710017_INSPECTIONS_20171231

_AM
NURTH CARULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

f .-.4,...
Facility Number
V Division of Water Quality -
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: I?(220CR- Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 'Title:
Onsite Representative: GA2.,? r�is.UGi�
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: E:�] o = ` 0 " Longitude: [� ° `
Design Current Design Current. Design ,-. Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
© Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys,
❑ Turkc Poults
❑ Other
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heife3
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockei
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
I
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑Yes
�o
❑NA
El NE
❑ Yes
!P `"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Fdcility Number: Date of Inspection N
`Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _ LA &Mt-)
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): lct,5
Observed Freeboard (in): 31
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
2 Xo
❑ 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 thr at, 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
2//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
94/0
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes LJ N/No
El NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drib ❑ 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
ZZN ❑ NA
El NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
L"J No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[--] Yes
8/No ❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
j N ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El Yes
�No❑ 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):
Z40 i�e.MlG6 Dart Kati C.Ro� IELvJS (��l-J �L Fog ftA .
Reviewer/Inspector Name f et41- Phone: q !� 3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: G 8 )
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — '} Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
lJ N
[I NA
El NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
ElYes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Elf� Yes
,�
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking P Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[1401
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
L7 No
❑ NA
❑ N(
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
URNo
❑ 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
ENo
❑ 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
,_,/
IQ 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?
El Yes
L�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Type of Visit 07Routine
pliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ?$5 05 Arrival Time: I 1 3a Departure Time: County: _260D� - Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Phone:
Facility Contact: 'Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: GPtici.`e ptLI-OGGJ Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ o ❑ 1 ❑ Longitude: = 0 0 1 = "
l IljVil
� Design'j' Current
pesign Current
Design Currer'
Swine
Cap sty Pupu� lattiioon
Wet Poulttz C�p'41 Po ul�ation
Cattle
Capacity
.Popu, I n
F5❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
airy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La et
❑Dairy Calf
© Feeder to Finish
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry'
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
-!
Gilts
❑Non -La ers
El Beef Feeder
PE3 Boars
ElPullets
❑ Beef Broad Cow
❑ Turkeys
-
Od
❑ Turkey Poults
Number of Structures: L,
❑ Other
ElOther
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
do
❑ NA
[I NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

_ r
Facility Number: 7 — Date of Inspection S
Waste Collection & Treatment
41 Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes MINo ❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): a-7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes dNo ❑ 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? El Yes 7No
El NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes El/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Ia N ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
]I. 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) 13 E 6Zm L.,,, o P, "(� & 4 4, 5 C' 0
13. Soil type(s) A Iy d R
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ayes
I& Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination, El Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
C✓JNO
El NA
El NE
❑No
❑NA
El NE
2/No
❑NA
El NE
OONo
El NA
El NE
I/JNo
El NA
El NE
OCSTpzi .1 L.A Goa__1 O E s=Gr►, S'& N h Co t' t( Ty D w G?
t,� � CA-rc c "p _ _7eLDr i� I" ZRMO T-I�Sr�EL`T�atj, iJs� rH(5 (u�� CZ fA t�rzgTC D
�t,Dw RA-rc for.-- Sp eA`-� G Jjj. Go V-a-c- C-T wa4Lkrt" 4 C 80— 0jC_ -Ad VL14A7 I�%
fir,) WEEO cotarwt, IJCC C D .
IReviewer/Inspector Name s`„ r `# ."�� > Phone: 01ad
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: (�,`�r, ,,,oQn Date:
12128104 Continued

r
Facility Number: 7 — Date of Inspection oS'
Required Records & Documents _
11. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes LJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CA,,WMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box.
ff yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElWUP El Checklists D/Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
E Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ElSoil alysis ElWaste Transfers
ElAnnual Certification
ElRainfall ElStocking [a/crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections onthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge`?
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NNo
❑ NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
,E2,
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
D- o
NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
El Yes
El No
,❑,,
[]' A
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
O' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
O N
❑ 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
Z 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
I3 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
2' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
L`7 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Od donal Comments and/or Drawingsc
12128104

