640071_PERMIT FILE_20171231

i
t9-
(Type of Visit: id Once Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: �f RYA rd . r
i _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: 1�dzf " Mk r�-4 Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Desigq
Design
Cram
Curent
CurrenL
Wr5imesn
ity
Pop
Wet Poultry
C pacify
Pop.
Cattle
Capacrty
Pop.1�S€
Lillli;l
(: II{�IIIAlAN[!!! r
:11�l.�ldl14ti14L
4d�$! a:e?it
�l6 t ;
1AIhnNdl(16:E4
%IIiSlk dili
Womf Finish
La er
DairyCow
Feeder
Non -La er
DairyCalf
o Finish
DairyHeifer
o Wean
Design
Current
D Cow
to Feeder
D ;
1?oult
Ca aci
Pnlli.
-Dairy
to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Turke Pouets
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes No ,❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No
NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
21412015 Continued

e
Facility !Nu mber: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes V00
NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �l
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 1;3<0 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 o ❑ 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 reat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes [] NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 ter___ ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑Yes 0 ZNoFNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
l l . 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): _ (?j� /' M jc,A, S f t� !n-'
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ YesKN
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ N E
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check [] Yes 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfer ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" 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: —1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes 5No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
[] Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
pen -nit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
E] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the pen -nit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�r h dye, r✓� Y
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
5-- �-- ► �
y Zy- i-�
Phone: '711 - t'/ 2.0*91
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: uly, —14o-1,--- 10-we u Date:
7 -M -/ -�
Page 3 of 3 21412015

_�'7
d
Type of Visit: AD Corn ' ce Inspection O Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance J
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access I
Date of Visit: 12:ZZ—/ 71 Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: Q County: Region:
Farm Name: 444 rr4f -- . 5,Go i E. i24— Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: 4-ti
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Title:
Latitude:
Non -Layer
aDr.y P■oultry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Phone:
Phone: I[
Integrator: [r"%dS fJ�
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes E2<0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ 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 NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - 7.4 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'? ❑ YesjNo
No NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 2 I/
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.)
�No[_]
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
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
t eat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes❑
VNo NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
V<O ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
o NA
7
❑ 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 Incorpprate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s): f 3e /~,VLA J
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑Yes❑
El�NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
❑ NE
M. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1; ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
g ;No"
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have ail components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] Yes
❑ 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
ZNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
ludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facii1ty Number: L - Date of Inspection: — 7 —
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes o 0 NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes P. o NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ 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).
7
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
• r
Reviewer/inspector Signature: !.� (r
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �� ' �� 2-op
Date:
21412015

—L—
Type of Visit: 0 Corn . ce Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access I
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: R-#, f Owner Email:
Owner Name;
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: 1 44 AiarYA x
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Region:
Integrator: 6AIA! 67 /-7 ' // (072
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design Current
#Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry C.city Pop.
Cattle apacity Plop.
Wean to Finish
La er
DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
DairyCalf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dr P,ouItr Ca Tacit I:o .
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Non-Dair
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Pouits
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 ❑ 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 N ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facilt 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
N NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): l>'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental t eat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes;No
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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind 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
�N ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
&No ❑ NA
❑ N E
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
in No ❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available`?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
���NoDNA
❑ 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 ❑ 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 ludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: &ff - ? Date of Inspection: —;L
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
2fNo , ❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
gNo
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28, Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
ZNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ 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).
:5'44a S� r✓e y
P-: 4( a_r
64Nf i br��<
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 13 u s 4a`e­
Page 3 of 3
Phone: � V ` yZ &O
Date: I ` ;- 'S `f 6
21412015

11
(Type of Visit: ,. D Co5jKance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: eRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
_. un..nnmwrirnirrr.u.m mnin in u
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: hl 6[ ✓+' p �4 E=j¢�Lr� s' a Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ke 14 "1 K w✓09 y Title:
Onsite Representative: 06e!i,L
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Phone:
Integrator: K-rj b it D
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design C►urrent Design C•urcent
Swine Capacity Pap.0 apacity Pop.
Wean to Finish I I Layer
Design t►urcent
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I
INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Design Current
Dr. Pooult . Ca aci Pao ,
Layers
Dry Cow
Non -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 operation? ❑ Yes , No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) -]Yes fNo ❑ 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 rNo
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 NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

FF—a 'ciTi t—y Number: - Date of Inspection: - Z—
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(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 12 �00 NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental eat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Y c s 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 D Yes - No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ONE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l0% 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): d.4.:J,,i °i_✓A-i-74.
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes En N
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes Z <No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. 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❑
VN
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
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste 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 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes &U No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
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.
❑ 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:
No NA ❑ NE
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No [3 NA ❑NE
[3 Yes [3 No [3 NA ❑NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33, Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any:YUS answers ;and/or any additional recommendations or any other co.mments:;
Use drawings of facility to better explain 'sit ua i ns; use_additionahpa es as necessary}.
fir(? brr4_�' v 4r? d' -5 Ik Jsk Y1.rve V r-,(
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: )2/. I11000
Date: !p — Z. — L-5—
Page 3 of 3 21412014

Type of Visit: 0 Co=U'tine
ce Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: L L Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: mGLf'+rr4 Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator:4�'414-m"*f'4 Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design
Current
Design Current
Design
C*arrant
Swine Capacity
Fop.
Wet 1?oultry Capacity Pop.
Olt t
Cattle Capacity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
on -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
DEE Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr. P,oult Ca aci P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Non -Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
i urke Poults
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
[3NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yesg�N�o[_]
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 DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes
[:]No ❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Ycs No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier;
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental th eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes NA NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes A�oo NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes :No
0 NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground [] Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): J4-
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? f] Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ NA
A�No
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. 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
gNo ❑ 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 ZfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield El120 Minute Inspections El Monthly and V Rainfall InspectioKNO
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Faclli N mber: -:27:1Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ YesgNo
❑ 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
NA ❑NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yesg�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ONE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Coinments (refer,to questions#): Explain anyYESanswers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Useed"rarvinu of facility to,betterexplain situations (use additional Mies as necessarv).
514- eV 12 0-
0 t
I° 3
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: J CAW -e-
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
214/2011

Type of Visit: J0 Com ante Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: OrRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
r ri
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: D Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: GLYf'A y ll lQ F Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1 Title:
Onsite Representative: iJ�_,rti 6 I�
Certified Operator: t'l l� /ht-wi— I �:z
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
i
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry C*opacity Pop.
Layer
Deslgn C►urgent
Cattle NEC-rapmacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Daia Calfry
Feeder to Finish
Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Dry Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: [3 Structure El Application Field
a. Was the conveyance man-made? [—]Yes o NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes f�N�oo 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 DWQ) ❑Yes N ❑ 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facility Number: d -)71 jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): !
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 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 o ❑ 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 t eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 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 VNIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN 0 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): �� e r- In �A , S 9 n f! , ,.► _S
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes FNo
NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. 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 VNo ❑ 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 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste ran ;":rs ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall InspectiFNo
udge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [3 Yes NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: �p
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
27, Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.,Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
[:]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
t
h
C'p ((br,9,4 �' ow 4�- y- , �Z' a 1C
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
M
Phone:
Date:
21412011

7 ( f 31 I I --
Type of Visit: ® Com ' nce Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance j
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emersencv 0 Other 0 Denied Access I
Date of Visit: I -)/ 171f � Arrival Time:® Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone:
Phone:
Onsite Representative: ac'4 r*--k"A-0 Integrator: 6-7�1'djlx'vp
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wct Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
D . P,oult ,
ILayers
Design
Ca acit
C►urrent
P,o
Da Cow
Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �0❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 DWQ) ❑ Yes rNo
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 NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection:
/
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
o NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[—]Yes
��No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): �J
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
E3To ❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental eat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes:No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): ,,..&,,, J.A..
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
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspection ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? D Yes No D NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: (p -71 Date of ins ection: rf
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes . No NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes t o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAW MP?
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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ 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).
6� - / (a I/ I—
Ll• 6
Reviewer/Inspector Name: f 3 a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Dater '? / l i t
21412011

Type of Visit: Q'Come Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: outme 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 23 i* Arrival Time: Departure Time: lQ County:
Farm Name: Y114►��� �.-i I e 6q12 0'_ Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Title:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: �4:! t ` 1 /�Ytu ✓ �/A Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Region:
Design Current
Design Current
Design C►urrent
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry CYapacity Pop.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
DairyHeifer
Farrow to Wean
(Design Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr. Poultr, Ca aCi , . P,a ..
[Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Othcr
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesrNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3 21412011 Continued

lFacility NVmber: - Date of Ins ection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
ffNo
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 0 <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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application F��
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �] 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): DC ✓+►�t..Cl_1 $,�`^t�� -- ----
13. Soil Type(s):
14, Do the receiving crops differ, from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
VTNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
� 0 NA
❑ NE
I& Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
t9. 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
9K10 NA
E] NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check th ropriate box below. es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard aWaste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes n No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: -7 Date of Inspection: irpiz-5.7
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
"NoNA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge
levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
/
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance: S54k
2-0 t !
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
F4Alo ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
5rCEINA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal'?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern`?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit'? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss rcview/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to Question ft Explain, any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments'';' `%`1
Use drawings of facility'to better explainsituations,(use additional pages as necessary):
lU >3 `T 1+P9 ✓z U.1 s4Q
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Phone: 7T/` y 2-e d
Reviewer/inspector Signature
Page 3 of 3
r s 1g,
Date:
21412011

q I (t ' 1 1 D
Type of Visit 1jf�Routlne
ce Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Complaint Q Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Dented Access
Date of Visit: _ r _
Arrival Time:
Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 'll ''
tj t :7_4 tZtl--
r�c�
Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: :
Back-up Operator:
Region:
��P��ho��ne No:
Integrator: &_() _
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = 0 0 6 011 Longitude: = o = i = N
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Finish
to Fceder
er to Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry Opacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La er
Design Current
C•att[c Capacity Population
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Dai Calf
❑ Dai Heifer
w to Wean
❑ D Cow
w to Feeder
Non-Dairyw
aers❑
Fto
to Finish
Beef Stocker
on-aers❑
Feeder
Pullets❑Beef
s
❑ Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turke s ❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 17) NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesFNEINA ❑NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No 'NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 thre notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? — ❑ Yes I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o NA ElNE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ElYes 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 Area
12. Crop type(s) �';,� r� ! •�
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes or ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes Uj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ReviewerlInspector Name ; j ` '� Phone: % 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: U;iE ,C�� Date: { 4 3f i 6
Page z of 3 16/40/V4 i.unnnuea

