Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
710029_INSPECTIONS_20171231
NORTH CAROLINA Department of Environmental Qual Type of Visit: t, Compliance Inspection V Operation Review /}y5tructure Evaluation O Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: O Routine Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: I�( Arrival Time: Departure Time: County Farm Name: 'ungia Owner Email: Owner Name: Phone: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Title: Onsite Representative: Y&�nbm r�lj Y�aLj io Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Latitude: Integrator: �1. Region: Phone: Certification Number: Certification ]Number: Longitude: Design Current Design Current Design Gent ` Swine C►apacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop. . Finish La er Dair Cow Feeder Non -La er Dai Calf o Finish 1 F Dair Heifero Wean Design Current D Cow o Feeder Dr, P,oultr> Ca aci pto �- Non -Dairy o Finish Layers Beef Stocker Gilts Non -Layers Beef Feeder MI Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow Turke s Qther Turkey Puults 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 or 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 k No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes No ❑ Yes No [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑NA ❑NE ❑ NA [] NE Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continuer) 1764ili Number: - Date of Inspection: Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? Yes Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Identifier: ! E Spillway?: ❑No ❑NA ❑NE ❑No ❑NA ❑NE Structure 6 Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 70 S� a 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 YNo ❑ 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 �gNo ❑ 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement'? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. []Yes []No ❑ NA XNE ❑ 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 '6NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? % Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE I6. 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 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ME 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA M NE the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑Checklists []Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes [] No ❑ NA VNE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ElWaste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code ❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" 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 ❑ No ❑ NA NE Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued FArili Number: - Date of Inspection: lR 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? [] Yes 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes the appropriate box(es) below. ❑ No ❑ NA to NE ❑ No ❑ NA WNE ❑ 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 �q No ❑ NA 0 NE 27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA Other Issues 2$. 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 b�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 KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes [ ❑ NA ❑ NE 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE SePc�ra�e. ��,cpec-4 -Foyry', r Rla-kd s c,ev tctAn iru�S-�,`yc ��n Z �r►a.r der nA Goner . -Uw f' c f Av, �kC.mkii E ry `� �mW U vt j * S (t sS --jan 12 L Ln oon �G aAJ 5 6(o A AW. ` i s cusrec� 4rccns e r� � u wea- �c�� 3 0 At Pb A w6o yNk 16 +D o-6yL 2 &rA VPAW AAkA G �VV picl n� Y& to Mar Y-A to l Mil al, a s -� NJ "VIA. MY, gcu�r�{I w AAO�+� WUWkoyh Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signatut Page 3 of 3 Phone: Z 1 Date: 2/4/201 S (Type of Visit: Q-Mompliance Inspection V ;;0_a11_00_w`__up tiReview O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance J Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access Il Date of Visit: /} Arrival Time: 110 Departure Time: Z %Z County: Region: Farm Name: Owner Name: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Title: Owner Email: Phone: Onsite Representative:n!"/I 1 Integrator: Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Phone: Certification Number: Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude: Design Current Design Current Design Current SwinePo P h` P• Wet Poultr Y Ca aci� P h' Po .. P Catitle Cat acit P Y Po P• Wean to Finish Layer Dai Cow W an to Feeder Non -La er Dai Calf eeder to Finish DairyHeifer [I Farrow to Wean Design Current D Cow Farrow to Feeder D I'oultr Ca aci Po P. Non -Dairy Farrow to Finish Layers Beef Stocker Gilts on -Layers Beef Feeder Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow Turkeys Other Turkey Poults Other Other Discharges and Stream Impacts 1. 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 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) ❑ 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 observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters Yes FrNo NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued Fucili Number: - '� Date of Inspection: I V7137/L Waste Collectign & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes EJ_No--Q-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: Z_ Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): Z �j 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE (i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a [] Yes [��lo ❑ NA ❑ NE waste management or closure plan? If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 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 to❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Apl2lication 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 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 Typc(s): 13. Soil Type(s): 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Y ❑No ❑NA Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑Yes No ❑NA 6'N E ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �/ N ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE ❑Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2rNF ❑ 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 Surve 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA N ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA gNE Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued Ocility Number: - 2 Date of Inspection: l `3 7,71 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA NE 25. Is thti facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NAFj-_K_E� 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 f NSA ❑ 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 lo_ ❑ 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. Dos (face the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. es ❑ 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 EZ(No NA ❑ NE 33. Did the Rev iewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ YesjNo o ❑ NA ❑ NE 34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE C6mments refer to uestion'# :,Ex "lawn an ',.YES:afiswers iikndlor, au additional re0ihMehdati6ns 6rart 'other'eo�rments 1,;`; -` s, slr,ata:.3!q:. ':tls��...:rl..af I,.1 !I,€ L:. [„ ! t:,,lry', Use,draw,ings, of�;facil�,. +.'to.betfcr,ex .lalnlsrtu twuns (use:,additionall�pagcs C'S/q c�, .v►, frur 1 C. f onl 4� r Qj (� c��„-t5 r► ccr�`�� SwSS�� d-ra�.�� -roe, 9 / Sr , .� w (' t r CA. c SAt,�S J �a� f a. nr (( cA r to I-4 ct t/ I-, D viv— 2 r ! -rr • P t L C ac r' e J P o & I / Ces '...kp, C5,19tvc.i COP/ C�r,5f,n.