u
Type of Visit to Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Technical Assistance
Reason far Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency A'Nier ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: l %1:
Farm Name:[ f 1 ��ttV /",a5►/Pi1'f *
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: TR(e:
Onsite Representative: �J)
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish,
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
re Time: / ounty: i�� Region:
Owner Email: __—._... _...
Phone:
No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = 0 0 4 Longitude: 0°= t
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er k
Other
❑ Other. _ _ _—
Dry Poultry
N
Poults
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dal
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: =I
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
El Yes El No [I NA El NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
El Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection D
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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 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 lbs ❑ 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)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination`
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I V4-'e; O �f✓ e i��o� �/�s✓�,G �+/,D�� G0. t '1'� 7
/v�-� ss fF .L�rez G,47 mod.✓ ,5a.� .N� p
�p/L �5 /•4�Pm /7No r�i� /�i9�'�l �� ��/}�z�z�f/��f—�a
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 4�S
12128104 Continued

F4cifity Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El 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 Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
RN
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NI,
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
El 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
KNo
❑ 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
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes,4No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments3and/or Drawings r � Y, a t
�C„+d x,+:$.,. fl, rnb`i �, Pt4�..JRA't,#'dy,�'Fa7�+E.�46tt1P.,i9i}�i+.�e.i
�f_ ,5 �,q�� �C/f-� lld�rnl,0 /DAP �jF. ✓<�}� , .�G S,Scli.� / I/��D
a �f � s�r.✓�,o .
12128104

jType of Visit JD Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number t Date of Visit: j
;dPermitted rtified 13 �+Conditi�onally Certified 13Registered
Farm Name: .... � ..!!�._._52 .... .... ___. .
Owner Name:
M Tune:
Not Operational O Below
Date Last Opera or Above Threshold: ...
County: ».»- ...»......» .. .._ .. _» »
PhoneNo:...» ............. _. »..........._ _ ___ ..... ...»....
MailingAddress:.................»........................................».....» ...... ...»_ ................ __...»_.»...»»..».».»»..».».».........».» .... _ ..... ..._...._ .»...
Facility Contact: . »....».... .»_. ........ __..y }... Title:.._....... ....._ ..............._..».»._...._».. Phone No: ».»» ......._. ».. j ...,
Onsite Representative:..__..Zal _.......»............»_., .. Integrator:
Certified Operator:. , , ...»„ .»., ._.__ .. , . _._..».»» » .».� ...».... _ Operator Certification
Location of Farm:
J Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 66 Longitude • 4 «
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes A 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 f 'No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ YesPlNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Continued

• 1~ acility Number: 71
Date of Inspection /
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
I0. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessh
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
0 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?
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
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
Air Quality representative immediately.
J5) tAAi-,V 4-79 V-C,,V-r 11),4
❑ Yes ZO No
❑ Yes o No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 511
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,� No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
Field Cove ❑ Final Notes
24 r e AV- f*4
- (o/,rJIJE2 At,Sv ,S-�r7,Ao 1" `7Z f,- ct zP FN C,, iT Cor�F�
L �rIl& if,.- k& i %q, eet J_/f
bA) � 212/03
to
/ococ-J.
r �l2�ifi.,� I t✓nyzFZC�T�oi✓ �
ReviewerAkspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r G'IA 7�;, - Date:
,.,.,, 13

.Vaulity,Number: — Date of Inspection "''r'`t+"7�'
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? U yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ONo
27_ Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ;2rNo
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONo
29. Were any additional problems notee -which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? 2 Yes ❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) Yes ❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes A No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ONo
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? /El Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes/91No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

f
Type of Visit e0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Vislt 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted 0 C •fled © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
/Farm Name: Z i
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: 9 99Title:
Onsite Representative: R_r�r)
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
�N�/UPSI Time: I C% I
Not O erational OBelowThreshold
Date Last Operate Above Threshold:
County Or
Phone No:
hone No:
Integrator: _
Operator Certification Number:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry CapacItV Population Cattle CaPaeltv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder 1 10 Layer I Dairy
Feeder to Finish 1 3&J2❑ Non -La er ❑Non-Dai
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
Bars Total SSLW
❑ Boars
Ntamber o f Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drams Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Naldtng Ponds / Solid Traps d'` ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ZNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Svrav Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes ❑ No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillwav
Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure b
Identifier:
r�
Freeboard (inches):
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,
❑ 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?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
❑ No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
10 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?
Al 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?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes /El 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
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
`Comments. refer tn: uestl6ri # .'Ex lain an YlrS+answeis and/organ srecpmmendationse4
9 ) P Y Y or any other comments:-
d
a( fx
Use;drawings of facNo
llity to betterexpl'❑ Field Copy ❑aiit=situations. (useadditianal pagestasinecessary)v Final Notes
NSL°FG�T2A,J nl€ v ✓ uJ F.co� �o :5'
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'z
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: fJ3
O5103101 v Continued