N1
Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes TNo
0 NA El
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
1.2 o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V
Rain Inspections
❑I Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
NA
2rE0:1
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑Yes
rNN� ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
[3NE
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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facilrty;Number.
Type of Visit Com 'ante Inspection Operation Review Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: M01 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: 1l'Z i�L P-e.g 1 A-1 —4-n _C Owner .Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: Ue i _+ /4' -.3_`,
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
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ❑ o ❑ I ❑ « Longitude: ❑ ° = A = {1
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
.Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey 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?
Cattle
Design Current
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 No ❑ NA
[I NE
El Yes o NA
❑ NE
El Yes o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes NA
❑ NE
❑YesNA
FNO'
❑NE
❑ Yes NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: (p
Date of Inspection �(
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
"5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes ZK�No�A ❑ NE
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 thr , n ify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes:�No
o NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste_ Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA El 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 ] 0 ]bs ❑ 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' r " �'d A
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
N ❑ NA
El NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El
Na NA
El NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
N El NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
No ❑ NA
ElNE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑Yes
El NA
El NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: ~ G Z
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 'f -ei Date: 7 1 (3 % u
12128104 Continued

Facility Number., — Date of Inspection 7 !
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes 12 o -NA El NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 E10cather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ZNo NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes N ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes N 0
NA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? El Yes�N[0:1 NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No 'NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes o [I NA El 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings ��,
14 *
a
w
Page 3 of 3 12128104

j,zzI
r
e of Visit Compl' nce Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistanceason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Li�az) —1 Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: j1 �( �'''4 `+ f�3 L��- S fir. C Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Lz
Certified Operator:. _ __��
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: L dx 6 D
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Region:
Latitude: ❑ o = 6 Longitude: = ° ❑ , ❑ 11
Design Current D n Current �Ccwrent
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Cap city Population C*attle pulation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean pry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ La era
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts ❑Non -La era
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑ Boars
10 Beef Brood Cow
❑ Turke s
Other ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo
�NA El NE
El YesNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12.128104 Continued

r
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): Z ��
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes "0-NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
at, notify DWQ
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmenta2No
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
[:IN E
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) .42:: � f—P- `i Wq "L. > _
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?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
{use a
sQ<
�No NA
No., ❑ NA
ON UNA
❑ NVNa ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
P Phone: 7 7
Reviewer/Inspector ector Name ' �'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: f i Date: D
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility }Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �OEINA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Flo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
.2�oElA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I "
Rain Inspections ❑ W ther Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
o NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No 0 NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
hlo NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
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?
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
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes El No ❑NA El NE
❑Yes []No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or.Drawin s
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Facility Number
Q Division of Water Quality
O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit VEompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit fflRoutine 0 Complaint O Follow up Q Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: l v Arrival Time: N Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: CLAY,- En a, --,r Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: _
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: A i
Phone
/No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Region:
Latitude: 0 0 [=] ' =" Longitude: = ° =' = "
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
j❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La er I --di
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Pouits
❑ Other
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dar
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ YesVNo
NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)`?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility Number:6 —71 Date of Inspection (� d
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ 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 "N�oA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes EfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P<01"❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental thre , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �N0NA El NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ 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 El Evidence of Wind Drift El Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) !"'+
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E�A�o'NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving cro and/or land application site need im rovement?
p p
❑ Yes
NA
❑ NE
t6. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑ yes:No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
A
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: S/ Date: r ( c7
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropiate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes ZNo 2 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste -Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
2 <Nqj[__1 NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
;No,❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
�No❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
<No 'NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
ElYes
o [I 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
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

1iq,Nui4 r
Di' Sion of Water'Quabty -.� K ° '
Division of Sail and Water Conservation
n
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit &Co lance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Z�( (7 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Al it ✓vf} 6
d E,.--s L, Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Prone No:
Onsite Representative: -r Integrator:
Certified Operator: �� �7"t ` Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location or Farm: Latitude: [� o 0' 0 Longitude: 0 e °
tis
r 'Design
Capacity Pc
Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
E:
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current
YWet Poultry.:
Capacity Population
Layer
[
❑ Non -La er
[
Dry Poultry
❑ Other �.
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Dairy Cow
Daia Calf
Dairy heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Co
k E
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
El Yes 0 No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes N ❑ NA WNE
E
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ,
❑ Yes VN/ME-1
NA [3NE
❑ Yes
NA ❑ NE
El Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

r
Facility Number: (,71
Date of Inspection L_L ►_-T��
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
Structure 4
❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ZN ❑ NA ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ 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 environmenta�No
e , notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ' NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑Yes 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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes . No ❑ NA ❑ NI
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P41 1:1 NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ;No�.NA
NoNA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
El NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? El, NA [I NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? El Yes NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA El NE
Comments. (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
41,
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. use additional pages necessa "
g ty P ( p g r'Y) ,
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 7Z Z4i-v L
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — 7 Date of Inspection Z D
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes �NoEll
-NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design ❑Maps El Other ,�,
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes L�'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and t" Rain Inspection�N�NA
ther Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
A ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ YesA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ YesA ❑ NE
26.Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
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?
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
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE .
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes ❑No ❑NA El NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

/-/ M. I
qi
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other [I Denied Access
Date of visit: pl Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: :41a,— Owner Email:
If
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: _
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: Certified Operator: go 4 w`K✓tr� -�
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator: (SDI��S l Crli�-Rs
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 0 O = d 0 Longitude: = ° ❑ 1 ❑ 1{
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
to Finish
ign Current.
DesrguI�C:,MertWC;ciy
Wet 1'ou try Capacitypulla�tion. Cattle Poutl n
to Feeder
❑Non -La et
❑Dai Calfr
to Finish
r❑
A
❑Dai ileifei
to Wean
D Cow
w to Feeder
❑ Non-Dairyw
rs
EFeeder
to Finish
Beef Stocket
Non -La ers
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Pullets
❑Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Number of Structures: "
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
-:mac
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation`?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
No NA
El NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
El Yes
o l
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
N NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 6, - Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): tj
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑Yes 0 o El NA El NE
❑ Yes PN-o-El NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes edNo % NA ❑ NE
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 environmenZ--Nol�tZ
tify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ YesNA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes No 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 o ❑ NA El
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes B<O� NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
It. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ❑ Yes NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) (ram cT —6­/ 13 ren t_ 4 4—
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes VTNo -0 NA
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination',[] Yes No ❑ NA
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for ]and application? ❑ Yes <No
NA
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 a -" `.� ���"F; Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: S L Date: 1 2j
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: ;— Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes 2_N ❑ NA ❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes No []NA
❑ NE
the appropiiate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0,N0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
❑ Yes
No [] NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
2No ❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No �NA❑
NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA - NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No A
❑ NE
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additigoal Comtnents:and/or,;llrawings
x
12128104

Faci ' Number tale of Visit: Time: �"
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
e tted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ...� .......I.-...I....._�.V`..� . �......,1.........................Y............................... County:......�1�..� S..........................................................
Owner Name- --------------------------------------------------- f
---------'----------------------------'----'----------.........---------------------------------------- Phone No: --------------------------------
Mailing Address:
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:.............................................................. Phone No:......................................--'--........
1
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................ . ................................................................. Integrator• ... n... ! I .........................................
Certified Operator:......�5.'`..Y.!....................................................... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 " Longitude • 6 44
-Swine
❑ Wean to Feeder
ik""
❑ Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Weans
❑ Farrow to Feeder
v"� ❑Other
" r"TpWiDeSt
❑ Farrow to Finish
Gilts(
4❑
F3�1 PEE ¢ �13=,p'� ES��1 E'
�7
El Boars
itll
-q'..
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'?
M
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 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0<0
❑ Yes 0 o
El Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
Structure 6
Identifier: ....................................... .............................. .................................... ................................... ...............................
.... ...................................
Freeboard (inches): ti 14 1/
12112103 Continued

1
Facility Number: —
Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do 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?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ffNo
❑ Yes 00_
❑ Yes
❑ Yes Wo'
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes �No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type C' / M t" Cj "4-
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 N
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes /
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes�No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes
16, Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 0 No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes eo�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 ❑ No
Air Quality representative immediately.
_"!,�ti-..i ._„9..'SY: ,1.e.�.i Id'?isj:t%G-G']•"�N•etSF?.tait'k:..7�[t;7:. ' .,;-Vs _e'.yrfl i'
Comments;{refer to question #) , E tplaun any =YES ansrt!ers and/ori any :recommendationsxonanyl other comments;: "3#a, j r#t
ii3se draiv�n 1of facth � `�to;bette��e�r''lath srtuattoas {use"additioasl� a"�'es��1� .,,#�,� #���#'f<�..
Copy ❑ Final Notest
,. €� � Pt is ..: r; r°i 3 ss,a;�� • r a ! � .d�€ 'tP.�I,i.r s ! ;3t .-� .'a .' f` � ? '�e`�t€ "s?:`�r fir, . „ i,r s :d�l,i � � 'i�C t¢,sf E { t,�j:€°,�� �,°p ? , �� ! :; ,,� :E,•a.:>> � ns af; ,�b:t .,-.i� d s€
A6
IMP,
f3 ,:' E "4t@,• € r ¢ `a �ti,€ 1s, Er xq, ag I�,r
ReviewerlInspector Namei� , d-y y ,!„
b arm a l.r �1a vd.td a 7..i l
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Tf „ "- . -'Date:''-' .— O
12112103 Continued

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

Fa ' Number Date of Visit: Time:
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: pm�L✓,.- I U 9s .. County: ---
Owner Name: f �+� '� ' ��µr'�� Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: �`� /knit
Location of Farm:
Title:
Ph/one No:
Integrator: a °t-bP`0_
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 1 " Longitude 0 C �K
Design
Swine
canto Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Number�of Lagoons � A
Current Design Current Design Current
o ulation Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Ca` aeity Population,
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dai
... �-
❑ Other
Total DesignCapacity
i
�." TOial SkW 4'
Ii ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Laeoon Area ❑ Sorav )field Area
No Liquid Wa
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?
WasteCollection & 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):
05103101
❑ Yes TN,
❑ Yes ;N�
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes N
El Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number:&i4— 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
s
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application?
/ ❑ Excessive Ponding ElPAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Cckel S-6— C , `7 h-,Gi N1,4 , ✓'r , l'J &M "— f
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re uired Records & DUcuments
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. Nail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
21 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
❑ Yes No
ElYes j No
ElYes o
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ffNo
ElYes
❑ Yes ❑ No
ElYes ❑ N
ElYes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 1 {71 r
❑ Yes N
❑ Yes XN
❑ Yes Vr
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes EN
El Yes
Col Yeso
El Yes o
05103101 Continued

i.. A
IType of Visit A Comp' ce Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Fac'lity Number Date of Visit: 2 Time:
Not Operation -al-
er tional Below Threshold
,priPermitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: i �lf ''Y�� County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address.
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: r f4
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone No:
Phone No:
Integrator: _(,T� d_ J-JLnT
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude a 9 41 Longitude 0
Design
Swine Ca aci
can to Feeder o 0
❑ Feeder to Finish
Current
P.o ulation
Design
P,oultr, Ca aci
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Current
Popelation Cattle
❑Dairy
❑ Non-Dairy
Design Current
Ca sei Po ulation
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Other
i -i
Total Design Capacity
h Total SSLW
❑Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management 5 stem
❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
Discharges _&.Strearn 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 gaUmin?
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
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes
❑ Yes �'No
❑ Yes IQNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ;No
ElYes
Structure G
Condnued