� La�•_5�, — 9!? f 3ry Reviewer/Inspector Name: vs o�'I �Vi Phone: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: C Date: Page 3 of 3 21412015 Type of Visit: 71 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation0 Technical Assistance Reason for Visit: O Routine Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: �y Farm Name: amr-Kh TL� Owner Email: Owner Name: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: {" Integrator: Certified Operator: Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Latitude: Phone: Certification Number: Certification Number: Longitude: Region: k)t�_o If Design Current Design Current Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Finish Layer 7eeder C*attle DairyCow Design Current Capacity Pop. Feeder Non -La er DairyCalf o Finish Dairy Heifer Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish Design Current Dr. P■oultr► Ca aci P■a Layers Dry Cow on -Dairy Beef Stocker Gilts Non -Layers Beef Feeder Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow Other Other Turkeys Turkey Poults Other Discharges and Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the ope/in? 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)? popor d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) [] Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes � ❑ NA ❑ NE 3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE of the State other than from a discharge? Page I of 3 21412015 Continued Facili umber: - Date of Inspection: $ Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No . ❑ NA ❑ NE Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier:. Z Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): Z 2� 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes..,0 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 ONo ❑ 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 environment reat, notify DWR 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ 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 C5 No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ o ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect I d application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Pon ng Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN 'QPAN > 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 J'NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? D Yes [] No ❑ NA ,�NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable D Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ZNE acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes D No ❑ NA J2 NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA J:�" NE Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA JZNE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA .❑ NE the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other: 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No i ❑ NA 0 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 ❑ No ❑ 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 Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: 9 Z� I 24..Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No 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: ❑ NA -NE ❑ NA [. qi 26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No [DNA NE 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) ❑ Yes ❑ No CIA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ETNE ❑ Yes 2fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE []Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below. []Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ NA 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 ❑ Yes , ❑N No ❑ NA NA ff'NE ❑ NE ❑ NE ❑ NE Comments "(refer to question #.)Eioliin�'any YManswers'and/or'any additional recommendations or any other comments. Use drawinks'offacility.to better.explain-situations.(use additional pates as necessary). o fr<5 ' /l� �a ^�[��.^ / th t� 4�y � r n� 1. "'f r,5 �(i %1�i S A/� , / i /i/J'�1� (�fU ��/1 4 / // ,,,0, w s .1 o1 C J[II - 0 !A 5k /1...• �� 1r...��P J r /1�41� � 1 •1 JCL T e� �A� 000. �C��{S . /7/ �/Yr��'+� C/-� (t" `� Ices �r i�:t� �+�hof4- 0.% 9 � u^. o C I ti -j o �vd S %r �C)s r r �¢ s 5a,r419 I k1rer, 1120 A, - �ar' rd4 '4 e,( ex vt �,��5 � t""" S QIG ✓tS )-qrj•, o+- All s4,-, tS . 5 k� _3 G� 51, C�l� �(A // h t% 7 �� 7k5 /' �/1 fti o 5rQr,. 1aSf- irc���f/o,- P"c (rs� (�` /s4,rAle Qr tom/ �w5 Q� S . Lx5�- + rr, p& n' On/P1iC•� f dui wt 5 ego f 4-5 A ok /Lx DfSe453 c`�- Pk b %r �+vn4- I rJ �� 5 c t.�� r� �..i►cr+ ��/� A+ % (IV, �/[rn %�� 5 r �, Irr 1 �re91 P- JPf 5 I. - a4 P4.h hri f� � 2 �... �,-�ff+p�t-��J� l �� I L e l /ts s�� M %� s, +•�vL t„t'I'Gd A.CrC, 5 C��kG�. 5y �e,- �..,e.R( s� P�.dI S 1 r ` e Rn A int` 4 ilit� e Vl,)eAA/i't� prff!nf- —9- p� 4wS� a c err- I � 9n ���tre,r,�.. �-S w� �� 2,� �� ��v S ss "At-aS,,S a ,,..,r`. i s /'n �� 1 t c.�..! d r l �f► G e is S A P/m, � a f e� rr�Q a Reviewer/inspector Name: i tto /1 Vo -A Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Phone: Date: Page 3 of 3 LJ 21412015 Type of Visit: Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance I Reason^Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up ;, Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other O Denied Access Date of Visit: Arrival Time:1 Iu O c7 Departure Time: I t Ub County: ?E &,pEOU Region: Farm Name: Owner Email: Owner Name: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Phone: Facility Contact: Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: /C6-0114 3AcL0VkMLL.. Integrator: Certified Operator: Certification Number: 91; 8 Z Back-up Operator: Location of Farm: Latitude: Certification Number: Longitude: Design Current Design Current Design Current Swine Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop. Wean to Finish I ILayer DairyCow +0 Wean to Feeder III INon-LayerIryCalf Feeder to Finish Dai Heifer Farrow to Wean Design Current Dry Cow Farrow to Feeder Dr. Pmoult . Ca aci Po Non -Dairy Farrow to Finish La ers Beef Stocker Gilts Non -La ers Beef Feeder Boars Pullets Beef Brood Cow Turke s Other Turke Poults Other Other Discharges and Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other: _ a. Was the conveyance man-made? b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify 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 2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued Lfacillty Number: I I - V1 IDate of Inspection: I1 Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes ❑�io ❑ 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: LPGoord �-jr L Spillway?: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in); Z ZL-0 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? ❑ 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 environmental hreat, notify DWQ 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 V ❑ 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 3/No ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? Waste Application 10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes CNo ❑ NA ❑ NE maintenance or improvement? 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) ❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil ❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area 12. Crop Type(s): 13, Soil Type(s): 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes allo ❑ 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 Fglf/io ❑ NA ❑ NE acres determination? 