka✓lgea( �-o ber,,v�at. —
Reviewer/Inspector Name - _ `j p r� �%N+%ae'f u f s
Date: 1 / 2
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: $A9 5100

Fac'lity Number-.i) —5 Date of Inspection /] Z p
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below []Yes ONO
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Jallo
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ff 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 ONo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes XTo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments an or swings:.
1S. Need �o :,-,fyvveon-rv-� Vela )] foll 10 or be irvre -)4c t
y
G rrolo in -field met4tkx l.--,as4e lao
25. Ty,cfe its q Sl•iel fie•- i� Bhe eF -b4e vll s of ,<'=end S. ��e sti�l cr
r�►l d be ✓'c~wA wind -7-,e Gvo e,44bliskled Al-eKc zlr
4� i s- i e Ct Of Ae e;CI A S kOt'4 t d I2 r-c"Zv CA-��^a/`� Ae
S ' �'R. -F► �d 6 e 44 ; h ea c4 i C e q n of • ',o l /'C GO!'�i l� ; h Pp yaws
y G���ppp 9
�
�y - "-Y, M4e-4 albove 4V.C;eQs A.-e y kq-�,
5100

Facility Number 31 gg1 Date of Visit: 11-28-2001 Time: 15:20
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: WChaCdjiola1.Fa]Cm...............................•........................... Co
unty: I}uRlia....................................
Owner Name: �i hard---------------- 5kojau:---------------------------- Phone No: 41Q.28— 4 9-- ----- ----- ---------------
Mailing Address: 119j.I?le.cA. 9.ti9xiL Iid....................................................................... y!!AlAtl'<e...�I...................................... $ G..............
FacilityContact: ..• ........................................................Title:............................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Ri�hars�Shvhr__.__----------------------------_--- Integrator:C:3rrQU'.IEQ9S IAC-.---.---- -----------•
Certified Operator.Fichard.A............................ sho ar................................................ Operator Certification Number: 1.7�$�.............................
Location of Farm:
From Wallace take 41 E. about 9 miles to Deep Bottom Road turn right go about 2 miles to Sloan turn right on Angola Bay
Zoad 2 miles to farm on right.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 1 34 OF 45 03 u Longitude F 77 • 48 53 w
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4320
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I JE1 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 4,320
TotalSSLW 583,200
Number of Lagoons 2 ® Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ® Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management. System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ®No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gai/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from. a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......... 1.&&2......... ..... ..................... -------------------------- ----------•----
Freeboard (inches): 40

Facility Number: 31 581
Date of Inspection 11-28-2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe'erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Analication
� ununueu
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ®No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ®No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
® Yes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments {re€er to question #)-_�Explain_any YI:S answers andlor any recommendations orWany other co mentsy
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary) x E Field C otes
�- . ❑ oPY_ ❑ Fina1 N
17. Need to have newest Certificate of Coverage and General Permit available for inspection.
18. Need lagoon design information for the original lagoon.
19. Need to keep IRR1's and grower needs to sign all application records to verify his agreement with the records.
13. Field 3 is mostly Bermuda in the field but is designated as Fescue in the plan. Mr. Shofar plans to have plan changed to Bermuda
15. Need to improve on Field 7 pull 10 or be sure that crop in field matches plan.
5. There is a shelter in one of the pulls of field 5. The shelter should be removed and the crop established here or this piece of the field
should be removed from the sprayfield both in practice and for record keeping purposes as well as in the waste plan and wettable acres
desi n.
Reviewer/Ins ector Name
p Stonewall Mathis . � entered by Bette Rose
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05103/01 Continued
Facility Number: 31-581 Date of Inspection 11-28-2001
Odor issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during.land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
®No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the Iand 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, mussing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Mr. Sholar has a neatly kept facility and other than noted above, the fields are neatly kept.

Facility Number 31 581 pate of Visit: 11-2&Z001 Time: 15:20
rO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: R.iAhard5.ilolar.>?,arm............................................................ County: Vmpjiu.................................... WiRQ.--•--•
Owner Name: �istu`tr�---------------- ShoJar_._ ----------------------- Phone No:
�Q-$5:49----------------------------
Mailing Address: 11 1.]2eep.l�srttQ�n l d.................•-------.............................................. W.PLIJAq..�]. ............................... 2,840.6 ..............
...................
FacilityContact: ........................................................... Title: ............................................... Phone No: ......................................
Onsite Representative: PiS-jlarAa9Jar__integrator:CarrAU.1EQDdXlnc----------------------.
Certified Operator:Rllrhlalfd..D........................... N1101a]C............................................... Operator Certification Number: X.% $ .............................
Location of Farm:
From Wallace take 41 E. about 9 miles to Deep Bottom Road turn right go about 2 miles to Sloan turn right on Angola Bay +
Road 2 miles to farm on right. 'W
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Home Latitude 34 • 45 03 Longitude 77 •
Design Current
Swine. Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4320
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other.
Total Design Capacity 4,320
Total SSLW 583,200
Number of Lagoons 2 ® Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area IN Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/rein?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier1A.Z......... ........................... --•--•-----•--•--•--•--•---------•--•-----------•-------------•--•--•-----------...........................
Freeboard (inches): 40