• Facility number: 2 O
Date of Inspection /
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30, 'Were anv 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 permanentitemporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
/3) PLAVEIz- Wph_
-e Coe
Ali, roP-
�s ?Fo A/ Mal
uGL p
�YB ref✓ Q/c,E AZ 3103
I t
05103101

Facility Number Date of Visit: 'Time: I i To
10 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted O Certi(fi}ed [3Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �n Or¢ �G� n tr-_ _ County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 04 Du Longitude 0 0' «
Design Current
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity, Population
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacitv Poijulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
10 Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other -
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
'Number of Lagoons �
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ t a oon Area ❑ S ra Field Area
..
, ,
Pon ds l Solid Tra s
- ❑ No Liquid Waste Management S stem
Discharges & Weam Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Collection && Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Stricture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ±L(
Freeboard (inches): �'c3O
05103101 Continued

-r+-�..n.w,i '�. :�,�e , �+y ',I in _.. �. �"" "^r ^J�-+.'i �,ci"'ti^.-"~'i�^ ' y� _ �.•L �v ~ ~ti , f a.�...� ,� �.�i, •`'" ,�..
k��+...i°ti'Y.,JVrn:-Ls*<i.<'v�,.�,^
OrDivision of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ()Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up Q Emergency Notification Cher ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: - 3O"� Time: 3l7
10 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
© Permitted 0 Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �n County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification NumI6er:v
4w:,r
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design Current
swine
Feeder to Finish P
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder,.
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Poultry Capacitv Population Cattle Capacitv Population
❑ Layer I ❑ Dai
❑ Non -Layer on -Dairy I
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
lNumber of Lagoons a Subsurface ace Drains Prese
nt anLagoon Area I
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharizes & 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 Cll tin & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: A4 (
Freeboard (inches): --' a Q1r
05103101
t
J Spray Field Area ii
❑Yes
.^
❑No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes.
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection 7 -�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reouired 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.
�Coinmen ts,(refer to yuestionA#) ,.Explain tiny YES answers antllo"many recommen'dations.or anyoticr comments
Use'drawings7af facility to better ezplatii situations, use additional page0fis'necessary) + '
. �❑ Field Conv ❑Final Notes
Q it
Reviewer/inspector Namet: G L
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

- •r-. c � i'Y a`^.P.F-v a7y..; v!`• ...rPlt' �stJ!!'��
�ryr�'�zi_"a,+'}'�'rr�:,,°%•'°'�„���:'',%,`'•l'+;.�i.1F�i'�i:+�_�',^�;�y�;;:;L,.���,�`tP4.';�.Ry;��;,,r"."";!ti*�ip,i;'�,tt'�-�j4�''�.,.�- �. 1 .E�
w
406
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection �U3
$. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4_6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7, Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
' elevatign markings? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? - ElYes ❑ No
1r 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ElPAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type �`•
'
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)7 '
U Yes
J-.,.J No
.Y,•
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[] Yes•,
r .:
s
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;rdesign, 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 t
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
❑ No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel 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 (refer to question #): Expjia' any ICES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
e..
Use.drawings afIfaclllty to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ❑111111
Final Notes
aY1.Py—loc7Gil
✓
r
Reviewer/Inspector NameWIT Riffilli
ry _
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7 — 30 _ Q 3
r 05103101 Continued