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Ld `"o ❑ NA ❑ NE Required Records & Documents l9. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropriate box. ❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other: !21. es record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. Yes [—]No Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Rainfall []Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections 22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [ZNo 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes FiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Weather Code ❑ Sludge Survey ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued EaciRty Nuihber: Date of Inspection: '�- 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit. ❑ Yes nNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [] Yes [2�No ❑ NA ❑ NE the appropriate box(es) below. ❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: 26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ 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) []Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 2(NNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes 7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other: 32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 34. Does the facility require afollow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes 2 'No ❑ NA ❑ NE FY No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE No ❑ NA ❑ NE Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). a() WASr� WPPtSGAT. O.J RF6,09-D3 ' 1M..Z 5&Mj!(n j-&&�A_ 2-013 T f36v Wsl.lr ' �olrL ate �oti Imo ►�} ~I'�CL�.1 �I'Vti4LL_ Ca A_ J OV EA—Sf CD UAP ZEEIJ j7R-ZU_U 1 sJD Ca w,.T .' vf. Reviewer/Inspector Name: Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Page 3 of 3 Phone: rN — 3 00 Date: I /4/)011 V Type of Visit ,C,ommpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance V Reason for Visit 'Koutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: ! I OS Arrival Time: 66 O Departure Time: County: 9 f00 f 9-- Region: Farm Name: Owner Name: Mailing Address: Physical Address: Facility Contact: Onsite Representative: Ki-P—OL-TN L3 PGxn� l L�� 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 Other ❑ Other Title: Owner Email: Phone: Phone No: Integrator: Operator Certification Number: Back-up Certification Number: Latitude: = c = I = Longitude: = ° = i Design Current Design Current Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population ❑ Layer TI s I! JO Non -Layer Dry Poultry ❑ Layers ❑ Non -Layers ❑ Pullets ❑ Turkeys ❑ Turkey Poults ❑ Other Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other a. Was the conveyance man-made? Design Current Cattle Capacity Population ❑ Dairy Cow ❑ Dairy Calf ❑ Dairy Heifer ❑ Dry Cow ❑ Non -Dairy ❑ Beef Stocker ❑ Beef Feeder ❑ Beef Brood Cow Number of Structures: =' b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)? d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) 2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes LYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes �XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE 12128104 Continued "H ilityNumber: y — a Date of Inspection d Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No [DNA ❑ NE Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: (AC o uN (A Goa-0 Z Spillway`.: Designed Freeboard (in): Observed Freeboard (in): 31 ).5 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes d-N ❑ NA [I 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? [ 'es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE 8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes []"No [I NA [I 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 El Yes D 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 Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area 12. Crop type(s) G - - P) S G D' 13. Soil type(s) l f is 2 F' 6 L-K 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE 15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? Yes ❑,/No ❑ NA El NE 16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination: ❑ Yes lid'/ o ❑ NA ❑ NE 17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? El Yes ❑ NA El NE 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes VN ❑ NA ❑ NE 3 & IV.0 w5 a ; r "i K ' 3 fii'9F^ �1A. hh" �I ik i l oCmmments (refer to question #)` , Explainany it Swanswers`and/or,anyxecommendations. any other comments 1%ir�. � ^ lase drawings of lacility+to better explain"situations (usejacidition l p ges,> snneces�s ry): t '7,) rj iL�65T a rJ t p 6 oa /✓ Z ►J E(-W tir o6t R , Kc-_ t, .o ve W e 6 b y v6 & & rA.7Zr& r vN LAGuON 01kc— "'-L Ox6tCl I 1S,) �fl(� 1� i3CiLY+�J�Ib EEO �-S�PR.CG�,i1.a{„ /�Jr.fl L,innE REG?t.1l.�p, , �j,� aCEO ir_�4Goc,:✓ OECyGr,1 F+ram. t.�►Gour.l Z, �►.}owt�cnr r� PrLoctiss a GCttz+Jc, t,+v• ••,•ETErc F'a XC.e_�rare. LAC:14 J 'F2�nJS�E S, Reviewer/inspector Name phase: t 9i-) Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: q lltdr 12128104 Continued I'yci* Number: Date of Inspection Required Records & Documents 19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW P readily available? If yes, check E] Yes ❑ No El NA ❑ NE the appropirate box. ❑ WUP El Checklists Design ❑Maps El Other 21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 13Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE ❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis 3/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 2I No ❑ NA ❑ NE 23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes LEI N ❑ NA El NE 24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? El Yes No� ❑ NA ❑ NE 25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit`? ❑ Yes �to ❑ NA ❑ NE 26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes 0 o ❑ NA Q NE 27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE Other issues 28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE 29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes Ea<o ❑ 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 EKO ❑ NA ❑ NE If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately Co 31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) 32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No . ❑ NA ❑ NE 33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE Additlonal Comments and/or Drawingsc 12128104 Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I Reason for Visit d Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access +j Facility Number I Date of visit: Permitted jQ Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Farm Name: ....sw....�...A . �`t �T.S.r�?.`�.! ..4.fi-�........ Owner Name:.......... k`�^�!`?» T :..... _.: 1 N. �4...................... Mailing Address: Time: Not Operational O Below Threshold Date Last Operated Above Threshold: ...__._._.._W».. County: »._....T.4!».........»............».»»........ PhoneNo: ...».........».»......»»........................ »..... Facility Contact: .._ .... _ ._ ......w .»..».» . . f_�. Title:... __ ___ » ._� _ „. P, one No: __.... Onsite Representative:.._. l•�7/f . +-WZ+ _» ».��. Integrator:J/JL.LI� CertifiedOperator:._»..»» .»....»�.._....» ._ ___.. _ ...»» » .. »»....»...».»..»..».... Operator Certification Number:..»