Facility Number:(,L/ — -7/ Date of Inspection 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuetures 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 /'Aj. (- . I nz P r,9T" -'-/
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
RgqjjjEMd Rvcgtd§ & nt
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?
(iel 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 ReviewerM ector 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
lallo
❑ Yes
© No.,/
❑ Yes
p No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
f..
❑ No'
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑�No �
El N.o'�
❑ No '
El
No
❑ No
❑ No .�
❑ No /
�r
© No
El No
No
❑ Yes ❑ No'Ff;
❑ Yes ❑ No /
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 1 ❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments {rifer�to: quesE:on��)"�Ezplain�any�YBS unswers�, ©dl r any recommendatloris . � any t6erkcomments i;
Use"d�rawings,of facll[ty;to better" eaiplain situations:,(use adtlitional�pages as nee ary): `. ,`" �'
f "h i�"� � �d'..;�r�. .,��`,� _ ❑Field Copv ,.❑ Final Notes �
rr
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date; ?-)ID —_
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: ( — Date of Inspection ZZ
I EP
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 L�J'No
ElYes rNo
ElYes
❑ Yes
Cl Yes o
❑ Yes y' "
❑ Yes No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings;
05103101

•
Number Dale of Visit: 01 Time: U
=4� Q Not O erational Q Below Threshold
e tted Mertified 0 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .....................
FarmName: 141.. f �....... 2-*. `s ......... n.... .................. County:.....................................................................................
OwnerName:./SF!..�1..... .....,�. I....... (n'I (tiv r! Phone No: .................................................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative: ........................................................................
Certified Operator: ....... �� Y; `3 l^ 4..... t vri�
7..................................................
Location of Farm:
Integrator:.. °.�. S ri.GY .....................................
Operator Certification Number:. .........................................
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 " Longitude ' 6 64
DeS!gn Cl rrent DeS�gll Chrreftt ` o tt ' De5Ig11 t CIIX'rC11t
Swine -Cs' ci Po ulatioa :Poultry Ca 'ace Po ulit! n Cattle Ca 'ci Po `illation c
can to Feeder ❑Layer ❑Dairy
�, ❑Feeder to Finish y on -Dairy
❑ ❑
Non -La er N
❑ Farrow to Wean
WL
❑ ❑Farrow to Feeder Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total De`slgn'CapaCtty ,.
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW,.
Discharaes & 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)
❑ Yes
'r-wo<
❑ Yes:N'o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ................. ..0..'..........................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Yes o
/__A
Structure 5 Structure 6
Continued on baf

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improve ment•?
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
12. Crop type / fia41' r /2- k/ -e
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes
❑ Yes No /
13. Do the receiving crops differ with th se desig ated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)`? ❑ Yes
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes o
19, Does record keeping need improvement? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes N
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes N
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 o
23. Did Reviewer/Inspe •tor fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes o
24, Does facili equire a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o
25. Wer ny additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes o
...............
�'V : violattcjris or &fieie;nues -were nbfed. during �his;visit: Y'oit will r;eogtve •no furtttgr
.T°. ' pondence. about. this .visit ;
,. :. .... ::y le,. -,. i ".: •: t 3 -'3., I 1 i i�
Cotmments ("refer' to question #) I xplatn any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments
44
Use d rawings of facility to -better explatnsituattons {use addrtronal pages asE necessary) , .�,
r _ t_ , o- � t. € t, : fe I. l 1,,
0
t
A6
Reviewer/Inspector Name ° iJ
Reviewer/Inspector Signature '56Date: -7`
3/23/99

• M
+Facility Number: 5�' HP 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 ❑ Yes No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 12 o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes o
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged till pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes o
�kdditional, Comments an Or, Drawings:. ; . 1 j r is e' i 4f
A6I
5/00

' .. ivision'of Water,Quality ���
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation.
Q . they Agency
Type of Visit O �outine
plia Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit CO Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Z '1'iine: Printed on: 7/21/2000
Q Not f? erational Q Below Threshold
[] Permitted © Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: : :ri'fi.4 ........r? (>r.^^f n C... County:.. ..................................... .......................
�.................. A., .............................
Owner Name: f.+` I 1 l . ,� i %furs- Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ... Title: ................................................. Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:........................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: .................... Integrator:
9 l�f..... *..n,
Certified Operator:...... .........
Operator Certification Number: .......................
Location of Farm: 9
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Fj Longitude �• �� °°
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
57Tean to Feeder p ❑ Layer I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish JE3 Non -Layer 1 Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder 10 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I i i ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lag...m Area 10 Spray 1lietd Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
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 liow 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
SuILrrctaauryyI Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ............ i.... ............... ..................... ......... ...... .................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Yes .z No
❑ Yes No
El Ye
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes >rll�
yo
ElYcsEl
❑ Yes L7 No
Structure 6
Continued on back ."

Facility Number: Date of Inyeetion L® Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees, severe erosion, [] Yes _F1
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'? ❑ Yes Na
(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
❑ Yes Itj <No,❑ Yes to
❑ Yes J_e 0
❑ Yes
[-]Yes J�o
12. Crop type �j.Q C_h2..W L f--•��`�'r� r rs'
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)'? ❑ Yes o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes 6Rio
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 '0
Required Records _&_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes aro
I9. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes :zo
o
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'? ❑ Yes
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'? ❑ Yes o
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ YesIN
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector f il-to review/inspection with on -site representative'? ❑ Yes
24. Does faciiit wire a follow-up visit by same agency'? ❑ Yes
25. We any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP'? ❑ Yes No
Io cjris:or• Uriciencies •Were nbtea• during �his:visit' • Y'Ol1} :will•r.eeeiye do flurther
corres' oridence. about: this viisit-,
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
I I A�i
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
..

Facility Number: — Date of Iaspectioa I Z) 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 el/or below ZesoNo
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
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes P40
❑ Yes �''
❑ Ye o
Yes ❑ No
5/00

1123
Divisio"n f-Sail and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
vi�t ision of Water Quality
Routitie O Complaint O Follow-2of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered E Certified M Applied for Permit 0 Permitted JE3 Not Operational . Date Last Operated :..........................
r f% I
Farm Name:.. 1 .d.. � .9Y.1..:... . `�...!.... County .... ! /?9.� .........................................................
S ..................ram................... 2� Z � Y? T�- 3 07
OwnerName:................j! 1................................................. Phone No: C............................................................................ ......................
Facility Contact: s} f= . Title: ....... Phone No:
Mailing Address: Sal...... r� 1 .� n .'�....... . �2-1.. t. Z............................... .... I .....................
Onsite Representative :.1,.- .........�.............................................................. v�`✓�...........................................
Integrator:.... i
Certified Operator;......}..f...r.✓,.�9..��•................................................ Operator Certification Numberc.........................................
Location of Farm: �' f Z 9 Zl
Latitude Longitude �• �' ��°
Design . Current
x Design
Current
Design „Curretat
Swine _ y .Capacity .;Population
Poultry' Z ,Capacity
Population. Cat , Capacity Population
can to Feeder
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy
[] Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean'
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
w ,
„%kn � '$
Farrow to Finish
_
Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
a �T Sdo
� h Ota 'W�; :
~
rilunatber Lagoo ! HqI ing Ponds11E
Subsurface Drains Present
❑ Lagoon Area
10 Spray Field Area
i>
`
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
P.
«�
. x:
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
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?
7/25/97
❑ Yes . oo
❑ Yes LTNo
❑ Yes LQNa
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [; 70�❑ Yes 1, O
❑ Yes L�F'No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Y . No

F`ticility%Number: 6 t —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes
Structures La oons Holdin Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate`?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Freeboard(I't):.......:...J......................................................................................................................
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?
❑ Yes
Structure 5 Structure
6
............................ ...................................
..........................................................
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
No
W'so
❑ Yes
�No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes o
Waste Anplication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes a o
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop typer?.!�!^.M:.�9............ ......................... ......................................... ................................................................................................................. ..
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes o
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ElYes .L�so
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑Yes o
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No
21, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes o
24. Were any a ' ional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes o
25. We ny additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ElYes No
o.violationsor. deficiencies,welre,n©tid;during this'visit:-You.rvill recei've'ito-further
. 0rr0040dekc shout this:visit:•' • ;
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReviewertInspectorSignature: A6&61z jf�, e*;k Date:

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Raleigh Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
MOM
1DEHNR
DIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
June 27, 1997
Mr. Phil Murray
Murray Farms, Inc.
5108 Ridge Road
Spring Hope, North Carolina 27882
Subject: Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Facility # 64-71
Murray Farms, Inc.
Nash County
Dear Mr. Murray:
On June 10, 1997, Mr. Buster Towell from the Raleigh Regional
Office conducted a compliance inspection of the subject animal
facility. The inspection is part of the Division's efforts to
determine compliance with the State's animal waste nondischarge
rules.
The inspection determined that the operation was not discharging
wastewater into waters of the State and that operations were
proceeding according to your approved Animal Waste Management Plan.
As a result of the inspection, the facility was found to be in
compliance with the State's animal nondischarge regulations.
Effective wastewater treatment and facility maintenance are an
important responsibility of all animal waste producers. The
Division of Water Quality has the responsibility to enforce water
quality regulations in order to protect the natural resources of
the State.
The Raleigh Regional Office appreciates your cooperation and
compliance. If you have any questions regarding this inspection
please call Mr. Buster Towell at [phone].
Sincerely,
Judy Garrett,
Water Quality Section Supervisor
cc: Mr. Patrick Rogers, Nash County Health Department
Mr. Terry Best, Nash Soil and Water Conservation District
Ms. Margaret O'Keefe, DSWC-RRO
DWQ Compliance Group
RRO Files
3800 Barrett Drive, Suite 101, i
FAX [phone]
Raleigh, North Carolina 27609 N50%
� C An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
Voice 919-571-4700 recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

SWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review.
❑ DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
�c outinc O Gom "IaiiitZa0 Follriw-n" of D�1' ins t�ction 'aO Fnllow=u "of l)S1VC lrer iew,^.O Others p:
Date of Inspection L�
Facility Number Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time tin fraction of hours
Farm Status: degistered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for l hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
/tUertifted ❑ Permitted or Inspection (includes travel, nd processing)
❑ Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ...................................................................... .......................
Farm Name:.. ....... i1zl .14 ................. County; ............................................
OwnerName:........................................................................................................................... Phone No:.........................................................,.....:.......................
Facility Contact: ..... ke—.tri................................................ `ritle.:................................................................ Phone No:..,�.�,.�.'....�...[..�.�
Mailing Address: ..........................................................
...................... ' ......
..................
Onsite Representative:..... rj..... ...................... 401-..t-f�... .....I.........
CertifiedOperator:........................................................ .............
Location of Farm:
Integrator: .............................................................................. . ......
Operator Certification Number: ............................... .........
C
Latitude • 4 �66 Longitude • C�' "
Type of Operation Desrgn Current h « Desi n Currentf >�� Des[ nCurrent
tH s Pam„ x#f g_f g F
;u. Swine 4 Capacity-zPopulatsonPoultry Capacity Pppulation Cattle CapacEtr+Populatian
❑ Layer ❑ mDairy
Z� ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
[y
sk Total Destgn Capacity f'
g
�t
Total SLWx r
.....
Number of Lagodns /Holding Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ f aguon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Wean to Feeder
�
��❑
❑ Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
❑Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Other
{rf;nel':11 '
1. Are [here any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑Yes 'i�No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes XNo
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon El Spray Field El Other
a. It discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes- No
b, f f clischarbe is observed, did it reach St�rfaee 1�'ater? (If yes, notify D1�VQ) ❑ Yes /11
Na
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estima[ed flow in gal/min?
d. Dues discharge bypass a lagoon system" ye:, notify DWQ) [] yes )6 No
3. is there evidence of past discharge From any part of the operation? ❑Yes A No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? El Yes (A No
S. Does any part of the waste nauta�,ement system (other than lagoonslholding ponds) require ❑Yes [A No
maintenance/improvement?
4/3U/97
Continued nn back

Facility Number&41— ,
6. 4s facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ': ❑ Yes VNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes XNO
8 Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes o
.,_'+,, "":�a'i`i't .'it `.•'..�. :.`.��i'ia�.-`:�fi�`Hai_�'r"�$t'r��`si"ro"�',r.�'C'r•r.-�"v'� -i` ira':i'- �-��� :r�'�..: - M-�;��,rkw, _ � 'N.. .-f�: N Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Nonr]s
9. Is storage'capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No
Freeboard fft). Structure 1 Structure 2 Stricture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
1 ...........
........ ................................................................................................. ....... ...........................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes EIN0
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes VNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DVi`Q)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?.
Yes
- ❑ No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
[(No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .I..F. ..!`-............................................................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes ZNo
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
,[Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
-ONO
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
YNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
KNo
For Certified Facilities Only
J
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
El Yes
,EJ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
PqNo
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
f 2(No
� ��� � � I" ✓�/i'��.I�-� e✓ f�f'1--�.. �'� d •uL� �-.u0 a'� �" S mac,, t�y0r
i i rTv ytl a AJ C L 5 /0vo7c
r ,
�-Nc-� t l� e��,oq
� ��
T- P4/'/ / /1�rV0 �t4 . 1Uv lQ2rw r,,,v ��� 0 2
�N �I T'►-Iq-TIP,J P-47-C C9 N GL44C4 W U P
„xk x x--< ,,�u";;'," e d
Reviewer/Inspector Name (f(j //fir jjfJ+$ f �y ��,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature- Date: t7
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Qua ity Section, Facility Assessrnret: nit 4/30/97
Il

Date of Inspection
Facility Number � � ��
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: ❑ R ❑ Applied for Permit t.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review I o u
Certified ❑ Permitted 1o=rInspection (includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated:......_.......................... _..... _..... __............... __....................... __................................ _........ _......
Farm Name: m.(:Gi'.LA.:f.....EA.9-.P s.......R&=k ... c.......................................... Coun &..
Land Owner Nanre:.._:...d._h .u.�� R...:(..........................._................................. Phone No:...!.1...l..._y'%...-._3....Ier..........................
Facility Conetact:.......... ,a. !x ..-........................... _.............. Title:. ..L.A 1..P�_......._....._.. Phone No:..... 7..9.ka.. K.............................
Mailing Address:. ..1._ ..Sl.....rL.i.. S....................................1 (...! � .1 ..../�: ......
:.............47.�..ta
Onsite Representative: �_!,./ _. � k„v„„! ,,1� Integrator:,.0 A ! „.r _I �
.. ......_.. L...................................................._. ...............................................
Certified Operator: t . i /4�J. L... u vvs) v�.... Operator Certification Number: .........................
Location of Farm: S 2
Latitude 0.0<=„ Longitude =* =, ="
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ISNo
❑ Yes P'N-5—
❑ Yes td'No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
0<0
ffNo
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
OLNe/
Continued
on back

Facility Number:...
6, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes La'No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes (moo
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes 4d�o
Structures
(Lagoons gild/or) ding Pondsl
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
............... ............................ ............................ ............................ ............................
.....................•.....
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
P O
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Id'No
12,
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
0
(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?
Wfes
❑ No
Waste,. Application
I4.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If in excess of WM/P,'or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type �.�..F. t!r'...' ,•...c�...r✓...�'��'�ja f .....nas.!....�4✓r
--.1.............................................
j.
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
Lr1"No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreageTor land application?
❑ Yes
050
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
01 o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
0
For
22.
Certified Facilities Only
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management PIan readily available?
❑ Yes
I�No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
2<0 F
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
Reviewer/Inspector Name Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

0� 1N,gr�R Michael F. Easley, Governor
O Q� William G. Ross Jr„ Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
j Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director
Division of Water Quality
0 "C
October 1, 2004
Keith & Phillip Murray
Murray Farms Inc
5010 Ridge Rd
Spring Hope NC 27882
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS640071
Murray Farms Inc
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Nash County
Dear Keith & Phillip Murray:
On June 11, 2004, the North Carolina Division of Water Quality (Division) issued a revised State General
Permit for swine facilities. The General Permit was issued in accordance with the directive of Senate Bill
733 (Session Law 2003-28).
In accordance with your application received on January 22, 2003 and in accordance with the directive of
Senate Bill 733, we are hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Keith &
Phillip Murray, authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and
land application system in accordance with General Permit AWG100000. The issuance of this COC
supercedes and terminates your previous COC Number AWS640071 which expires October 1, 2004,
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the Murray Farms Inc, located in Nash County, with an animal capacity of no
greater than an annual average of 3800 Wean to Feeder swine and the application to land as specified in
the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If this is a Farrow to Wean or
Farrow to Feeder operation, there may also be one boar for each 15 sows. Where boars are unneccessary,
they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be replaced by gilts at a
rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until September 30, 2009. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as
specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting
and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for this
facility. Any increase in waste production,greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number
of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and
this COC and must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please carefully read this COC and the enclosed State General Permit. Since this is a revised State
General Permit, it contains new requirements in addition to most of the conditions contained in the
previous State General Permit. Enclosed for your convenience is a package containing the new and
revised forms used for record keeping and reporting. Please pay careful attention to the record keeping
and monitoring conditions in this permit.
Aquifer Protection Section -Animal Feeding Operations Unit
1636 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699.1638 One
NorthCarolina
Phone: [phone] FAX: [phone] Internet: h2o.en r. state. nc.us
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer — 50% Recycledf10% Post Consumer Paper Aatwrallff

If your Waste Utilization Plan has been developed based on site specific information, careful evaluation
of future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current Waste Utilization Plan is
inaccurate you will need to have a new Waste Utilization Plan developed.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal property.
Upon abandonment or depopulation for a period of four years or more, the Permittee must submit
documentation to the Division demonstrating that all current NRCS standards are met prior to restocking
of the facility.
Per 15A NCAC 2H .0225(c) a compliance boundary is provided for the facility and no new water supply
wells shall be constructed within the compliance boundary. Per NRCS standards a 100 foot separation
shall be maintained between water supply wells and any lagoon, storage pond, or any wetted area of a
spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the
General Permit, an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual permit by contacting the staff member listed below for information on this
process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC
or the General Permit, please contact Duane Leith at [phone].
Sincerely,
-.Z:5
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures (General Permit AWG 100000)
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Raleigh Regional Office, Aquifer Protection Section
Nash County Health Department
Nash County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File AWS640071
APS Central Files

Upon abandonment or depopulation for a period of four years or more, the Permittee must submit
documentation to the Division demonstrating that all current MRCS standards are met prior to restocking
of the facility.
Per NRCS standards a 100 foot separation shall be maintained between water supply wells and any
lagoon or any wetted area of a spray field.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General Permit
or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS 143-
215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
If you wish to continue the activity permitted under the General Permit after the expiration date of the
General Permit, an application for renewal must be filed at least 180 days prior to expiration.
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be submitted to
the Division prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the right to
apply for an individual permit by contacting the staff member listed below for information on this
process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and binding.
This facility is located in a county covered by our Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water
Quality Staff may be reached at [phone]; If you need additional information concerning this COC
or the General Permit, please contact Michelle Barnett at [phone] ext. 544.
Sincerely,
U
for Alan W. Klimek, P.E.
Enclosures (General Permit AWG100000)
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Nash County Health Department
Nash County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File AWS640071
NDPU Files