Type'of Visit 1P C mpliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Time:
Facility Number Date 01, Visit:
Not O erational Selow Threshold
[Permitted 0 Certifle 0 Cond' •onally Certified r[3gistered Date Last Operated Above Threshold:
Farm Name: � County:
Owner Name: &Zd +-fZ Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: 1 e Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: .,,,, du�nJ,� /` — Integrator: -- _
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
n swine ❑ Poultry
Swine
,Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Ll Farrow to Feedei
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �� Longitude
Design',• Current Design ''Current' a 6 Destgn :f Current
,Canacio _° Population =F i.Poultry , .CapaciEv" Popalatid .. ',3`Cattic' : e't`.`;Cavadtv.° Pouiilation
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Namber:of, Lagoons
Holding,Ponds l Solid Traps
) Non -Layer gr] Non -Dal
.. ❑
Other
` TOtB� �QSI[! CalSCttj
4 �t�
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ 5 rav Field Area f=�
-
❑ No Li uid Waste Mana ement 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? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes INO
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
o
Structure 6
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,
❑ Yes
No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
f
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
,_
L,Q No
/
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
4No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N0
/
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
o
11. Is there evidence o ver application? ❑ xcessive Po ing [_PAN ❑Hydraulic erload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop type Gf
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those design ed in the Certified Animal Waste Management lan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
16No
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
X
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
ElYes
VN0
Reauired—Records & Do-cuments
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/ W`UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
es
op�_
s facility not i compliance with an applicable setback criteria in effect at the tune of design?
20. I ty o n c p y pp gn
' Ye
❑ sONo
o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
[6 o
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?
El Yes
IN o
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comiments:(refer to'yuestioni �} F)�xplain;anY�YES ans+wers�andlnr,anyrecommoiaidationsttir;any a� €r
...r�c�mments�.',,�'�r',.�._"�`;'a���`E�!�:..'.;�� , ,F;e
Use drawings of facilityto ;better explain situations. (nse ndditi6itW pages as'necessary)g a 1 �1 ieid Gapv ❑Final Notes
m
.. . , .• .... M. r.m M..ww.. •hn.M¢t Ytrfr+P'. Mt n t h. ii,liw
AZ5 4447s A0V / w
pei✓ve z. 5 Ate'.
• x9� § -,- _ � il'E � x ,'.i� M � i i i it i (' � �e.,iY'M��'tt�{ 4 � ,[ d:. y j 3 i�`.— I r€ €--re.�VV _ •-
Revtewerllnspector Name i.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 ` f — ff Continued

Facility number: — 17 Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atior below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters. etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentitemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes x No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes ZNo
ElYes'go
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Gominents;and/or.Druwfts:.'. t
- A f, -'5�
_ Z)4 -
05103101

A ~ . xDivision of Water Quality. i
QrDivision of Soil and Water Conservation'
0.0therAgency
Type of Visit 11Compiiance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine AComplaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date or Visit: 1 —A1 Tiine: ` Printed on: 10/26/2000
Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:...........'^^.t.................:.............. �.Cfrw�, county:................ ..............
OwnerName: .........................
..........................
..... ..
................................................................. Phone No:.......................................................................................
FacilityContact: l .................
.......................
.................................... Title: .......................................... 0... ..... 4.... 0.... ... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: ... 0 .................................................................................................................
..................................................................................... ........0.................
Onsite Representative:......
.1.1k1.�.....
..'Y . S^^:.................................. Integrator: ...........t' ..C.. r......................................................
Certified Operator ...
S,p 4%A. ................
... ....................... Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
r'R
7
M Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �• �° t J�° Longitude �• �� �64
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer I 1 ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish -q ❑ Non -Layer I I ICNon Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ ,agoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds /,Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance; man-made? ❑Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) Yes ❑ No
c, If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (fi'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the Slate 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 StRILALLro 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ............................................................................................................
.................+:........................................ .
Frcehoard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

acilit .NU ber: — Date of Inspection / Printed on: 10/26/2000
6. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures obs rued {iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan`? ❑ Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application_
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Required 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)
❑ 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
�' I io yi4l 00njs;or deficler UL-9 $re note$• O(Wift fhis'visit' • Y:o> wiil•>�eegive ijo furtj><rrt`
correspondence. abouf this visit..
Comments {refer, to, question #);4 Explain.any YES answers and/or any'recominendations 'or any=other;co ments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional'pages as' necessary)
04
plLiSGL-4,rce— was 9lo44rr� • w wpc.S Oft -1��
I IV6 ivy- . aoslna _ I1r
Reviewer/Inspector Name r, - Us
rc,.".,1orc. -".,E,.
ReviewertInspector Signature: V I Date: 1 " 0 5/00

