710033_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qual

13
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit G'RRoutine Q Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral _ 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: g 3o I Departure Time: County: f 69D4G— __ Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Owner Email:
Phone:
�-�— Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: C %IVN TES`
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = 0 = 6 = Longitude: = ° = =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
�� ❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharties & 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
E]Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
El Yes
ZO El NA
El NE
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: i— 3 3 Date of inspection 3 0 5
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ 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: (AGoak
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
(iel 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 ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? • ❑ Yes Q I o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes Qq-qo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I l . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 3ER-1r^voh L H ) lr ESwc L Hli
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
i_TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
E N.
❑ NA
El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑
Yes
L <.
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
ElYes
�ZEINAL400ElNA
❑ NE
FsCL�o A-0D 2,Ecoc-05 "or— UOoD.
Reviewer/Inspector Name e a " Phone: (u) '7RL — 7�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 0 Date: 9,13105-
12129104 Conhinued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 3 c
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes P!(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes LlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
9'l0A
ElNE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
El No
U A
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
b No
NA
ElNE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
ElNo
,❑l
ETNA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
O-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?
El Yes
/
D o
❑ 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
ElD Yes
o
❑ 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
L�.14o
El NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El Yes
Ld'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
t Aditional Cornmenis and/or Drawings:, a i { : v�; y K 2�
12128104

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Facilify Number
Permitted 13 Certified © Conditionally Certified Q Registered
Farm Name: S
Owner Name:�.�
Mailing Address:..__
EE Tune:
Not Ouerational O Below
Date -Last Operar Above Threshold:
County:,0�._..
Phone No:..
Facility Contact: _ - .._ . __ Title:. .. Phone No:
Onsite Representative:_ z Integrator: _ _ _� _ • •„
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number: ._.
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • < 66 Longitude &
Design ==�Cgii�t
- +Cagacstv�`�Poi�iiia�on
Non -Layer I I I :'I❑ Non -Dairy
Boars
#iddry
E c mr es & 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes UrNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes 8 No
❑ Yes ONo
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): _
12112103
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 ZNo
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 vras answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancerimprovement? ❑ Yes 0 No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ANo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes No
elevation markings? 10
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes jff No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ;jNo
❑ Excessive P//oo�nding ❑ PAN Hydr Overload ❑ , /n C and ❑ Copper arptor Zinc
12. Crap type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Aniu6rite Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑Yes ONo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes RfNo
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 gNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ONo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below ❑ Yes VNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes XNo
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes JZNo
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 ONO
Air Quality representative immediately.
Field Covv ❑ Frnal Notes
Y) I�,EGOmn'IFi�Q rEEP,r.4-_- Inv,r )40 AR -OR
o Al"2mzZO�z
P
� "/��,er5 'op 77'U 2 DoN ��i '
'2z
ReviewerAnspector Name A
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 1W.5
12112/d3 Continued

Facility Number: a — 33 I Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. FaiI to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes VNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes V'No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo
❑ 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 A 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 R�No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes J9 No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes P No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompHauce of the Certified AWMP? , Yes ❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes fiffNo
3I. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
[3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit You wM receive no further correspondence about this visit.
2�3/Zap
A^wm/1-2
�
0 z /0 y
1
r zloy
3fZ%/
Aw'-�S DEL' �c1r5L'r�� /¢ma eA)-r
id
12/I2A3 r- /vehFe %O ;�?i✓ G'v'v'.QGf iJ'A?4Ar7 J-Vf�ae_

4
Facility Number `i f 3 Date of visit: Time.rO i ZCi
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
©Permitted ©Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: v
C O Q 54- � rA .- M S County I"- a in e r
_ _ . _
Owner Name: _ _ 1� e n n c4�, D . (G! n + e Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: IKz n pi-e ' D . b-4 pi -r e►, integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude Longitude �• 0�
CCen)gtDesign: - rcattle Population Cf actri :=PulatEonSwi€a f ❑ Wean to Feeder ' . ❑ La er ❑Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish - ❑ Non -Layer I on -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean -
❑ Farrow to Feeder .. ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design-
C�
a acih' '.
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars ° To#a1'SSLVh:
Number of Lagoons © ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La oon Area ❑ S raV Field Area j :
Molding Patrds`/'Sold-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)
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
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): J.
05103101
Structure 5
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
Continued