�OF W A TFRQ Michael F, Easley, Governor
William O. Ross Jr., Secretary
North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
co j [ Alan W. Klimek, P. E., Director
0 r Division of Water Quality
May 1, 2003
Keith & Phillip Murray
Murray Farms Inc
5010 Ridge Rd
Spring Hope NC 27882
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No. AWS640071
Murray Farms Inc
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
Nash County
Dear Keith & Phillip Murray:
On April 28, 2003, .the North Carolina General Assembly ratified Senate Bill 733 which directs the
Division of Water Quality (Division) to extend the expiration date of the Swine Waste Operation General
Permit AWG100000. Therefore, the General Permit has been re -issued by the Division to extend the
expiration date to October 1, 2004. During the period of this extension the Division will be working with
all interested parties on the development of a new version of the Non -Discharge General Permit.
In accordance with your application received on January 22, 2003 and in accordance with the directive of
Senate Bill 733, we are hereby forwarding to you this Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Keith &
Phillip Murray, authorizing the operation of the subject animal waste collection, treatment, storage and
land application system in accordance with General Permit AWG100000. The issuance of this COC
supercedes and terminates your previous COC Number AWS640071 which expired on April 30, 2003.
This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not limited to, the management
of animal waste from the Murray Farms Inc, located in Nash County, with an animal capacity of no
greater than an annual average of 3800 Wean to Feeder swine and the application to land as specified in
the facility's Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If this is a Farrow to Wean or
Farrow to Feeder operation, there may also be one boar for each 15 sows, Where boars are unneccessary,
they may be replaced by an equivalent number of sows. Any of the sows may be replaced by gilts at a
rate of 4 gilts for every 3 sows
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until October 1, 2004. Pursuant to this COC, you
are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations as
specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC. An adequate system for collecting
and maintaining the required monitoring data and operational information must be established for this
facility. Any increase in waste production greater than the certified design capacity or increase in number
of animals authorized by this COC (as provided above) will require a modification to the CAWMP and
this COC and must be completed prior to actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
If your Waste Utilization Plan has been developed based on site specific information, careful evaluation
of future samples is necessary. Should your records show that the current Waste Utilization Plan is
inaccurate you will need to have a new Waste Utilization Plan developed.
The issuance of this COC does not excuse the Permittee from the obligation to comply with all applicable
laws, rules, standards, and ordinances (local, state, and federal), nor does issuance of a COC to operate
under this permit convey any property rights in either real or personal propertyAM
.
N
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699.1617
Internet httpJfi2o.enr.state.nc.us/ndpu
Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
Telephone [phone]
50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper
Customer Service Center
An Equal Opportunity Action Employer

MEW
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization
10-27-2000
This plan has been prepared for:
Murray Farms Inc.
Phillip Murray
5010 ridge Rd.
Spring Hope, NC 27882
252-278-3076
This plan has been developed by:
J- EDWARD LONG
NRCS / NASH SWCD
ROOM 107 AG CENTER DRIVE
NASHVILLE, NC 2 785 6
252-459-4115
cvcloper Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal waste
utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the Required
Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with this plan.
Signature (owner)
Signature (manager or producer)
Date
Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices adopted
by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By: 3o/ate
Technical Specialist Signature Date
------------------------------------------------------------- ----- ----------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Cover Page 1

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
S5
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid waste generated 725,800 gals/year by a
3,800 animal Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid. operation. This production
facilityhas waste stora a ca acities of approximately 180 days,
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
1675
Incorporated
2877
Injected
3169
Irrigated
1821
Actual PAN Applied
Year l
2050
Notes!
In source ID, S means standard source; U means user defined source.
---- -
425370 Database Version I-04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Sourcc Page 1

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres ofcropland
needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements, and proper
timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the
manure generated by the operation. Animal operations that generate liquid waste and utilize waste storage facilities (lagoons or holding ponds) may apply more or
less waste in any given year than is annually generated by the facility. In order to determine whether the plan adequately utilizes the waste produced by the facility,
the storage capacity table included in this plan should be reviewed to ensure that the design capacity of the storage facility is not exceeded during the planning period.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to balance the
nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
RYE
Unit
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
R,4d
Cotton,
Fed.
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(1bs/A)
N
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutnet
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied-
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
lbs/A
1000
l/A
tons
1000 Pais
texts
2611
4
SS
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
BcrmudagrassHay
*4.0rTons
*4/I-9l30
' 200
0
0
Itri
200
79.7
0.0
247.1
0.0
2611
4
S5
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
Small Grant Oversell
1.01011-3131
50
0
0
irri
50
19.9
0.0
611
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3.4
2.6
Bermuda ass Hay
*4.0*411-9/30
* 200
0
0
Irri
200
79.7
0.0
207.2
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3A
2.6
Small Grain Overseed
1.010/1-3131
50
0
0
Irri
50
19.9
0.0
51.8
0.0
2611
6
SS
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Bcrmudagrass Hay
*4.0*4/1-9l30
* 200
0
0
Irri&
200
79.7
0.0
12T5
0.0
2611
6
S5
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Small Grain Oveaseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3131
50
0
0
Im
50
19.9
0.0
31.9
0.0
2611
7A
55
GEORGEVILLE
1.2
0.9
Bermuda ss Hav
*4,0
Tons
*4/1-9/30
* 200
0
0
Irri
200
79.7
0.0
71.7
0,0
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---------------- ------------------------------------------
529836 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-30-2000 WUT Page 1

Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
I Field
Sours:
I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use.
I Aces
Crop
RYE
RYE
Unit
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
(lb%/A)sr
Comm.
Feat.
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(lbs/A)
N
Applies
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manurc
Applied'
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
lbs/A
1000
al/A
tons
1000 gals
toms
2611
7A
SS
1 GEORGEVILIE
1 1,21
0.91
Small Grain Ovcrsced
I 1.0
Tons
1011-3/31
1 501
01
0
I Im
501
19.91
0.0
' 17.9
0,0
Lagoon Liquids
Total Applied. 1000 gallons
917
Total Produced. 1000 gallons
726
Balance. 1000 !i
91
Manure Solids
Total Applied. tons
0
Total Produced. tons
0
Balance. toms
1
0
Notes: L bi the tract column, symbol —means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol ' means user entered data.
---------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----------------------------------
423370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUT Page 2

The Waste Utilization table shown below lists the fields in this plan that are identified as backup waste application fields. On the basis of estimated nutrient content
and volume of waste generated, these fields are not needed to utilize the nitrogen generated by this animal operation during the plan year shown. However, if the
nutrient content and/or volume of waste exceeds the expected values, waste can be applied to these fields so as to meet the nitrogen requirements of the indicated crop.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the amount of solid and liquid waste that can be applied on each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to balance the
iutrient application amounts with the'realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table (Backup)
Year I
Nitrogen
Comm.
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Solir
PA
Fret.
(lbs/A)
PA
Manure
Manure
Manure
Mann
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
Applied
Applied'
Applied
Applii
Raga
.Applied
Applied
(acre)
(--re)
(Field)
(Field
(lbs/A)
(lbs/A)
1000
Source
Total
Use.
RYE
Applies.
Applies
Trail
Field
I I.D.
Soil Series
Acre
Acres
Crop
RYE
Unit
Period
N
N
I N
Mdhod
IWA
al/A
toms
1000 pals
toms
26121
71
SS
NORFOLK
4.8
3-6
1 Wheat. Grain
*55.0
1 Bushels
911-3/31
' 11
0
Irrig,
1 1101
43.8
0.0
157.8
2021
81
55
NORFOLK
1 7.71
5.7
1 UVheat- Grain
'55.0
1 Bushels
911.3/31
- i 1
0
In
110
43-8
1 0.0
249.9
Lagoon Liquids
Total Appliod. 1000 pallons
408
Manure Solids
Total Applied. tons
Notes: 1. In the trail column, symbol — means 1e:a 4 otherwise, owned 2. Symbol ' means user entered data.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 • WUTB Page 1

The Irrigation Application Factors for each field in this plan are shown in the following table. Infiltration
rate varies with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you must apply at a rate
that will not result in runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be
applied to each field selected to receive wastewater. It also lists the maximum application amount that
each field may receive in any one application event.
Irrigation Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
inches/hour
Application Amount
inches
2611
4
GEORGEVILLE
0.qO .9-}Ij
1.00
2611
5
GEORGEVILLE
Q,40 8:3+
1.00
2611
6
GEORGEVILLE
0,40 �39
1.00
2611
17A
1 GEORGEVILLE
o.qO 4.3e
1.00
2612
17
NORFOLK
O.SD
1.00
2612
8
INORFOLK
0.50
1.00
7'0L
ro117100
° pr of SpFAq
�sposA� �u�pF
--------- ----------------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1,04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 1AF Page 1

The following Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization table provides an estimate of the number of acres needed for
sludge utilization for the indicated accumulation period. These estimates are based on average nitrogen
concentrations for each source, the number of animals in the facility and the plant available nitrogen application rates
shown in the second column.
Lagoon sludge contains nutrients and organic matter remaining after treatment and application of the effluent. At
clean out, this material must be utilized for crop production and applied at agronomic rates. In most cases, the
priority nutrient is nitrogen but other nutrients including phosphorous, copper and zinc can also be limiting. Since
nutrient levels are generally very high, application of sludge must be carefully applied.
Sites must first be evaluated for their suitability for sludge application. Ideally, effluent spray fields should not be
used for sludge application. If this is not possible, care should be taken not to load effluent application fields with
high amounts of copper and zinc so that additional effluent cannot be applied. On sites vulnerable to surface water
moving to streams and lakes, phosphorous is a concern. Soils containing very high phosphorous levels may also be a
concern.
Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization Table
Crop
Maximum
PA-N Rate
lb/ac
Maximum Sludge
Application Rate
1000 al/ac
Minimum Acres
5 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
10 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
15 Years Accumulation
Swine Nursery Lagoon Sludge - Standard
Corn 120 bu
150
13.161
9.67
1 19.341
29.02
Hay 6 ton R.Y.F.
300
2.6,32
4.84
9.67
14.51
Soybean 40 bu
1601
14.041
9.071
18.141
27.20
--------------- •----------------------------------------------- .----------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 ' Database Version 1.0.3 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 . Sludge Page 1 .