..._ „ ....... ... _.... Location of Farm: ASwine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 " Longitude • 4 41 `Swine Wean to Feeder '. ❑ Layer Feeder to Finish p1,,,,Qother ❑ Non -Layer Farrow to Wean Farrow to Feeder Farrow to Finish ,x T6� J.Des> Gilts ❑ Boars 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? .r Cattle' „13 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) ❑ Yes ? No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No 2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ZNo 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes UrNo Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No Structure 1 Squcture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: �.�. » » .»» ..._ ��/ » _ .... _ ._...... .».... _... _. .._ ___ ...... _ . ...... » .. ... _. _ ___._. Freeboard (inches):7 LA 12112103 Continued •. Facility Number: — Date of inspection Y; V -'�"'"� T� 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, E] Yes 0 No seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes 0 No closure plan? (If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Q( No 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes VJ No 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ❑'No elevation markings? Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelrmprovement? ❑ Yes d No 11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONO ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Co and/or Zin 12. Crop type ��KMI,iA� �- Z-E sE60 -- 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (dWMP)? ❑ Yes VNo 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 ONo 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ONO Odor Usues 17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes 0 No liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No 19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No roads, building structure, and/or public property) 20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes PNo Air Quality representative immediately. ❑ Field Copy ❑ Final Notes 3)uG� S -- fP �� ✓� `r' -4)46 f M„ �u�i✓�jL GU.4i✓ ��in1 /�,er, NEB p e p eezel ..14101040 0/0 Reviewer/Ynspector Name & ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: 12/I2103 Cowed .• Fac3i4ty Number: — Date of Inspection B je uired Records & Documents 21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 0 No 22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 0 No (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes V3 No ❑ 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 1Z 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 [21No 27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ,fNo 28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONo 29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes Z No NPDES Permitted Facilities 30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) Yes ❑ No 3I . If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes Z 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 Z No 34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 12 No 35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form 0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. I pa4aA I, c , Al" %�PI��Anr�o E ICYza�, 12112103 1. Type of Visit to Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access Date of Visit: Faci:lih• Number 0 Permitted © Certified Conditionally Certified © Registered Farm Name: N Owner Name: ..� ti: E . Mailing Address: Date Last Operate Above Threshold: County: K�10 rl? Phone No: Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: Onsite Representative: CAR �3R2 MG K 5 Integrator: Certified Operator: Location of Farm: Operator Certification Number: Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude a � Desi 'n 'Design besigitv.. pCurrent Cg Desegn Current F n Swine • Ca achy. P& ulation f o ulation e ❑ttle.:. Ca actty; .-Po ulation Poult Ca a" Wean to Feeder ❑ La er `' Dai , Feeder to Finish` ❑Non -La -Layer I Non -Dairy 'h t i. .fit ,— .E; , � .-,_�.i` _<, -' - , � •, E d � , .! 3 �� 7 �f � 3 1 Farrow to Wean ❑ Other �IIi�' E�. s� l ,� a „ .€ E �' �� ❑ Farrow to Feeder ' Farrow to Finish C i, Total Design,apactty �r e f f •1 Gilts f ❑ Boars ; TOO SLW Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area La ❑ S rav Feld Area I Holding Ponds �IS+nlidTrraps h { ,e b ❑ No Liquid Waste Management S stem 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? ❑ Yes A No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes IzNo 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No Waste lle tin & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ZfNo Structure1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier: Freeboard (inches): 30 4L 05103101 Continued Facility Number: 7 j —2 Date of Inspection r JVYL89 I 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ((J(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 !,Q No 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes XNo Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Jo 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes �60 12. Crop type F 13. Do the receiving crops differ with &ose designated in the Certified Animal WaNe Management Plan (CAWM )? ❑ Yes A No 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �Z(No b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ko 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 XfNo Reguired. Rec9rds & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONo 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 ANo 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes XeNo 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? El yes 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes XNo 23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes X No 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No X 25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? El Yes ;eNo 0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit. Comments (refer ta:,question #) Exptain snytYES answers and/or any, reco"mmendatioas or anv,other comments. drawzsof Estil'lty to better ex l,. iiinsta s npaiec,essarY) sField Cory al Note „ s� usedd`' it�.0t;-yaP ger11 �a , 5` FCo�n nt E�I,O Ii F��ti�a-�lirlpQZx/ �IF_Gr 7,¢7Z29^/C417- 4990( AO y- NOT�F$ P Reviewer/Inspector Name00 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 05103101 r Continued 4 R Facility Number: —2 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 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 Cl Yes No ❑ Yes YNO ❑ Yes/No ❑ Yes No ❑ YesXr-1 Vo ❑ Yes No Additional Comments and/or.'DraHinps,;' ,,. E,. ' � , "' ' /S) E u�S - >gf�i G�C�czsrs- /1�FF,p j14, Low ,vs �5 s Avg % sic T�orJ �irt� va 05103101 Type of Visit ACompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint. O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access Facility Number Date of Visit: ®Time: =0 Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold Permitted © Certified [3 Conditionally Certified Cj Registered Date Last Ope ted orAboveThreshold: Farm Name: ......a�.`..... '~�. ��................................... County:`-d�,":..................................................... . OwnerName: ................................................... .................................................................. Phone No:........................................................................................ FacilityContact:............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:................................................... MailingAddress:.....................................................