W Facility Number: 1 —33
Date of Inspection dL
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
❑ 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/1nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0 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:tfi question:#):. Eicplatn asy YES iius s-eirs;ano/or any:recommendfitious or. any other.7coaiminti -
_
Use dravVings of facilityto better_ezpn situatao s. (use adtithottal pages:as necessary) ❑Field Copv —❑ Final Not esA
a ►-� el ✓G field -/A S i t-t t�E'G� .'6 ✓eS/ O',Vit SCE a q G o wr� r✓c.i.� i . T11 e
edr 1'qJ•i4ah s� ys Spra y'_'15 p>c LAIA54e WI1 OCGo✓r;1110 ye�S,. c,"A- al
I
dK��•�� Ae rcrih a�-, �ou�d Ae 4;---,e ee^ Ae �G1►-, s. the
Ga-n f)A1nC-jn� Sezl s 1 d,►74 See A
�e;S
✓S�ec�
DGGv{r>�� bv4 �e),tves T�+Sr� S�ray;n 0� /oaje eeGv,,,,,
,/
�eGayse a� L,e he ed /elfel w odor -A-)
ewer/InspectorName YD�toJg �l /[9�.5
ERewer/InspecterSignature: Date: 3�
05/03/01 Continued

Facility lumber: l] j -33 Date of Inspection 3Q oZ
Odor Issues
26, Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ❑ No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ❑ No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were 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.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Ir, Oki
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:—'
L ) / �
Aloe". r-rGJL° GDm/r1a,'b, &ln ; �a 1�s �L,��' S�✓'Q,�
eyenb a�,,d a eet4.o?d 44e ►'wle &f'ra;.�/ eVe�I fS ha s
DGGU✓+re4� i�T17� pqS� also . �Aee.t'►, 7�e eo �/a;nAn4- .ram yS' 74;s
,s 44e GCSe beGrUse �e,5)44ened le-VO 4�-' od©rs c�O/ter+-r�jr
e ld a1'0ke 7/
s�A,ld al lsa 4Ae Gd^^J����i�4
SeI t S J e t1AS I-jeafd �l�e i,rr,'�q ,ra, eq ✓=Jo►�e.� rt D�P,rgTi.�g !�!/�;"�
pCiS� ►'qi►� evem 4S
Y'.� �• . LA n ; e S ca / S -}� � � S�O � A � 1 j 0'r L J oa-k d d n Of oc e yr
lies 'day- Al,-. (ar7;er .sue ys - 4Q- h%e ltas bee►^ operQ-? �y
e'er �Qrl 1 ectrS and t-,�J heVer Sllrru yed i -IBC i APll.
- ; rv►e rret v be Forme �r cry-1�'' al r'� � � eUen/f . me. La ►, :e.�';
re661ds Stow 4kaj 4e YVo6✓ eekJ4 Aff Oe60,1-orP"�( OPI
V vS f 1 Z 1,A4 A u A) v- 4 1-7j Ze 0 Z-. I- Cl rh 9a � 5 4a �eY T he 4q�0
✓J l
cawt�Ol �•t; -�-0 1 e'rl�/fcC,Gl1 w ��� f�,e �;v,`s,'o�. �' Ig►� ,,� 1,{ y .
/11r. 1'�1cC�11 w'11 jpy'obefbly be ►'h 60"?4c 0 4e v;s"t.V1A
i.1 +9,04eGr 7h0 �G,r►"i GtyfG[ T G��L� �?d� See BVI'G{evIGC
0510310I

(Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Fallow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit:
0 Permitted O C rtifiied 0 Conditionally rtified 0 Re0stered
Farm Name: _ PASTAG W/nS _
Owner Name: K;_aA)A%F -f� _ Z dZL)
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
�1 r /
Onsite Representative: 11 N r - OlLl AJ
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Date Last Operatepr Above Threshold:
County: , ` V_41< i+ Q
Phone No:
P one No:
Integrator: S
Operator Certification Number:
0Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' ' " Longitude ` °
I❑ Wean to Feeder I I 11'UTaj:er
N Feeder to Finish I T&IqM 2. ❑Non -Layer
to Wean
Other
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liauid Waste
Discharees & 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?
I►i
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 galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Area IU Spray Field Ar
ea
❑ Yes XNo
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste II etion & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 3
05103101
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
9Nd(!�d faq,
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
o
Structure 6
/
Continued

Facility Number: 1 — M 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 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?
I1_ Is there evidence oiover application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type
moo- FXS5 4
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those d signated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �NO
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNO
❑ Yes 1VfN0
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes /�No
El Yes dNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes X
No
❑ Yes [XNo
❑ Yes qNo
❑ Yes Of, No
El Yes �No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes JVNo
❑ Yes "0No
Cl Yes PNo
0NHo�iviolations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
A ' � i3*`. "' � '� * �;'�,.. � i 3n :,- '4 11 +iv T 1. � p �R' � §�A��-
;C� tnment, efertoquestiion #) Explain anyXES answers andlur any, recommendahans ©r any otl er comments. ;x r 7
�a
Useadrawrngs of facility to bettere ei playa situations. u addrtional�pages as necessary):�
.: - -Field Coifv ❑Final Notes
_
�5 A4
742— && � /`�!Jr/i✓r�y� Z7,
y
JewEVZ-151/lil o O�ll
l
,
Reviewer/inspector Name
6l p
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: Z 22�
O5103101 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes Y(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 VNo
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) /
24. 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 EYNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 0No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes [71No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
IV
5100

- Division of Water tlahty
Q Division of Soil and`Water Conservation
Q Otheii•'Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Me of Visit: i� -'G Time: 3a Printed on: 10/26/2000
Facility Number
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
P(Permitted © Certified © Conditionally C rtified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold :
��'c' c�++ �s� county ................................................. .......................
FarmName : ........ .............` ti..........................................................................................
OwnerName:........................................................................................................................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ...............................................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:
...................................................
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
OnsiteRepresentative: 0 .1..r� `Q............................................................................. Integrator:........ .. ..............................................
Certified Operator: ........................................... .................. Operator Certification Number:.........................
................... ........... .... ....
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude * ° 1; Longitude • 4 «
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer I ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer I I 1E] Non -Dairy
l I
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? Oyes ❑ 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 Stater (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes Iallo
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 ta'No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONo
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 S Structure 6
Identifier:.......................................................................... ......
Freeboard (inches): 39
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: r] —33 Date of Inspection printed on: 10/26/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes )4 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 XNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? 9Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes t(No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes M No
Waste application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding El PAN El Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop type l� t VL�
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes j<No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes gNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
�'�10 yio�aiigris:or deficiencies rare poled ditrtrtg �his:visit; Voir i l•reeeiye lid further
;corresposideii& ab"f this visit: ...... .
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes JR No
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes )<No
❑ Yes N(No
❑ Yes JkNo
❑ Yes 14 No
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes NrNo
❑ Yes ,0 No
❑ Yes Q'No
Comments (refer to; question #) Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility t6better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary) w
-kV hc►—:�*�-� G•, ` its S
1l�GL��S �� ��� � � i.��'T ��.S��i ►-� , �C��y2 � ��'l�
��`1'
�i t�� Y�C� v�{tom` e..-�, ��•-� ��'� {�� � �c� �-2� � b�� C�e� �-2��i�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
RtG _ s� _5-3WO
Date: 5100