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage capacity,
this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated. If available
storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design storage volume
of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval in the waste
utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Available Waste Storage Capacity
Source Name
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid
Design Storage Capacity (Days)
Start Date
1 09/30
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)
1
1
98
1
2
90
1
3
80
1
4
116
1
5
134
1
6
153
1
7
171
1
8
195
1
9
226
l
10
216
1
11
207
1
12
176
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
----- --- ------ ---------- ----- ---- ------ - ---- -- ----
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Capacity Page 1

Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design fold that the producer either
owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly
apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to properly
dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an agreement with a
landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use
of the land for waste application. It is the responsibility of the owner of the
waste production facility to secure an update of the Nutrient Management
Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of application, receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per
year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per acre
per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste will
be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
------ -- ------ - - ------ --- --- -
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 S -- cification Page 1

method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and -a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not be
applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is
applied from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public
right-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied ar agronomic rates in a manner that causes not runoff or drift
from site.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Pagc-2

16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge,. pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when these
-- ----- -- --- ------------ -- ------ - - ----- - - - ------
425370 Database Version 1,04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 3

metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and maintained for
optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis records shall be kept
for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste application records shall
be maintained for a minimum of three years. Waste application records
for all other waste shall be maintained for a minimum of (five years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
-------------------- -- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 4

3tbi
i.
�p�l "'�, •�`ii°`r� "'jam `�" � ! 7 I ��'F 'r' � j�A�' •�,�P" '•
' 0 2.36
40
r TT
�� •m + +t ,f�
WWa�o
1 y�
v �r �Y 14 i�•
.•u

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE
PAGE 1 OF 1
10/9/00
SOIL MAP LEGEND
Legend
I
Map Soil name
symbol I
I
I
AaA (Altavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
AbA (Altavista -Urban Land complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
AuB IAutryville loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Bb IBibb loam, frequently flooded
BnB {Blanton loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Boa ISonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Co (Congaree fine sandy loam, frequently flooded
DOA IDcthan loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slopes
FaB IFaceville loamy sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes
GeB IGeorgeville loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
GeC IGeorgeville loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes .
GeE IGeorgeville loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes
G98 IGeorgeville gravelly loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
GgC IGeorgeville gravelly loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
GgE IGeorgeville gravelly loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes
GoA IGoldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
GrB IGritney sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
GrC IGritney sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
CUB IGeorgeville -Urban Land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
He8 (Helena coarse sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Me IMeggett loam, frequently flooded
NaC INankin sandy loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes
NnB INason loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NnC INason loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
NoA INorfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
NoB 4Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NpB (Norfolk -Wedowee complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NrB INorfolk, Georgeville, and Faceville soils, 2 to 8 percent slopes
NUB INorfolk-Urban Land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Ra IRains fine sandy loam
Rb IRains-Urban Land complex
To ITomotley fine sandy loam
Ud IUdorthents, loamy
Ur (Urban Land
w lwater
weB Iwedowee coarse sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Wec (Wedowee coarse sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
Wh Iwehadkee loam, frequently flooded
WkA Iwickham fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
WoA (Worsham loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

r
Lam'' "'�'G ' _ T�°41 NoB �,`"♦ ' y �'�}Jh`.
;: "",� � :(_ s 'a o „♦ �SG�yr:.. '•Is' �V�, P +1Nh ara. � . ,�v3f
NrCi r 1 r
'z ' y,''Yr�Re,� i,• +, � , fir..+ "� �,}�L �, 4 � _'�. �'
1 N010
Nr8
Ra i t Rr NOBr
Ra Nr8
��* �.�t1 ~ Fab �,. ;r 1 of * NrB 3 �.
\i No6 A. a GeBa ' GOA.
Ra � b + s �' } G 13 '. 1%
GB
NAC aNOR
Ra
� �
NrNr Fa.
P
NOB No8 k 9 ..� • i
r� �+ ��� ,.i 4i � ���Y- ` +. +..,.-� GeB �• 2n
GOAGc
Wo
R S�• w + , r.
rA r F Nr t [? �,r NrB tir 'J� s` sz Nr9
1r,, �c Gc� �:'prx i"• : +i 4 ,- . GeB
E' GeB coy r oA
GeCL , (o♦ C '"ir6 �;t oq. R21� F+ Lom
♦ �- �'�. NOB:. '�� r CrosPis
NOS , j..`.a N
.a
_.��- -"^•�. i o'a a :s r Ty.
w q ( s GeB +
Nr8 ,0o hr8
� tin ' ° " ♦ . -9 C' {`� S�
°e a: n♦ �
C,f GrC
Nr 1N ry NrB ° e
,• j_ w NoB:
NrB AAA,t� .; ec O '1 I921
y rDSa e 1WhV r• c N
Fab Ge8 ;}' i, r '�y ;�. GOE; r7; Nt G Nr6
?a.. �•G NrS(srn8 G

•1
/ r
F
�02 V
Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization
10-27-2000
This plan has been prepared for:
Murray Farms Inc.
Phillip Murray
5010 ridge Rd.
Spring Hope, NC 2 7882
252-278-3076
This plan has been developed by:
J. EDWARD LONG
NRCS / NASH SWCD
ROOM 10 7 A G CENTER DRIVE
NASHVILLE, NC 27856
252-459-4115
feveloper Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal waste
utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the Required
Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with this plan.
Signature (owner) Date
Signature (manager or producer) Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the. U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices adopted
by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By:42 i-�l/0%0 DQ
finical Specialist Signature Date
1�
MAR 2 a 2aaa
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Cover Page 1
RECEIVED ! DENR ! DWQ
Aquifer Protection Section
MAR 13 2009

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
S5
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid waste generated 725,800 gals/year by a
3,800 animal Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid operation. This production
facility has waste storage capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
1675
Incorporated
2877
Injected
3169
Irrigated
1821
Actual PAN Applied
Year 1 2050
Notes:
In source ID, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
------- ----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Source Page 1

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of cropland
needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements, and proper
timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied on each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the
manure generated by the operation. Animal operations that generate liquid waste and utilize waste storage facilities (lagoons or holding ponds) may apply more or
less waste in any given year than is annually generated by the facility. In order to determine whether the plan adequately utilizes the waste produced by the facility,
the storage capacity table included in this plan should be reviewed to ensure that the design capacity of the storage facility is not exceeded during the planning period.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to balance the
nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use,
Ames
Crup
RYE
RYE
Unit
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
Comm-
Fete.
Nutrient
Applied
! l
Res.
(lbs/A)
A
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
IT
N
lbs/A
1000
611A
tons
1000 gals
tons
2611
4
S5
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
Bermuda ss Hari
•4.0
Tons
•411-9/30
200
0
0
lrri .
200
79.7
0.0
247.1
0.0
2611
4
S5
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
Small Grain Ovemeed
1.0
ions
10/1-3/31
50
0
0
Irri .
50
19.9
0-0
61.8
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3.4
2.6
Bermudagrass Hay
`4.0
Tons
•411-9130
. 200
0
0
Irri .
200
79.7
0.0
207.2
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3.4
2.6
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-331
50
0
0
Inn -
50
19.9
0.0
51.8
0.0
26#17A
SS
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Bermuda ass Hay
*4.0
Tons
*411-9/30
: 200
0
0
Ini -
200
79.7
0.0
127.5
0.0
26
SS
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Small Gram Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3131
50
0
D
Img.
50
19.9
0.0
31.9
0.0
26
S5.
GHORGEVILLE
1.2
0.9
Bermuda ass Ha��
"4.0
Tons
'4/1-9/30
' 20Q
0
0
Im
200
79.7
0.0
71.7
0.0
--------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUT Page 1

Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
I Field
Source
I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use.
Acres
C
RYE
RYE
Unit
Applic.
Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
Comm
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(lbs/A)
N
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
lbs/A
1000
!/A
tons
1004 is
tons
2611
7A
SS
GEORGEVILLE
1.2
0.9
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3f31
50
0
0
Irri
50
19.9
1 0.0
17.9
0.0
Lagoon Liquids
Total Appli41000 g2lions
817
Total Produced, 1000 gallons
726
Balance, 1000 gallons
-91
Manure solids
Total Applied, tons
0
Total Produced, tons
0
Balance, tons
1
0
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol —means leased, otherwise. owned_ 2. Symbol' means user entered data.
--------- ----- -- --- ----------------------- ------ ----- -
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUT Page 2

The Waste Utilization table shown below lists the fields in this plan that are identified as backup waste application fields. On the basis of estimated nutrient content
and volume of waste generated, these fields are not needed to utilize the nitrogen generated by this animal operation during the plan year shown. However, if the
nutrient content and/or volume of waste exceeds the expected values, waste can be applied to these fields so as to meet the nitrogen requirements of the indicated crop.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the amount of solid and liquid waste that can be applied on each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to balance the
nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table (Backup)
Year 1
Nitrogen
Comm.
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Soidc
PA
Feat.
(lbs/A)
PA
Manure
Manure
Manure
Manu
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
Applied
Applied
Applied
Applic
Req`d
Applied
Applied
(acre)
(acre)
(Field)
(Fielc
(1bs/A)
(lbs1A)
1000
SOUrCe
Total
Use.
RYE
Applic.
Applic.
Tract
I Field
I I.D.
Soil Series
Acre
I Acres
Crop
RYE
I Unit
Period
N
N
N
Method
Ibs/A
l/A
tons
1000 gals
tons
26121
71
85
NORFOLK
1 4.81
3.6
1 wheat, Grain
*55.0
1 Bushels
911-3/31
* 11
0
Irri .
1 1101
43.9
0.0
157.8
2612
8
SS
j NORFOLK
7.71
5.7
1 Wheat, Grain
*55.0
1 Bushels
9/1-3/31
* Ill
0
Irrig.
I liol
43.8
0.0
249.9
Lagoon Liquids
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
408
Manure Solids
iTotal ApTlied, ions
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol —means leased, otherwise, owned. 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUTB Page 1

The Irrigation Application Factors for each field in this plan are shown in the following table. Infiltration
rate varies with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you must apply at a rate
that will not result in runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be
applied to each field selected to receive wastewater. It also lists the maximum application amount that
each field may receive in any one application event.
Irrigation Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
indtes/hour
Application Amount
inches
2611
4
GEORGEVILLE
0.q0 -938
1.00
2611
5
GEORGEVILLE
0.40
1.00
2611
6
GEORGEVILLE
0. y0 a3&
1.00
2611
17A
I GEORGEVILLE
-
1.00
2612
7
NORFOLK
0.50
1.00
2612
%
NORFOLK
0.50
1.00
-TrL
ral�-��00
r o= SPRAq E
Dvwflb (I
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 1AF Page 1

The following Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization table provides an estimate of number of acres needed for
sludge utilization for the indicated accumulation period. These estimates are based on average nitrogen
concentrations for each source, the number of animals in the facility and the plant available nitrogen application rates
shown in the second column.
Lagoon sludge contains nutrients and organic matter remaining after treatment and application of the effluent. At
clean out, this material must be utilized for crop production and applied at agronomic rates. In most cases, the
priority nutrient is nitrogen but other nutrients including phosphorous, copper and zinc can also be limiting. Since
nutrient levels are generally very high, application of sludge must be carefully applied.
Sites must first be evaluated for their suitability for sludge application. Ideally, effluent spray fields should not be
used for sludge application. If this is not possible, care should be taken not to load effluent application fields with
high amounts of copper and zinc so that additional effluent cannot be applied. On sites vulnerable to surface water
moving to streams and lakes, phosphorous is a concern. Soils containing very high phosphorous levels may also be a
concern.
Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization Table
Crop
Maximum
PA-N Rate
lb/ac
Maximum Sludge
Application Rate
1000 allac
Minimum Acres
5 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
10 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
15 Years Accumulation
Swine Nursery Lagoon Sludge - Standard
Com 120 bu
150
13.16
9.67
19.34
29.02
Hay 6 ton R.Y.@.
300
26.32
4.84
9.67
14.51
Soybean 40 bu
160 1
14.041
9.071
18.I4
27.20
-------------------- -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Sludge Page 1