---................................................................................................................................................. .......................... u,l_ _ �f Onsite Representative:. ....l:A� Y...................................................... Integrator: ...!l'. .�4.�^..-::�SMA .............................. Certified Operator:,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ..... Operator Certification Number:......,,,,,,,,, Location of Farm: ❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ` " Longitude e t 6d Cae aCgi PO ution Cae acid Population Xuiri r Desi Carrent Swine Poultry. Cattle on Ca cl �Po `eilalioai? ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Layer ❑ Dairy er Feeder to Finish a Non -La Non-Dai ❑ y ❑ Non -Dairy b i ❑ Farrow to Wean . ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other [] Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity . ❑ Gilts E 1 ❑ Boars Total SSLW Number of -Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area . ❑Spray Field Area Helibng Ponds 1 Solid Traps , ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System Discharges & Stream ImIRacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes +4 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 9,-kjNo Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identifier:...................................................................................................................................................................................................................... uu Freeboard (inches): 5100 Continued on back Facility Number: —a� Date of Inspection 5. Are -there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes )dNo seepage, etc.) 6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or closure plan? ❑ Yes gNo (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 JNo 8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Wo 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 KNo 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes XNo 12. Crop type b2+-vet. ELF, "� +- Qt—_-Zk , T-� t 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes XNo 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes `�INo b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes (�� No c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes PqNo 15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? )UYes ❑ No 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ,V No Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes tNo 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 (iTNo 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 R No 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes allo 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? Yes (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ 9No 23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ONO 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes P No 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes t�No ris'ol....... wire h0 ed• 00109 01s;visit; • X00 w•t ooi*e 40 fu>j-.. . corres o deit& abaut: this visit: tip Reviewer/Inspector Name '�<� rw� ,�QV"V`. gyp: ��"'\ � ..y iE E � �� i:•,� � _EuEJ :.3 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100 a } Facility Number: �9� Bute 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 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 dNo 28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes KNo 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 ONO 30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes eNo 31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ONO 32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent temporary cover? ❑ Yes 0 No Additional, Comments an or Drawings:,,- �, � o \J4< y-e-z" '�_ `,0-- _30 5/00 Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other Facility Number / Date of Inspection Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:tn Permitted ❑ Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not O erattonal P 13 Date Last Operated: Farm Name: .....D.Chn.4121..........�.Lif.,E2'tS............................................................... County:......... C/'I Gib.............................. n....... Owner Name:.... ... �?LD.II It ........... , .e..k'w........................................ Phone No:Facility Contact:ldl .�!h......�P�xi.Q�i9.... Title:.....Irl�fz�%........................................ Phone No: ICJ( cj ate (a..,/...... MailingAddress:...............................................:..................................................................I.nte................................................ e:............... L...K�f'uiY✓1........... grator: Onsite Representativ.........""I'l"""""""""*"""""""**""""""""""'1*6""""""'-'O"*"O""""*"*"*', Certified Operator:.. . i?. ...........................0.................. Operator Certification Number:.................. 0....................... Location of Farm: ................................ ...........................................................::... ......:........ ..............................................................................................................................I...................... ................... .... Latitude ' ° It Longitude ' 6 « t f r, Design ,.Current`,.' . Swine ,. -'Ca act Population ❑ Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish 3 &7 Z Zip ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Gilts ❑ Boars Current'r ''y '- '` 3, Destgni t',Currenf' IPnrnilatinn <,Cattle Number of°Lagootis t<< ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area Holding.PondsSoil d.Tralis . ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System Discharges & Stream Impacts 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes C9 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 Watcr 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 j5j'No 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes P No Waste Collection & Treatment 4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes gNo Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 Identilier: LajoOni"l 1,,4oeAAz- Freeboard (inches):`.�� �11........................................................................ ........................................................................................................................................ 5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes %No seepage, etc.) 3/23/99 Continued on back Facility ]Number: — 2 Date of Inspections 6. Are there strictures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or Xosure 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? Cl Yes No 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes �fNo Waste Application 10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ONo 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Yes No 12. Crop type 13. Do the receiving crops differ with t ose 6esigriated in the Certifie Animal Waste Management lan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes T�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? XlYes ❑ No 16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Rf No Required Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes fNo 18. Does the facility fail to have ail 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) OrYes ❑ No 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes C'No 21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes rC No 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ie/ discharge, free board, problems, over application) ❑ Yes RNo 23, Did Reviewer/] n spector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes �rNo 24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes [V No 25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes %No .... yiQl. 00jis:o'r• iie�icae tes -w� re jik • ¢;tr°t#g • bjs;visat; • Yo0 witi•tebeiye t)o futfte Torres} 6iiri6&' ab' t f this visit; • • : • • • • . ! � rA �Y -. ' I U �¢ ¢ f '! S rt� 4.. � Comments (refer�to question #) Explain any, answers andlor anyiieeommenelattons orany other comments �; gift ,�' r� r ¢, ..;�yE 3 , �5 r ybx ,¢ r' a I:lse,iltawings of factttty to better eatplatn situations (useladdtttonalrpages astnecessary;) , } ! rj =, s �fi ., <1°r' vi Of �. �- /S�, pP[y /gnu (s C'er�rcrta 115-01/5 Atalvsl,s edlaas recur DT�[m� iv'Ii a Q ' 4ile' L�GyLS 'S l��Llil C /e /9 qy Ozlw Reviewer/Inspector Name ¢ Reviewer/Inspector Date: l�1/b�39��9�ZU �rc�r _ex4. 