Type of Visit oCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: �7 a j Time: 11 55
Q Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
13 Permitted 0 Certified Q Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: ..........J0..:...:• c 5... PPt r s .. +-%....r-...r" ........................... County:...Pe..c.r.........................................................
OwnerName:..,..... � y`�.cS...........G-..aY.Sow.......................................................... Phone No:.....................................................................................:.
FacilityContact:............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative:.,....eso ^Integrator:....1. ..lrioh.. t ................ ......... ......... }..................................
.. »....
.......
.. Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 64 Longitude e 4 «
Design : 'Currentl,r
Swine. t'anRrety Pnnnlatbriri
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design . : Current
Poultry Cg act Po ulation Cattle
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
ToWbOsign Capacity L
Number of lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
Holding Ponds/ Solid°Traps,: ❑ 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)
7
❑ Spray Field Area
c. Ii' discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure. 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ..........................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 2-
5/00
❑ Yes ;TNo
❑ Yes JNo
❑ Yes Rf No
-.h IA
❑ Yes Pf No
❑ Yes ;'No
❑ Yes PFNo
❑ Yes P�No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: 7 1 —) Date of Inspection Ill 1 q
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ONo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes O 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 j2j No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes JZ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,� No
11. Is there evidence of over application}? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes PNo
12. Crop type �c.✓'�^� vd.a l7dL`j S:✓ .-Vl r4 I',
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes /PNo
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?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
i �04%tioiwor- 4001clexims •wro m000. OW109 NsAsit; • *; w�l� fe�i e o t'u1-tit r
rtiriespori�ence a�otit this visit:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes J�3No
❑ Yes _j3No
❑ Yes 21 No
❑ Yes L'No
,zYes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 13 No
❑ Yes .0 No
❑ Yes
,❑'No
❑ Yes
13 No
Xyes
❑ No
M Freeb'O'q � CrArL jre nc4 rccor'deof re6r"'q" , lUlayc� 4 Are;I
Zoo) .►'ham, lie-��Yso� Guhrlo-� ex�O1��n wh 4to vecr.6ts q,,e nnA r wMed,
;2S . The be r r-. vdA t-wo been -rca_m ; - L.e �-'NS449 f,1an rec� v: -cf 4 ke (aer ^1 u�loti
• -0 6e k4a ed . Woti4 lat^ aana� �'�eld ���r_-iFse- "�-4 ajree.
15. NeeA 4-o mfflV 1;,.,^c q 4 h e rk4e OF �o�-,%acre orl44c teie<d Cehinod
688 LISeS. 1Veed -rho eSlkblUln �er•kVda, p►i Aelot &ett,no( h.G� 110vSe5
6tv1d �et orard 4-ke o0j -end of pvlls r,e) s,o4.karwise 4e
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 10 11 °i 01 /00

Facility Number: rZ
) — / Date of Inspection 11,17,11101
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 O No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e, broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes IZNo
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? 0 Yes ❑ No
Additional omments an orDrawings:,
)��coj14 ber,--vo(ri ceef if well es44 bilsheaf espe-,Pe�,r i-�s Ise ��c�,., •
1' %.1e�abic gcteS (�G-�Q✓ Mry,ar�ia►� in�nrrl�j-�idh woo due be
(Ioee; ned 6Y ��/� m in Yet ay 2n0 I ) 6v4 Was MOB rece► veal.
Iveeci �o Svbr►1,� we Hable L16�es i►-kf'a�-� f o,-� �Gn ics le�►�eJ�
a. 2 [:.wr�s �e Iah Wks tL, wtq�G�es� qq Ca aF
ory ->b� ®�
w k ; c� 3 1 ) Zors)
14 ohdw I 1 M'J
t2� Ca�d"'�I D�'i✓e �xa-
Nast '�hP q,re� (A-0--t,-,CA -4)1P hog z f ►')eA41 Ke&
5/00

Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 36(
Time of Inspection © 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 13 Certified 0 onditionally Certified 13 Registered [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
1BFarm Name: ..... . 4� County :.............. ...................................
OwnerName: ................................................... ........................................................................ Phone No:.......................................................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:.................................................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: .............................................................................................................................................. .................. ..........................
......... .......... .. .
Onsite Representative:.!-R;!........................................................................... Integrator: ........
................. .....1................................................
Certified Operator: .................................. I ................ ............ I ................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude �' �� ��� Longitude '
fo wine Destgn Current' Design Current ��4 Design , ,Current
S Capacity 'Population . Poultry,. CaAgcitv',`.Potiiilarro'`n'"'.. `Cattle 'r ;r'�;CdAaciO.;E Poueilatii -
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feederlo Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
I❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
TO a
W
DischarZtis & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes P(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? (ii' 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 RNo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes WNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ............5 ........................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, Yes [kio�
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facidiy Number: - Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidencoof oveerpplication? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type -p 1 • ch
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there'a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Renuired Records & Documents
17.- Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18, 'Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20-, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
*iola igris'ot• OOrjcje dL-9 v�re'pQteo- OUring thls'v�s�t� • ;YOO w011•teceiye 00 fu>j-t�t�f•
corresporicience. abotit this visit.
❑ Yes 4No
f` Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 12LNo
❑ Yes P�No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes too
❑ Yes gNa
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ErNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes &No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes E(No
❑ Yes fi4 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
awl-.2✓ •Q`'\ l/�G.l�i c,�yv-� fJ X'6
s
Reviewer/Inspector Name
��
�aa.Ez�`.. � `'fin.
+'
,_, � �! . �;•� ��. s� �,.
�'��� ���, ,
��i
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:^

v FacMty Number: 17- Date of Inspection Qd
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
xYes
❑ 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
X 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
4No
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
4N0
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
XNo
Additional oMlnents"ar of rawlllg5 � . u � � E "��-
s4LcL-U
3/23/99

Division of Soil and, Water Conservation -Operation Review. !
10 Dwrsion of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance•Inspectton
10Dsvision of Water Quality Compliance Inspection
Other,'A enc -Operation Review . ,,>.. a • �
J%Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSIVC review Q Other
Facility Number Mitt: of Inwpcedon
Time of' Inspection Gb 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 0 Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered 0 Not O erntional Date Last Operated:
Farm Narnc: ]��le-�( C.! ...'..�`..�"�........ County:....... er" 'G ..............................
OwnerName:............................................................................................................................ I'hone No................................,.......................................................
FacilityContact: .......................... ....................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:...................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: "�\ i&�............................. Integrator:.....1,,............. p�`
Certified Opera Cor:........................................,.........,..,..,.,..................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
I,ocatign of Kartry, r 1 r .1 It r N r
".— YV........I&
_A. LK=.....h.i...it......................................................... ................................... ......... ................................................. .................... I.............................. T
Latitude Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine _ _ Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean toFeeder❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Fceder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean -
❑ Farrow to Feeder JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originaled at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the convcyancc rnan-madc?
I). If dischargc is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters [:]Waters of the State
c. tf discharge is observed. what is the estiniatcd Ilow in gal/min?
d. noes discharge bypass a lagoon systc;nt?
2. Is.there evidence of past discharge from any part or the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) Icss than adequate?
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes [XNo
MYes ❑ No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Frechoard (inches): .............
......................................................................................................................................................................................................
1/6/99 Continued on back

. Facility Dumber: r) — ( Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of' the structures observed?.(ic/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovernent? Yes ❑ No
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [�<No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen ❑Yes No
12. Crop type V`''1' ,,......- ............. 4 .r..sti`..... ................ ................. .......... ..................................................
..........
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes WNo
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint) ❑ 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. Pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes M No
18,
Does the facility tail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
NINo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement'? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
19 Yes
ElNo
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
0 No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
R[No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
t4Yes
❑ No
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
D9 No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
9No
0, O. jations.or. deficiencies .were tied d[t .Hiis. visit :.. �vi7l.re.. . flirt. .
. .ing .. . .. . ..
Correspo;rildence; about; this visit.; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; .
Comments (refer to question Explain any YES answers and/or any recoriimendations�or any other, comments
Use diawings,of facillity to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):,
ks
Qar t1b rQ iy\1 LAJZ- 0_Z_4J( A-L, R-44- Ff
r 4 he
rI
%,S \vt...2`�� � `�. `'� t . �Qw �c�f ►r•4 � t1G � � 1
vtv t'e y-t"'eJWGi Ke��c�-ZAce
��
Reviewer/Inspector Name ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: "310 M _ 1116199

L61007
> St�
INA4
--,3 CIA-
vy�
--I a,�
i-ssulmvjcj iOjput, sjaoluP
luo ltuol)!Ppv
-
;uoijndsujjo-,))i?(j .... . ..... :-iaqtuiiN R)!jjqij