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage capacity,
this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated. If available
storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design storage volume
of the structure. Either of these situations .indicates that the planned application interval in the waste
utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Available Waste Storage Capacity
Source Name
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid
Design Storage Capacity (Days)
Start Date
09/30
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Capacity (Days)
1
1
98
1
2
90
1
3
80
1
4
116
1
5
134
1
6
153
1
7
171
1
8
195
1
9
226
1
10
216
1
11
207
1 1
12
176
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
--------------------------- I----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed; 10-27-2000 Capacity Page 1

Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. 'There must be documentation in the design fold that the producer either
owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly
apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to properly
dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an agreement with a
landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use
of the land for waste application. It is the responsibility of the owner of the
waste production facility to secure an update of the Nutrient Management
Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of application, receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per
year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per acre
per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste will
be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
------------------------------------------------- ----------------- ------------------- -
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Pa e 1

method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
S. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not be
applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is
applied from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public
right-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied ar agronomic rates in a manner that causes not runoff or drift
from site.
--------
-----------------------------
------
----------------------------------------
-------------------
-------------------
--
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 2

16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when these
- ----- --- ------------ -- ------ -- -- - - -
425370 Database Version 1,04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 3

metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and maintained for
optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis records shall be kept
for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste application records shall
be maintained for a minimum of three years. Waste application records
for all other waste shall be maintained for a minimum of five years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
-----------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------------
---
425370 Database Version 1,04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 4

ra'ra.r�J' S {
�' E1`t' P• 4 �' .•fiAy S +. �� iis` , hyy y 4� .hY t ,� , in
f T .% a yr ♦ llf r �4.r
91..; y:+..� ,� � `.9,, �• L� ,'fir .�`... �, °>�?+ai •�r' �� 7n. � i�,?: s' � , ,lrt �
r �� � :t'.- -"�`a tJ '� J��YT�r y 'kh•.� rA .fl +.� i ! ��. . � y
Is
ivic
#ice,:
s tr}N
E t45 x c tit t�' ,. � t`r' . k• ; y,w ,.S v irk"'�':�a, 1
Ile
4w"�,
41
' r . �� x4 Y �, ^� i� �, Try . • �ti
IWr
A
NR
�y� IA�� � � br�rh!rkliy,�'+•yti"'�'� � ''.�s+l�,i.kw� k' . }fir;"' �',
iv
'�'+n F�Lr 11� ^7sM�\'�l``�C�� � 1L „� a Y- •r' j• .y J' °v7 � _ 'q'1
Anil-
�n aAtX` ,e
• � �sS�eSr���.4. � - {;4'w ���

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
uDecember 6, 2000
KEITH & PHILLIP MURRAY
MURRAY FARMS INC
5010 RIDGE RD
SPRING HOPE NC 27882
ATTN: KEITH & PHILLIP MURRAY
4 • •
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
Subject: Certificate of Coverage No.(AWS640071—
UNMrray_Earms_Inc--
Swine Waste Collection, Treatment,
Storage and Application System
(Nash County ';
Dear Keith & Phillip Murray:
In accordance with your application received on October 31, 2000, we are forwarding this
Certificate of Coverage (COC) issued to Keith & Phillip Murray, authorizing the operation of the subject
animal waste collection, treatment, storage and land application system in accordance with General
Permit AWGI00000. This approval shall consist of the operation of this system including, but not
limited to, the management of animal waste from the Murray Farms Inc, located in Nash County, with
an animal capacity of no greater than 3806 Wean to Feeder swine and the application to land as specified
in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP).
The COC shall be effective from the date of issuance until April 30, 2003. Pursuant to this COC,
you are authorized and required to operate the system in conformity with the conditions and limitations
as specified in the General Permit, the facility's CAWMP, and this COC, with no discharge of wastes to
surface waters. An adequate system for collecting and maintaining the required monitoring data and
operational information must be established for this farm. Any increase in waste production greater than
the certified design capacity or increase in number of stocked animals above the number authorized by
this COC will require a modification to the CAWMP and this COC and shall be completed prior to
actual increase in either wastewater flow or number of animals.
Please be advised that any violation of the terms and conditions specified in this COC, the General
Permit or the CAWMP may result in the revocation of this COC, or penalties in accordance with NCGS
143-215.6A through 143-215.6C including civil penalties, criminal penalties, and injunctive relief.
Upon notification by the Division of this COC's expiration, you shall apply for its renewal. This
request shall be made within 30 days of notification by the Division.
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Certificate of Coverage AWS640071
Murray Farms Inc
Page 2
This COC is not automatically transferable. A name/ownership change application must be
submitted to the DWQ prior to a name change or change in ownership.
If any parts, requirements, or limitations contained in this COC are unacceptable, you have the
right to apply for an individual non -discharge permit by contacting the engineer listed below for
information on this process. Unless such a request is made within 30 days, this COC shall be final and
binding.
The subject farm is located in the Raleigh Regional Office. The Regional Office Water Quality
Staff may be reached at [phone]. If you need additional information concerning this COC or the
General Permit, please contact Theresa Nartea at [phone] ext. 375.
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens
cc: (Certificate of Coverage only for all cc's)
Goldsboro Hog Farms — Mr. George Pettus, P. O. Box 10009, Goldsboro, NC 27532
Nash County Health Department
Raleigh Regional Office, Water Quality Section
Nash County Soil and Water Conservation District
Permit File
NDPU Files

1 1�
Slate of North Carolina
DeparlmeW of Environment and Natut-al Resources
Division of Water Quality
Non -Discharge Permit Application Fol>rc1 Nrr����'+�����
(771IS FOR,11 r AY 13C P110T0(-'(11 ,,, 1:,(1R (1,-.: is :lN 0
General Permit - Existing Animal Waste Opgr 3 1ns
UUT 2000
The following questions have been completed utilizing, infoia-111:1111
11 ile -,%ill the Division. Please
review the information for completeness and make anIra
question has not been completed by the Division, please complete .�� g�rtReik>II! nyl�o not leave
any question umtttswered.
I. GENERAL INFORMATION:
1.1 17acility Name: Murray farms Inc
1.2 Print Land Owner's name: Keith &-, Phillip Murry
1.3 rNlailing address: 5WO Ridge Rd
City, State: 5)ritl_ ig IIo>e NC
Telephone Number (include area code): 919-478-3076
1.4 County where rkility is located: Nash
Z.ip: 27882
1.5 Facility Isocalion (Directions from nearest major highvvay. Pleasc include Sli numbers for state roads. Please include a
copy Ora county road map wilh the location of Ilre farm ideulified): if �/ J"(� ,/j G�U. c�� 5 /�/ y� A..'ve-
I.6 Print Farm ManaYger's name (if different from I.,and Owner):
1.7 Lessee's / integrator's name (inapplicable; please circle which type is listed): Goldsboro I long Farms
1.8 Date Facility Originally Began Operation:
1.9 Date(s) of Facility Fxpansion(s) (inapplicable):
2. OI'ERA-i'ION INFORMATION:
2.1 Facility No.: —64 (coun(y nlrtnher): _ 7l (facility number).
2.2 Operation Description; Swine operalimi —
—Wean to Feeder
3800- Certified Design Capacity
Is the above information correct'? EOyes; nee. 11-no, correct below using the desir:n capacity of the facility
rlie "No. of Animals" should he the maxrmum num ben lIr ++hick the ++astc m;rn,i��enrert! structures +vcrc designed.
'hype of Swine No. of'Animais i)�te of i'ouhry No. of Aninrals hype ul'Cattle 'No. of Animals
0 Wean to Feeder 0 Layer 0 Dairy
0 Feeder to Finish 0 Non -Laver 0 13eel'
0 Farrow to Wean (11 sow) _ 0---
0 Darrow to Feeder (4 swx) _
0 Farrow to Finish (4 sow)
Other Type of Livestock on the fartn: No. of ArtimaK
FORM: AWO-G-E 7/7/99 Page i of 4 64 - 71

3.
2.3 Acreage cleared and avajjable for application (excluding all required buffers and areas not covered by the application
� y.s
system): -, , ; Required Acreage (as listed in the A WMP): - 0.+ Y . Z
2.4 Number of lagoons/ storage ponds (circle which is applicable): t
2.5 Are subsurface drains present within 100' of any of the application fields? YES or NU (please circle one)
2.6 Are subsurface drains present in the vicinity or under the lagoon(s)? YES or NO (please circle one)
2.7 Does this facility meet all applicable siting requirements? (Swine Farm Siting Act, NRCS Standards, etc.) (Swine Only)
Y + S or NO (please circle one)
What was the date that this facility's swine houses and lagoon were sited? -- (, l3 -/`? Y
What was the date that this Facility's land application areas were sited? �, 13 dI,� q
REQUIRED ITEMS CHECKLIST
Please indicate that you have included the following required items by signing your initials in the space provided next to each
item.
Applicants Initials
3.1 One completed and signed original and one copy of the application for General Permit - Animal
Waste Operations; l!"T .
3.2 Two copies of a general location reap indicating the location of the animal waste facilities and
field locations where animal waste is land applied:
3.3 Two copies of the entire Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP). If the facility
does not have a CA WMP, it must be completed prior to submittal of a general permit
application for animal waste operations.
The CA WMP must include the following components. Some of these cnrnpvnerrls Ilia), not
herve been required at the time the focilily was cerlifted but shrrrrld be added to the
CA 11'AlP for• permitling purposes:
3.3.1 The Waste Utilization Plan (WUP) must include the amount of Plant Available
Nitrogen (PAN) produced and utilized by the facility.
3.3.2 The method by which waste is applied to the disposal fields (e.g. irrigation,
injection, etc.)
3.3.3 A reap of every Field used for land application.
3.3.4 "File soil series present on every land application field.
3.3.5 The crops grown on every land application Field.
3.3.6 The Realistic Yield Expectation (RYE) for every crop shown in the WUP.
3.3.7 The PAN applied to every land application field.
3.3.8 The waste application windows for every crop utilized in the WUP.
3.3.9 The required NRCS Standard specifications.
3.3.10 A site schematic.
3.3.1 1 Emergency Action Plan.
3.3.12 Insect Control Checklist with chosen best management practices noted.
3.3,13 Odor Control Checklist with chosen best management practices noted.
3.3.14 Mortality Control Checklist with the selected method noted.
3.3.15 Lagoon/storage pond capacity documentation ((Iesign, calculations, etc.). Please be
sure to include any site evaluations, wetland determinations, or hazard classifications
that may be applicable to your facility.
3.3.16 Operation and Maintenarke [fan.
If your CA WMP includes any components not shown on this list, please include the
additional components with your submittal.
?/h-
FORM: AWO-G-E 7/7/99 Page 2 of 4 64 - 71