'z 2s P�h __9A,4- 2y 0 Facility^Number: — date of Inspection -1 ad Issues, 26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -E3-Yrr—❑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 J� No 28, Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Q' 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 rVNo . 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 ;T10 31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yeso 32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Additional Comments an or Drawin s:. g tol rafl,111W, 01� ✓r�y � . 6 3/23/99 Division of Soil and;Water'Couservatton - OperaUoh4Review ; P ivision of soil and,Water'Conservation � Compliance hi, ction �3i, P t'u ` t it s t .a ! t Diyisionof Water Qua[tty -Compliance fnspec4on , 3 , Pig ;; ��� �� Other A enc O ation Review PE .,,., y A er'' > Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-u of DW ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other Facility Number Date of Inspection Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm) Permitted 0 Certified WConditionully Certified (] Registered Not Operational Date Last Operated: Farm Name: ..... C^!�.w.S9.t ��h� na... � r w. County ....... t r( t'..................... .+....I,�...�............ ................................ +K1 OwnerName :......... 4g y..�,ad ................................................ Phone No:....................................................................................... FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................... ......................... Phone No: MailingAddress:................................................................................. Onsite Representative: ........................... ��...................................................................... `Integrator:.......rp„....r?........ Certified Operator:.......................................................................,................................I........ Operator Certification Number: Location of Farm: Latitude r-----�0' Longitude • ` 49 Design Current Design Current„ Design Current' Swine d .,, t: �, j,r - a acit Population' Poulfr-y ' Ca achy 1?�o i6lation � -Ca�e Ca acit Po uIation'�' 1 "w [ Layer ❑ Dairy ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy ❑ Other I irk, ilk"'' Total Design Capacity Total'-SSLW }Number°of Lagoons Z ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area :r ' iHoldip Ponds / SoliaiTra s ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System ❑ Wean to Feeder Feeder to Finish ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Gilts, ❑ Boars 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? h. 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: 1 Z Freeboard (inches): 3 ............................. ............................................................................................................................ S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) 3/23/99 ❑ Yes 9No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes gNo ❑ Yes 9No ❑ Yes 16No Structure 6 ..................................... ❑ Yes XNo Continued on back Facility Number: Dale of Inspection i b. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or M'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 VNo 9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level elevation markings? ❑ Yes ANO Waste Application 10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes !?1NO 11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding [I PAN ElYe s �`` No 12, Crop type nav i 13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes �rNo 14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ONo 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 lb. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ANo Re uired Records & Documents 17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? 18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? (ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) 19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) 20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? 21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? 22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit? (ic/ 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? 10 yiola>lignjs'or cleficienues w re poted• 00-rift tbis'ASI : • Yoti :witl t&Oye ljo #;uttiter' . Torres• 6fideiice: abauti this visit. _"_ - E � Y.�FfI _ t Use;drawrngs of facility, ta,lietter explain situations (use add�ttonal pages as `:' � f'�' 7 - �'G re_ 5/0t+5 Oq bcGk d f 4,g a uv, 'J-'ZZ ME4 -6 ve Ile,3e4g4ed, )9 - Nee&( -f-v ref c, Cc.rrA' LV*54< Vie C'?Pr0jpy1i41_e_ PAN huwt�,-, re'wt M45°°n �( �►1 Sj�+"a�/Y�cor�Jr ❑ Yes gNo ❑ Yes XNo XYes ❑ No ❑ Yes XNo ❑ Yes RfNo []Yes &No ❑ Yes RNO ❑ Yes (No ❑ Yes %NO ,�.� pr i�d i-ttt t�: �,d i•. _ T itd.a�il3t :?�4��37 �r H., •t�(�n RCVIeWCr�nSpeeior Name �� U 5:'Y t.., - s " -. t Reviewer/Inspector Signature �'� �f� Date. 1 / — ?3 - 791 Al 3/23/99 Facility Number: — Zq Date of Inspection r�3_ Odor Issues 216. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes o 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 lro 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 JRNo 32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ,,. _...i lttona ommentS an /ot D rh�vings ..� .f 3/23/99 V Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Othcr Date of Inspection 5 Z Facility Number Z. Time of Inspection O p Use 24 hr. time Farm Status: .... Total Time (in hours) Spent onRe%iew ©I or Inspection (includes travel and processin;) Farm Name: _14z,. �� �l tt c�. � ..''l u n .. ,c. _......»...... _..... County: ,.&,_-�..i:' Y ......_.... . � I' R-Q. Owner Name:....._.._.N ,atn�.._ _�1.__ M Phone No:..�q.ti Q..�...�...Z ...... ............. _.. Mailing Address: Onsite Representative: L Integrator:Certified Operator: _.Ala _ _..........tom' .. ..... ..... Operator Certification Number: _....I.Sa.. A ......... ... Location of Farm: Latitude • ®& u Ejw_ >� h OH-fp /!��'�CaSwP�/lad 5 Longitude s ®` ®11 90 L%rn;les -M NC #63 4-3v pas. 1244-rdn Say, 0 Not Operational Date Last Operated: type of Operation and Design Capacity ;p� IlC7v 51ccuN..�0 I•�w�i ItS n5°w x y'g"s:r •ry.. �£ xae '9tS* -:; ""t-R•;t'iw �• x -. 3 <....--.5.' iy, ¢�r Swine r . Y Number,_ a Paul' i�iuutber ;..� , ti, }'... ..N urnlier ❑ Wean to FeederLaver Dairy Feeder Feeder to Finish ❑Nan Laver I�� ❑ Beef El Farrow to Wean fis -: Farrow to Feeder s .�� '^,...x„`w�." ...Mai. .