Facility Number: 31-581
Date of Inspection 11-2&2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Anniication
K'U"Imueu
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? N Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
N Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
N Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
N Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
�; -
CaEnm_ents {refer to questran #) Explain any YES answers and/or any_recoiilinendations or.any other comments
Use drawings,af fac�hty to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessa n` Final Noes FielCopy -
17. Need to have newest Certificate of Coverage and General Permit available for inspection.
18. Need lagoon design information for the original lagoon.
19. Need to keep IRRI's and grower needs to sign all application records to verify his agreement with the records.
13. Field 3 is mostly Bermuda in the field but is designated as Fescue in the plan. Mr. Sholar plans to have plan changed to Bermuda
15. Need to improve on Field 7 pull 10 or be sure that crop in field matches plan.
5. There is a shelter in one of the pulls of field 5. The shelter should be removed and the crop established here or this piece of the field
hould be removed from the sprayfield both in practice and for record keeping purposes as well as in the waste plan and wettable acres
esi
LJ
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis.- entered°by Bette Rosev. v°
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

• 05103101
Facility Number: 31-581
Date of Inspection 11-28-2001
Continued
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is 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 Iand application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
-A. itional- ommen_ts and/orprawwgs:= - _-
_n
Overall, Mr. Sholar has a neatly kept facility and other than noted above, the fields are neatly kept. . H

- W Division of Water Quality _
-a O Dtvtsxan of Sotl and Water Conservation
W
Z
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 31 $81 Date of Visit: 11-28-2001 Time: 15:20
Not O erational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted N Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold__ __ __ __ __ __ __
Farm Name: Hi!chardSltoaBU'.Farm ............................................................ County: ])Spin .................................... WjR0 .......
Owner Name: I�JCItAId----____-- 4olar_---------------------- Phone Na: 9J.4.285:•.44-39____.-------------------------
Mailing Address: 1 1.Aee�.. nttQatl lBd ............................... ..... ............................................................ 2,846.6 ..............
FacilityContact: ...........................................................Title:............................................... Phone No
Onsite Representative:l$r��bp]al------------------------------------- Integrator:�arr9dl' 1`49si�inc_---------------------•
Certified Operator:ftblRXS1.D ............................&Qlar........... .................................... Operator Certification Number: 172 8.............................
Location of Farm:
From Wallace take 41 E. about 9 miles to Deep Bottom Road turn right go about 2 miles to Sloan turn right on Angola Bay +
Road 2 miles to farm on right.
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 34 • 45 ° 03 u Longitude 77 • 48 i 53 u
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
® Feeder to Finish
4320
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
EE
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 4,320
Total SSLW 583,200
Number of Lagoons 2 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area IN Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a, If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? [I Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier• 1 &2•
❑ Yes ® No
El Yes ® No
El Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
? ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 40

vaiy�iut
Facility Number: 31-58t
Date of Inspection 11-28-2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste ADDUCatiOn
a ununueu
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes N No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Coastal Bermuda (Graze) Small Grain Overseed
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? N Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
N Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
® Yes
❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
N Yes
❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
Yes
N No
23, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
N Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #) Explain any YES answers and/or anyrecommendations or -:any oilier
__ _- -
Use drawings of facility to tietter ezplam situations (use;additional pages as necessary) ❑ Field Copy El Final Notes
=
17. Need to have newest Certificate of Coverage and General Permit available for inspection.
+
18. Need lagoon design information for the original lagoon.
19. Need to keep IRRI's and grower needs to sign all application records to verify his agreement with the records.
13. Field 3 is mostly Bermuda in the field but is designated as Fescue in the plan. Mr. Sholar plans to have plan changed to Bermuda
15. Need to improve on Field 7 pull 10 or be sure that crop in field matches plan.
5. There is a shelter in one of the pulls of field 5. The shelter should be removed and the crop established here or this piece of the field
should be removed from the sprayfield both in practice and for record keeping purposes as well as in the waste plan and wettable acres
esi
Reviewer/Inspector Name Stonewall Mathis _ entered.by.._Bette Rose -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

05%03101 Continued
Facility Number: 31-581 Date of Inspection 11-28-2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ®No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional..._:omments:and or, rawinigs::_
Overall, Mr, Sholar has a neatly kept facility and other than noted above, the fields are neatly kept. +

State of North Carolina
Department of Envirom
and Natural Resources
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor BY. -
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Richard Sholar
Richard Sholar Farm
1191 Deep Bottom Rd
Wallace NC 28466
Dear Richard Sholar:
I
FD
o •
CDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
November 6, 2000
Subject: Notification for Wettable Acre Determination
Animal Waste Management System
Richard Sholar Farm
Facility Number 31-581
Duphn 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 Patrick Fussell on 8/1.8/99 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 Patrick Fussell the necessary
information to potentially exempt your facility from undergoing a complete wettable acre
determination. Please submit this information to Patrick Fussell, 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 Patrick Fussell at [phone]. If within 90 days
you are unable to provide Patrick Fussell 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-
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

Notification for Wettable Acre Determination -
Animal Waste Management System
Page 2
Category 2:
Your facility has been identified by the 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 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 Sonya Avant of our
Central Office staff at [phone] ext. 571.
vSincerely,
T--� Z��Z %,7.
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Wilmington Regional Office
Duplin County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
Carroll's Foods, Inc.