Facility Number: 1 —33 Date of Inspection a c G 4 Printed on: 10/26/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 RNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ YesgNo
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 ,1
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes rN
o
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? ❑ Yes MNo
_Additional Comments and/or swings:;;
tt �
KA
r
5100

Revised January 22, 1995
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number
Farm Name:
On -Site Representative:
Inspector/Reviewer's Name:�`�
Operation is flagged for a wettable
acre determination due to failure of
Part 11 eligibility items) F1 & F3 F4
Operation not required to secure WA
/ determination It this time based on
Date of site visit: b �` exemption El E2 E3 E4
Date of most recent WUP: Annual farm PAN deficit: pounds
Irrigation System(s) -circle : hard -hose traveler, 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wiportable pipe;
6. stationary gun system wlpermanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART 1. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part 11, overrides Part I exemption.)
1z E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres js complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D21D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part Ill. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part If. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part II - F1 F2 F3, before, completing computational table in Part 111).
PART 11. 75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination zination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of info rmationlmap.
F3 Obvious meld limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part III.

Revised dannary 22, 19
Facility Number ')` -33
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination _
FIELD NUMBER' - hydrant, pull, zone, or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers depending on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system. If pulls, etc. cross more than one field, ins pectorlreviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 78% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination.
FIELD NUMBER' - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS' - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres and raving received less than 5091b
of its annual PAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of in 1cation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the cornment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

,r
-
=Division'of Soil and Water Conservation - Operation.Review
;`Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Compliance Inspection
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection i
D Other Agcincy - Operation Review
Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSNVC review O Other 1
Facility Number Date. of InspectionFq9 Q
Time of Inspection d 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[3 Permitted *Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered [:] Not OperationalOperationall Date Last Operated:
Farmname:...\.....-✓`'`"5....................................................................... County:................... ......
Owner Name:... ...................... Phone No:..............
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
MailingAddress: .......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ........... I..............
Onsite Representative:.>,r...`....f................................................. Integrator:....1!..>r��............................. ........... ............
Certified Operator: ................................................... ............................................................. Operator Certification Number:..........................................
r...,.......t,,�..... .. ,,....r.......................................................................... .................
Latitude Longitude �• �� �«
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
a �$
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area ID 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 originated at: ❑ Lagoo; ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a, li' discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. II' discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. li' discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/tnln')
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of 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) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ...........
Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes
P(No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
� No
❑ Yes .
UrNo
❑ Yes
CYNo
Structure 6
116/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 1 — 33 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 pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste A lication
10_ Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11- Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding ❑ Nitrogen
2. Crop type .... 1.......
,........G,i...............................................................
0
❑ Yes XNo
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving -crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required .Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible 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?
0: MDA( a'tions.tir. deficiencies •were noted' du.rin Niis.visit:. l'oti ilfreceive noF further ...'
eorrespo-tideiiee; about: this visit.: - , - , - ; :... ; .:.: .. _ :. ; ... ; . .
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes 1171 No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes jq'No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes b(No
❑ Yes VV
,'Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 9No
Yes ❑ No
$� Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes L)d No
❑ Yes allo
Comments (refer -to question"#):"Explain any YES answers and/or any;recommeiadations or any other comments r
T
Use drawings of facility to better explain'situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Ak
e� �� +ems % � ..I�, t. '.I� ►��-.� 4. S:=
r less end [� axe
L y LJ � CLI C 1 R -L, `eA +--��AT ", r
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 17:,,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ( I.h' Date: ylC/Ljy 1116,99