�' t.... - �-. •A-x x. � � �3.�, � Farrow to Finish ❑ Other T e of Livestock n v�r { Zx^%k ;.. j x Z -_ X'i't_, .r+.w...K. x k ,ikY „i.¢'': ,-•^..:s rs . .•.,„z .... Number otLa eansJ Haldtn Foods +' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area < ❑Spray Field Area a r r. General 1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes , ® No 2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes RNo 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 9 No c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gai/min? t 444 d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes El No 4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 9 No 5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require 19 Yes ❑ No maintenance/improvement? Continued on back 6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria? 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after i/l/97)? 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? Structures {Lagoons and/or Iiolding_Pondsj 9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate? Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 L . _ z C; . 10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? 1 I. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? 12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? (If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) Lagoon 3 13. Do -any of the'structiires lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels? Waste Annlication 14. Is there physical evidence of over application? (If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ) IS. Crop type CLOL _..... y 16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan? 17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? - 18. Does the cover crop need improvement? 19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment? For Certified Facilities Only. 20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? 21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal. Waste Management Plan in any way? 22. Does record keeping need improvement? 23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge? ❑ Yes 29 No ❑ Yes ®.No ❑ Yes la No ❑ Yes ® No Lagoon 4 ❑ Yes ,®.No ❑ Yes ®-No ® Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes BNO ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ Yes O No JS Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes ®,No ❑ Yes ® No ❑ Yes 0,No ❑ Yes RNo ❑ Yes .9�No ❑ Yes RNo - IZ• C arrr,c.t e�roSioK n 6e, e.e- 06 V%S. Latiocv� wall �es�GEi4 ntou �kC O'j y,Jalt�. �v. o-X%L �rCt^ 1 Ye vt�Q'E0.tQ 0.►%y7 bares S P 6t,S 6.-. �a�0a•n. watl. I I�. �tvi�gC-twft� b0.re a�r@..0.-L ti'^ �tQ..L�'� � W��'k 0.K 0.�p✓��riO4�C C-dVt�r c.,ry V 1 o r. d; c f1 r v ,...,. ;'�'�j b k; .�-� t 1� t La o c s, r t a. q p e- rs f7.,' # c nu L a 9-%j e,.-L �v �^[ 5 %�.,r t v d r Gv f F t' e nv +--,r- "v to Z - . -CL p e.1 O C-C. V 1% oQ. to C �+-�� �.-e, s i �v e -v.. a::,pxw, w-w .�"a'a ._ ': �a, _ S--�C"'.. Reviewer/Inspector Name . „l(„l(��,,���,�.�.,,�-�. � - �, .T Reviwer/Inspector Signature: Q" , _r =mAn Date: cc. Division of fVater Quality, Water duality .section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/14/96 Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency le Division of Water Quality Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DW2 ins action O Follow-ug of DSWC review O Other Date of Inspection - Z I - Facility Number Time of Im.speet.ion i C3 24 hr. (hh:mm) © Registered Certified Applied for Permit © Permitted 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: i-� I 1 Farm Name: ..............F�. ... �'o �[:<...... (k q.)1.C(.04......�.y � '\ ... County:....... �� ......................�.... R �........ Owner Name. .............. .r'..`...y.....f....id..... ��.�h.�t.Kl!I.......................................... Phone No: ! r � 2�.'. Z.�.�...................... Facility Contact:.............................................................................. Title:.................. Phone No: Mailing Address: .1 U !r e�( -S� >� ����So:�� C C�!..L....................................-........................ -VI ..�,a �Q vt Ci.E!^............ I tor:.......... 7`� G r .... Onsite Representative:...... .,.........�..... r'.�1............ .... ................. �: '4 � S ..... . ........... Certified Operator; ................................. '4K oc d. �� �- y�.c�.�!!!................ Operator Certification Number,... � LIq.�...... Location of Farm: Latitude 0' 0' 0 G° Longitude • s Designer= Current a Design Current ...Cattle .Des�gri Curren swine"..Capacity ,Populations Poultry. Capacity Population Capacity``, Population,`, ❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy Feeder to Finish 6 ❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy ❑ Farrow to Wean ❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑Other 3rh.. El Farrow to Finish zr <. Total Design Capacity := ❑ Gilts ti tTotal a SSLW` ❑Boars t, of Lag Dons / Haldhnj Ponds` � ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area —NumberEr r ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System General 1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �No 2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes N c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin? d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes A(No 3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo 4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑ No 5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes �,KNo mai ntenancelimprovement? 6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes 9No 7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes )-4�No 7/25/97 NJ Facilky' Number: — 8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? Structures (Lagoons,lJolding Ponds Flush Pits etc. 9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Structured Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Identifier: 2 Freeboard(ft): ..........3.... ...................`I..t.................................................. 10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? 11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ) 40 ❑ Yes �6o Structure 5 Structure 6 12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? (If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ) 13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? Waste Application 14. Is there physical evidence of over application? (If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ) ! .................... 15. Crop type ............ ..�.�..Q.t�.."...�-.�!Lei..a...�.,c.��..... r�.-.r..`..1.1`.:�.............................. ............. ............................ 16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? 17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? 18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? 19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? 20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? 21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? 22. Does record keeping need improvement? For Certified or Permitted Facilities Onli 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.viQlatioins-or* deficiencies. were noted dur.inj this; visit. - You.rvill receive• izo•ftirther' : - . corresporardehce AWO tbis: visit.- IZ. VaDe.4ie b.-/ ReCc.