* .0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
_1319.5pivision of Water Quality
outine O Complaint O Follow-uu of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection17
F_ Facility Number
Time of Inspection 3 : it S 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certified © Applied for Permit 12 Permitted 13 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name. `'�......,.....
.........I.u.�. ....&.°j'5�...rc:.•--1.............................................. county:.......... ...... .......................... 2C.
OwnerName: ............ ............................................................ Phone No:.........Z,.S....5.�.......................
FacilityContact: ..............................................I................................... Tt-itle:...............
Mailing Address: Z ..........►i-0r5c ....✓..r'.'":"�' ........
Onsite Representative: .................................................................................
Certified Operator:.................Ye`�...._11111,!.... ......................
Location of Farm:
..................... I................. Phone No:...........................
5-
Integrator: ..........................................................................
Operator Certification Number;.,J.k.`f.,1,1�.........
Latitude • 4 0 i° Longitude ' 4 u
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste Managen
System
C
ME
Area I❑ Spray Field Area
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
WNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
r 0
Discharge originated at., ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
KN 0
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
6No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No5..
Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
)?(No
maintenancetimprovement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
[�No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
No
7/25/97

Facility Number:'
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures La oohs Iloldin Pons Flush Pits etc.
9. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm -storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Freeboard .......... : . 1
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 4
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 1KNo
Structure 5 Structure 6
............................ ............................ I......
...... .............. ...................... .............. ...................... ................................ I...
❑ Yes K No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
_KYes
❑ No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
yyes.
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
VNO
Waste Applicatioq
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
4a�No
(1f in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type lP.t-�.-...r...�..L.................................................
..............
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
'W]No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�dNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�(No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
1WNo
21.
Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Cl Yes
WNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement? Yes ❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0- No.vio'lations-or, ddidencies werentited-during this:visit.• You;will ret:eivenaftir&er.:
:. corre OWWe O about .(his: visit:- ' :.:::...:.:.:. : .1. I . ... ' ; .. , ' , .
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Ko
{1. i= V;•��xL� O-3 6S;f� �� �d S� �� iciboU q �GG/L�: �f I,;4�' 6/q y Ak
a.,4 ve 3 �e�(,
}Z e_ve'$E'�� L4rt aJt'G�j Cc�o�rill -�U�' o� iL.�covn L.,�t'�� �onTrd��ee��rJcr 1
t A l[4 5dcavl ,
ZZ. IV1� ����� ►'Gcvt�5 �� le-ve s ot, Sr
_R R- �a14A C
LV
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 4�- 2 3 — 5' �i

. A A
x%
I
- :yr t-�it.. ,;.:+: t„E�- -�. �,..� , . Y ! -.. Y � .;.y �-,�.' a'�. is. . iJ' r `fir•.' j, -.�y a4�-�,^�..�':�,�.�,..Y,•ti'li+'`"? ::''�Jr"'r .......,... _ ...- ... _ . ,r, _ ��4�
` ❑ DSWC Ani"mal ,Feedlot Operation Review:
s�j �# t� e r � s � �°" �•� , — # � ° q r ;^#^"r «gym '^� �"f^!":°°" �.M.. i , '� ..
, � � rria ee I t eratl n a3 � DWQ �Ani l�F� d o Op o sit nspectton
x
IQ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
a
Date of Inspection 5 y
Facility Number
Time of Inspection I S : 5 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status. ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
JQ Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel andprocessing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:.................................._..........................................................._....................................................
FarmName: .o..ti.�.... r.s �a ....Fc„ K...................................................... County:...P.e.jn..cL.e..:................................... .1.1�.1.t..�$...C?.
Land Owner Name: �� 1'r.....g..,+y...................................... Phone No:.4...1.U..) ... .`1...'..... allkl........................
FacilityConctact:.........................................................................I........ Title:................................................ Phone No:
Mailing Addrew... Z_7.7....... }......1�.�r..,.,,.t.jk ..... F4.a..4.................... ... 9.u..X..r�.a ,..7...... h)..0................................, .Z .'i.. .,�..
OnsiteRepresentative:.. .�.�...r�...... P.r.,..r �..,n................................................... Integrator: ... M .u..r... . a .ti..................................
CertifiedOperator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:................ I.........................
Latitude Longitude EJ 11• E T-3-3,a
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97,; ,. maintenance/improvement?
',AIL t phi
[� Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ Yes
9 No
tZ 1 A
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes QNo
❑ Yes ® No
RYes 0 No
Continued on back r :~