UA�
13 Division of Soil and Water Conservation Other Agency
ivision
of Water Quality
: .. n'��`.."".""' - :sue-'�A4*�'—'-'�1 R
Routine 0 Com faint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up,of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection -
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 4 24 hr. (hh:mm}
13Registered)21Certified 0 Applied for Permit © Permitted 13 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ..._.._..
tt r �Q �1CJI � fC C7 ..............
Farm Name: ST t 1-4 f n. County: .....................
..................................... ```............................................. .......... r
Owner Name ............ Ka q.e±� ........ 0.'1.')S.r............. .............. I.................. Phone No:...�L l' U..`. 2. .�....1..� r .......................
Facility Contact: .................................................... .. Title:....................... ...... Phone No:
MailingAddress: .....&................................................................................ r .... . II
Onsite Representative:-........� e M ; e !M U h ...............................
-------�-'-----.�%...+...................h.....----�----..................-........... Integrator:................ �.�.......1�
Certified Operator:...............� r►. 1. ;E `�.... 4.yi.i L�. ................................ Operator Certification Numbeer(....... . ...............
Location of Farm:
0
Latitude 6 " Longitude ' 4 "
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes VNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes gNo
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 � N
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin? ,v
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �TNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes $ErNo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ONO
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes �No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ElYes , 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 he properly closed? ❑ Yes [(No
Structures (Lapoons-Holdi"g Ponds, Flush Pits. etc.)
9- Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes UrNo
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):......... -�J...... g............................................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes WNo
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes WNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenaneelimprovement? PYes ❑ 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
' �Ao
Waste"plication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)�KNO
15.
Crop type -- .................. ............_. �1..1..
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
9No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1PNO
'❑No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
>(Yes
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�io
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
IWNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
WNo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
�Zves
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities uni
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management PIan readily available?
❑ Yes
W No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
)ff`No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
19—No
0- No.vialations•ot deficiencies.were-noted.during this" visit.- You.vKiA i-ec've-no' 1&iher
correspQndeince aboa� this:visit::: ... •............. • ................ .
1 Z.. - I�cG�O s ri,4 I�-�-rcGe �.`� 4�a�,�q a n oaf °✓ s i�L a � j `��ao n � 4 I (,
gc'}yTC bare- cz o.l fM v� i4_5
I'f. P + rye o`h e�.(s cs is poss;d�e , ^,6-t Aal/e. CO'e, 30
D't 4�I ji �Lr7' i i ✓1 . r
Z Z . - K c� ►ecard Ql �r �t) )y �!Jt� bea.� an s: TEA . 1
-L►faSe fah5��5�J �J+IU�R 4c /do e i^'��1n GOdrlV5
- C6h 5:d¢•r~ � �1a p jie e.T��ztS / /
Sy 7125/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

,
ev
❑DSWC Anginal Feedlot Operation Review,
0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-ue of DSWC review 0 Other
Date of Inspection Is 28 1 q -1
Facility Number
Time of Inspection lb5 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:.1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
ER Certified ❑ Permitted or Inspection includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: ....... ..... ........... ......... ........ ................................................ . ......................... ...... .................
Farm Name: W...... _......
.................W.L��.-�
Land Owner Name: ...... Phone No: �,. 1 �.� .. 7 L� .�. ........... ,...........
Facility Conctact:............................ ............. . Title: ... Phone No:
Mailing Address: __.{e ,.. Q1 t _..... Z �� y...
-�-�-•c�•g••....�•G_t.an..�-_._...�.si.:_................................. ...�.�.1�..scams.�..t..�.�..rs.�.r...11.�..�.� .... ......................
Onsite Representative:... �.e.� >.. .....>:�.. s. �..x ..... ....�...... �...........•--• Integrator:. �!1. x. k� -- ......... .
t— .�r �� j!'i !� �: `ice j. ►i. �� '� �%L,c. �.��r" ....r f`.� l`.,.
Certified O/perat �?. F .......:.....:..... ...... !�? s :.:. :.... Operator.Certi cation Number::,...�.�.L?f?5 ..........:...........
�-� 1F''�F7-� 1�� � ( � Lr �.! i L'•t t;;' Ei 1"ri;JC T• - .. a• - •i•:�Fk"•. r t .rG. ,
Location of Farm:(v-
i(c}. .................................................................... l".................._.......:: t.....!:::..................-.-.........-....-. 9
fr "l"i. ' /1 r f.- .. .. 1...:L.. � '�......................................_..............._...........................-.................r........... ..-..... -_...... —_...._........_—...................
—.......
Latitude •i)
Type of Operation and Design Capacit
Design Corr
❑ Wean to Feeder
ERFeedelko Finish ld S(
El Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
< ❑ Other
Longitude
Subsurface Drains Present
Lagoon Area LINE Sarav Field Area
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 obsen-ed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallinin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify•DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes L$ No
❑ Yes [9No
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ Yes
[a No
N A
❑ Yes
[:gNo
❑ Yes
®. No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes [B:No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes RNo
4/34/97 maintenance/improvement?
Continued on back