-z7 c✓ +-+d A000A tl ❑ Yes WNo ❑ Yes WNo [O(Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes XNO ❑ Yes �k o Yes ❑ No ❑ Yes /410 Xyes ❑ No ❑ Yes o ❑ Yes �(No ❑ Yes 'VNo Xyes ❑ No ❑ Yes P No ❑ Yes/No ❑fit p No 1G r li�U.rJ� ChQnge A W I Sh04e Lei' "4 cG ct� c Ot++i"r-'t'l C✓U� ivt �.E1� WorK 04 ,eePK.ejc% pur heKj r��`n9 'Io e,6+t�i,54 bcf4e/a 77, Kte,4 I�'C'curo�5• U4 t" ee kiy tree La4.-) t-evEjS C%Pt S i 4 e 7125197 Reviewer/Inspector Name ASS :< b Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: %eb, 27. 2014 2:25PM Burrow, & Hall, PA No, 1609 F. 1 Tel: (910)285-3600 RICHARD L. BURROWS ATTORNEY AT LAW P. O. BOX 816 WALLACE, N.C. 28466-0816 E-MAIL: burrowsandhallatty@cmbarymail.com February 27, 2014 Mr. Jim Gregson Regional Supervisor North Carolina Division of Water Resources 127 Cardinal Drive Wilmington, North Caroline 28425 Re: NOV-2014-PC-0007 I K. Barnhill Topping 1 No. 71029, Permit No. AWS710029 Dear Mr. Gregson: Fax; (914)285-7766 By Telefax: (910) 350-2004 E-Mail: www.ncwaterquality.org Mr. Barnhill sought our assistance in responding to your letter of January 23, 2014, wbich he received on February 11, 2014. As you may be aware, the farm's waste application records were maintained in the farm office building. Early in the morning Mr. Barnhill's employee discovered and notified Mr. Barnhill that someone had broken into the building by forcing the door open, and had taken some of the farm tools. A further investigation by Mr. Barnhill revealed that the composition book in which Mr. Barnhill made his handwritten notes of the waste application dates, times, and pulls/fields, which he then regulax'ly kept on the desk, was also missing. Mr. Barnhill's practice was to periodically provide a copy of the handwritten notations to Mr. William Burke, who used the provided data to calculate the final waste application records produce waste application records in the required )corm. Those calculated printed pages of waste application records were also maintained in the composition book that was taken. Mr. Barnhill has asked Mr. Burke to provide him with copies of all of his waste application records, and will maintain a copies of those records, along with his handwritten notations, both in his farm office and his home to assure their immediate availability in the future. Mr. Barnhill has advised me that he is at a loss as to why someone who wanted to steal tools, would also take the book containing the waste application records, other than the fact that the composition book was always kept in a conspicuous place on the desk. ;F?b.27. 2614 2:25PM Burrow: & Hall, PA No.1609 P, 2 PAGE 2. Mr. J. Gregson Although Mr. Barnhill was advised by a DWQ representative that it would acceptable for the waste application records to be maintained at his home, I have advised him to also keep a copy of the records in his farm office. If you wish or need any additional information, please advise. I am, Vexy/11Y yours, Ric rd L, Burrows cc:. Mr. J. Kenneth Barnhill, Jr. • Site Require; 1rnme:1aate KtteauU,l. Facility No. DNISION OF ENIVIRON1'VMtiiAL MAINAGE-.'YENT —Y7 ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD DATE. ,11 — o , 1995 Time:' Farn Name/Owner: Mailing Address: Q O 00 K _61 z2r L( County:C�L7 Integrator. V'r I? ki,_ _ Phone: On Site _R_ epresentative: LAPZ, Phone: ZJ 3-Z-0 7 U Physical Address/Location: Type of Operarion: S wine _,.)I_ Poultry Carrie Design Capacity: _ 111 _ _ Number of Animals on Site: 0 DENT Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW Latitude: ' ' " Longitude: &- at -_YT Elevation: Feet Circle Yes or No Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 2='. hour storm event (approximately I Foot + 7 inches) 19No Actual Freeboard: I--R. Inches Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes orda_�Was anv erosion observed?C�or No Is adequate land available for sprav? r No Is the cover crop adequate? 42 or No Crops) being utilized: A Q 2 Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? or No 100 Feet from Wets?ems or No Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Scream? Yes o(5b Is animal waste land applied or spray irigated within 25 Fee: of a USGS ivlao Blue Line? 6vor No Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by main -made ditch, flushing syste:ti, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or& If Yes, Please Explain.. Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes org) Additional Comments: 2-Z 6- 4 a4 w++ r e � �-e�c,wa� Gc f� �2��'��i be.•�� J. , ,�1�i�.c.r. ; Ge.� • — Insuector N . Sig ature cc: Facility Assessment Unit L'se Attachments if Needed. IN 1 Site Requires Immediate Attention: Facility No. _ DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERA,TIIO S SITE VISITATION RECORD DATE: �O , 1995 Time: Farm Name/Owner: 1 Mailing Address: 0 n Z / County: n Integrator: Phone: On Site Representative: Phone: Physical Address/Locatign: M e OAIC�112e Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: DEM Certification Number: ACE - ' DEM Certification Number: ACNEW Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Feet Circle Yes or No Does'the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event (approximately I Foot + 7 inchesVpagpo or No A tual Freeboard: �Ft. Inches Was any seepage observed fromn(s)? Yes o o Was any erosion observed?& or No Is adequate land available for sprayr o Is th cover crop adequate? a or No Crop(s) being utilized: 4de-63 r Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin;Por or No ' 100 Feet from Wells?No Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? "Yes or Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes orb Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by'man-made ditch, flushing system, or other similar man-made devices? Yes or To If Yes, Please Explain. Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied, spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover, p)? Yes o: 0 Addition Comments: G n e A c4 ..�i !] A .�� i% ff ,/ .i!//♦- . ✓'� i��//.P / J! !` � r_m •-1V, C i. s X'ey c f 7 ""I'af A a ''40.r.// e- /.I b y e/ cc: Facility Assessment Unit - Use Attachments if Needed. Site Requires Immediate Attention • Facility Number - SITE VISITATION RECORD DATE: July 17 ' 1995 • Owner: Haywood Debnam Farm Name: DON Farms County: Emder Agent Visiting Site: tpff Rn i Fani dAr _,. Phone: (91d.) 259-4305 Operator: Havaraod_ Debnam Phone:(910) 239-2364 On Site Representative: Chris Debnam (son) & Larry Colvin, Phone: (910) 283-5411 Manager was on site Physical Address: nn_, ;4 Qt ci r1w of Hu,r 1 i on � � rnxi matF+� 1,85 mile sot���, junction with Hwy 11 and 53. Mailing Address: _ pn $acr.i .., .. __..... Atkinson, N.C. 28421M Type of Operation: -Swine Poultry _ _ Cattle Design Capacity: "� �Numbo of A.aimals on Site: 3672 Latitude, o Longitude: U ' 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) 9 or No Actual Freeboard: 3 Feet 2 Inches For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the comments section. Was any seepage observed from the Iagoon(s)? Yes or Was there erosion of the dam?. Ye or No Is adequate land available for land application? Ye or No Is the cover crop adequate? or No Additional Comments: House #1 has its awn 1aqoon. Houses #2 &3 share another lagoon. Each house holds 1224 finishing hogs Lagoon #2 for houses s 177r -of frieboard.is said got e fig ,.%he r-Q ity Spoil ?!rnm ,d-4 t ry+ ,1ms_nl;geed M bexm and nos lime fertilizer and seed and mulch. Lagoon #1 for house 1 needs lime, fertilizer, seed and MUIChon blarm on _ i ijgo n i 7 napdsa: +-.n YAo Aaarb-cl . HnrrwA is on site. _ Fax to (919) 715-3559 - SignAre of Agent