t � —v'•w v''t ;;N' •a c .N 1 rr�,� , y. �a ri�t�v„"� G tiN " — ,.A • Y: r � K`,., uti ..:�,.., r n• _. •'I' '1 • N • v:"A_ " ° %,
..i,r �t' �• .7i, r r .. ,
Facility Number:... ..j..... ...... ..
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®,No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
2 No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
® No
y tructures ,agoons and/gr Holding_Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
® No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Stricture 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
.....�........... ............................ ............................ ............. •.............. ............................
............................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
® No
It. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
® Yes
❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
[allo
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
1�5.• Crop type .�..t•,c..12....................... .. ....... ..................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
17: Does the facility have�a lack of adequate acreage for land application? t
❑ Yes
' 18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
„❑ No
... 19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes.
1.No
2I. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
Eor Certitletl-Facilities Only
❑ Yes
® No
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
($ No
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
iR Yes
❑ No
Comments (refer to question'#) Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations 'o any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use addrtioriat,pages as necessary)
3'
I., A, .r-e0.t,tr+ isuf�er•...area v%avedS fv bQ kePf beiweevt ,aver .SP.-t' ed., i?
n Cl ck c,teV% �ro�er��rS L+ octropiit�( reSrGlevreEl+
11 l Z} r+� a v. a{[ S cL r+n + r.. V%^ V v-%^ b V t IE •r p f i e c 4
S.JIS. �ev4.ge1 atC have arLpSyr -y/ �',C1dS UL ar�A f,
covE,�' Cr•Op• `
c••1•ci. vtiv'e et al cv-oS i0r-+ c�its- cv. la+-� 00'A ►�!o f j
24. Gei a nV II'. 4Qr reC.IY-X= t�Aaf Y �Eec{T f`6{@ ��eld V►vw.�er'C
f e'd 1.. L V ,r A `L' V\^ p p e ✓v. a va •E p 1. o, ,,, M a K. e. S V r e-
e'rf , ,n ►'w p v. �.. q vti.-• b ✓� p (C� U� C (� r ,r F S to Vn d t-o i E 1 4 +� v b e rol
ov, �rripa+iev. YrtC6rtLS
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: r� _ A n .. , -J') . i'`µ'' N' 9 Date:
cc. Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Sectioa `Faculty Assessment Ultll 4/30197

IJIL-C-M 1,L-I; G.,1 _Li4
0
0
0
Site Requires Immediate Attention _
Facility Number: J�
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 1 .1995
Owner: T= Pridgen Farm Name:
Col MY'. .end inr
Agent Visiting Site: , 21 & BE CBS _...._ _ Phone: [phone]
Operator'. same Phone: (Qtn) 252-513,6, —
On Site Representative: Ivey Pridgen Phone:
Physical Address: 2 miles east of H 421 on SR 1216. Faxm road on Left.
Mailing Address: 277 Horse Branch Road
Watha, N.C. 28471
Type of Operation: 'Swine x -- Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: . 622 Einiw1ing Number of Animals on Site; 3672 Finishing
Latitude: C Longitude:
Type of Inspection: Ground . x Aerial_
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Q or No Actual Freeboard: 6' Feet — Inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or&t Was there erosion of the dam?: lit s or No
Is adequate land available for land applicadon? C4 or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes ori@ - f
Additional Comments: Not purapina at tjais time. Lagoon established 10 months.
Erosion apparent on interior & exterior sides of dike, does not appear
severe enough to compromise dike integrity. Also water level provides no
threat - has plan to improve erosion control pen ing for fall.
Fax to [phone] Signature of Agent

E
f Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. _'7 17
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERip,
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE:, 1995
Time:
Farm Name/Owner: w t
Mailing Address: r' E'- rq
County:
Integrator. Phone:
On Site Representative: —.Pbone.
1
Physical Address/Location:
Pr o S elok M u r. C
Type of Operation: Swine . Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: - 362 Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certific •on Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: Lf, , tiLongitude: 0 1 11Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does'the Animal Waste Lagoon have ufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) a or No Actual Freeboard: ��Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes 00Was any erosion observed? V or No
Is adequate Iand available for spray? a or No Is the cov r crop de ate? J�Ye or No
Crop(s) being utilized: �1ftf C
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? a or No
100 Feet from Wells? e or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes oroo
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes o
Is -animal waste discharged. into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes oV If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, Iand applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes 06.
E
cc: Facility Assessment Unit = Use Attachments if Needed.
Of