Facility Number:....}.....
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 t structure 5
... _...._ ... ..................... -_.... ............ .... .._..... _........
�. _.....W�..
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?
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 .....6 ........ ..................... ................ ....... ................. ....... ...............-=... ........... .. .... .............................
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ Yes
E9 No
Structure 6
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
Eff No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
21 No
❑ Yes
9No
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes H No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Cgx ified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes `` ® No '
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
❑ Yes
_ ® No. . .
❑ Yes
ER No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
Comments'(refei to question # Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any. other comments;
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations': (use addrtional pages as necessary)
Movt tree f,( Ok 1u oo,.• ojall. 1 4
�f pVer jCrit E d S %1 �.ra F..� p�a< < tl k►� d U �+• w► ti LVas C `L
F t a" I
OtL.e.v �n7t E �� C too ��4 00d .
..
Reviewer/Inspector Name . rm
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: L
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessmen Unit 4/30/97
.M1f,ru

0
•
•
= Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No. -7/-�,
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATJ S SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: �J , 1995
Time-
Farm Name/Owner: LlQ r -et (, 0 R S �LYI'j2S j
le
Mailing Address: 0 poi m
County: `
Integrator: _fir /- ^ Phone:
On Site Representative: I :Phone:
Physical Address/Location: 1
4o AJc�iI41/ rn.q� 1 /7,m
4
11
l
r .
Type of Operation: Swine _�� _ Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity6A Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number. ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
.Latitude: Longitude: Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does -the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the la n(s)? Yes or ieo Was any erosion observed? e or N�
Is adequate land available for spray. . 9 or No Is the cover crop adequate? fies pr No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? or No '
100 Feet from Wells? es or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or Io
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes 0(8
Is -animal waste discharged into waters of the state by'man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or T If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acrea a with cover crop)? Ye or No
Additional Comments: r S ���' Gt Lt
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.
s

OPERATIONS BRANCH - WQ Fax:[phone] Jul 18 '95 12:13 P.22/23
Site Requires Irnmet late Attc-ndor
Facility Number.
. SrM VTSITATTON RECQRD
DATE: juiy 1995
Owner_ Xgnn r.aniex ,� Farm Name: Coastal Farms
County: _PLanagg ..,
Agent Visiting Site- 1 at:h cook Fender SAD _ - Phone: (910) 2 M j105 _
Operator; Dean Lanier - . Phone. [phone]
On Site Representative: Dean Lanier — — _ -- Phone:
Physical Address: 2.5 miles SW of the intersection of SR 1626 and SR 1411. Farm
road is on .
NWILM Address: 634 b1de Point Road
Rnmea2r,
Type of Operation; °Swine X Poultiy Cattle
Design Capacity: 24ga r; n i sh Number of Animals on Sitc: 24 -8 Finish
Latitude:.,,,,, * —" Lonsitude: O —'
Type of Inspection: Gouzd x Aerial
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufflcienc freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot +7 inchcs) �& or No Actual Freeboard: 3 Fe --- t � 2 inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, ple_se address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments secrion. f�
Was azy seepage observed from the I�goon(s)? Yes orla as there erosion of the darn?: Yes a� Y�
Is adequate land available for land application? or No Is the cover crop adequate? alor No
Additional Comments-
0
Far to [phone] Signamic of Agent