Facility Number: 64 - 71
Facility Name: Murray Farms Inc
4. APPLICANT'S CERTIFICATION:
I, (Land Owner's name listed in question 1.2), attest that
this application for �22Ye C_._1.�� (Facility name listed in question 1.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application
package will be returned to me as incomplete.
Signature _ /?�?��_���.�� f?� Date t y od
5. MANAGER'S CERTIf iCATION: (comploc only if different from the Lnrld Owner)
(Manager's name listed in question 1.6), attest that this
application for (Facility name listed in question 1.1)
has been reviewed by me and is accurate and complete to thevest of my knowledge. I unc erstand that if all required parts of this
application are not completed and that if all required supporting information and attachments are not included, this application
package will be returned as incomplete.
Signature
Date
,nm- COMPLETED APPLICATION PACKAGE, INCLUDING ALI., SUPPORTING INFORMATION AND MATERIALS,
SHOULD M SLNI" 1'0'iHE FOLLOWING ADDRESS:
NORTH CAROLINA UIVISION OF WATER QUALITY
WATER QUALITY SECTION
NON -DISCHARGE PERMITTING UNIT
1617 MAIL SERVICE CENTER
RALEiGH, NORT11 CAROLINA 27699-1617
TELEPHONE NUM13EII: [phone]
FAX NUMBER: [phone]
FORM: AWO-G-E 7/7/99 Page 3 of 4 64 - 71

c
ANIMAL WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN CERTIFICATION FOR NNW OR EXPANDED FEEDLOTS
Please return the completed fora to the Division of Environmental Management at
the address on the reverse side. -of this fora. �� 3G 7�
Name of farm Please print) :_Y (Atr-aV {`a.rm S_
Address: Rom c _ '
5� r4 Phone No.:_o 7 6
Cou)aty,,:AlArA
Farm location: Latitude :ind Longitude:_ ,2 Lg' /7i+ fg_ (required). Also,
please attach a copy of a county road map with locatidentified.
Type of operation ( swine, layer, dairy, etc.): 5 I n c �/ i.J e o ft h n 4 #-o -Fcr e r
Design capacity (number of animals): 3 6 00
Average size of operation_(12 month population avg.): 39 00
Average acreage needed for land application of waste (acres): !0�
a CnaaaobamaagamaaaaaasamaamaaaaasasaaaaasaammmssasaamaapaaaapsspaaaamaQaapppaaoa
TeahaicaZ SpecialiAt Certification - _
As a technical specialist designated by the North Carolina Soil and Water
Conservation Commission pursuant to ISA NCAC 6F .0005, I certify that the new or
expanded animal waste management system as installed for the farm named above
has an animal waste management plan that meets the design, construction,
operation and maintenance standards and specifications of the Division of
Environmental Management and the USDA -Soil Conservation Service and/or the North
Carolina Soil and Water Conservation Commission pursuant to 15A NCAC 2H.0217 and
15A NCAC 6F .0001-.0005. The following elements and their corresponding minimum
criteria -hare-been verified by me or other designated technical specialists and
are included in the plan as applicable: minimum separations (buffers); liners or
equivalent for lagoons or waste storage ponds; waste storage capacity; adequate
quantity and amount of land for waste utilization (or use of third party); access
or ownership of proper waste application equipment; schedule for timing of
applications; application rates; loading rates; and the.eontrol of the discharge
of pollutants from storm_ water runoff events less severe than the 25-yeas, 24.7hour
storm.
Name of Technical specialist (Please Print) : he/Xoo AaAe r- "
Affiliation: - 1V -Tct 4L RfSFkV1CF
Address (Agency) : vc 140L ;o Phone No. R
Nn,A�L.lk C 279SC
Signature: Date _/9,3/ `t.S _ -
p a R a a ¢ta a m a a a= m a s s a= a a m m m a a a a a s a m a a m a m m a a a a a m m a a m a m a m a m a m m a s a r,m m a a m n a m
Owner/Manager AQreamAnt
I (we) understand the operation and maintenance procedures established in the
approved animal waste management plan for the farm named above and will implement
these procedures. I (we) know, that any additional expansion. to the existing
design capacity of the waste treatment and storage system or construction of new
facilities will require'a new certification to be submitted to the Division of
Environmental Management before the new animals are stocked. I (We) also
understand that there must be no discharge of animal waste from this system"to
surface waters of the state either through a man-made conveyance or through
runoff from a storm event less severe than the 25=year, 24-hour storm. The
approved plan will be filed at the farm and at the office of the local Soil and
Water Conservation District. ��I
Name of Land Owner (Please Print) : //Iu✓'i/�`7 i9r'7A rye- -
Signature: Date:
/a�sr-Ss—
Name of Manager, if different from owner (Please print):
Signature: Date:
Nate: A change in land ownership requires notification or a new certification
(if the approved plan is changed) to be submitted to the Division of
Environmental Management within 60 days of a title transfer.
DEM USE ONLY:ACNEW#

}ASb Sol— 1423
lilf
L,
UziCrauoa1414
lim
1414 v LOW
1111 1 ! V. If Iz 1
Sol Crossroad. J UQQ
In?
15
Peachirto
LAU
WOO LIN
Ch. in Hill U92
V JA
<; "it
fc, U21 1411
chp.
Im lu jail ..q
199!
NASHVILL ilu
-E Ips
1292 C-.rwd. tcA
"N e, ,s I.7
FA
.9 fill •a
Jim Ill[N-1 3 ill1. M�.y.r 13
' Tjv rig"
SPRING HOPEIgg' F Im
jmn
LLU q
11 ILL im
I.A
Lill J19
I
, I., \ tial
laull . I - — _ - 1 14 11 !4L
C4
Wii.
TA Res
hC).k I I
UL AIR
17 d .4
1296 2 ti
I /I ..
In I , fr_4.
­­_.$,� . . ? Ila
I UZ (122
L.W
C, ­adl I
231, 561
,
.6
ls
:-Gold Val y 1217 Vlo A Z ACr�md, 8 t
•In It 192* b
Sandy .1 A
Ilu A 5 Cr� sat
1141 LUZ CTcmy Dads 1211
Lou 1114
M­d-�. P VU
F-6, 17
qrm.,—d,
Lat ul 1.71 V-1
4 ig A j 1, 1 6
A A
A
I I b Lm 51-nboFmTAS 11-A 1111) 0,
P933 I u I Ch.
Lm
LIA? F4. loll v I
LPG I TTj
tu Crm3rmd2
1297
ZZ, Lm LI I
1 IM
Lim 1.1 LTU .1743 �x
mu WmAl—d LW
IA Lw tru C­vxii. ,
LUI
Lift
J11211
231
.2 0.k. k, )fit
Im "Lila Im " , 19A1 14e,
villog. -low
Lila A
's
tin 1? .1 ,ti , . 1 141 UI
_UQ?
Lm 4 b
IQ I o
A High
Imu stany Hid 3 Lux Crud`
1114
I ,
I aft Uft 1173 llu
I v2! U22 Ull
A LAJL"
C,-.—d.
A IPA;
11
.3 t.
lift ,1 2 1241
ik fat).
nu lag 1101 `4 NOTE, n 'MAP INCLVDES ONLY STATE
tool u" LUA 2 lull OR IMPORTANT NON-SYSTE
7 MILEAGE NOT SHOWN ChP,
e CAMP Ini ROADS SHOWN AS OF JA
CHAIIL
LLQ1
uu
an
LLLL
LLU

THIS DESIGN IS FOR A SINGLE STAGE LAGOON
CLIENTS NAME Murray Farms
COUNTY
Nash County
TODAYS
DATE ..__�.�.-�=w.==---- __ _ _==W==---- .
June 30,
1994
DISTANCE TO NEAREST NONFARM RESIDENCE =>
1200
FEET
NUMBER
OF PIGS WEANL I NG TO FEEDER =====>
3800
NUMBER
OF PIGS FEEDER TO FINISH
NUMBER
OF SOWS FARROW TO WEANL I NG=___--.
0
NUMBER
OF SOWS FARROW TO FEEDER =_-'- -
0
NUMBER
OF SOWS FARROW TO FINISH
C)
DEGREE
OF ODOR CONTROL ___._ ---- -_ ---- ----.
1.0
(minimum 1.0 cu. ft. per lb SSLW)
(maximum 3.0 cu, ft. per lb SSLW)
NUMBER
OF YEARS OF SLUDGE ACCUMULATION :-`
5.0
YEARS
TOP LENGTH AT NORMAL WATER LEVEL ==== 233.0 FEET
TOP WIDTH AT NORMAL WATER LEVEL =====- . 133.0 FEET
NORMAL WATER LEVEL_ ELEVATION ==========> 52.4 FEET
SEASONAL HIGH WATER TABLE ELEVATION 42.0 FEET
LAGOON BOTTOM ELEVATION 46.0 FEET
Depth of Permanent Water 6.4 feet
(minimum depth without sludge = 6 feet)
(minimum depth with sludge = 8 feet)
SIDE SLOPES 2 . 5 : 1
Permanent Volume Required 159600.0 cubic feet
Permanent Volume Provided 163035.7 cubic feet
ADDITIONAL. DRAINAGE AREA IN SQUARE:. FEET::, 0 SQUARE FEET
(i.e. pumpout pond & ether outside area)
LENGTH OF PUMPING CYCLE -----> 180 DAYS
GALLONS OF FRESH WATER ADDED DAILY =_ - G GALLONS
EXCESS RAINFALL ABOVE EVAPORATION 12.3 INCHES
25YR124HR STORM RAINFf-i1....L_---__.___._-____.._-__- 6.6 INCHES'
FREEBOARD1.0 FEET
ESTIMATED 'LOP OF DAM ELEVATION ===---- . 56.2 FEET
Temporary Storage Volume 98168.2 cubic feet
Top of
Dam Elevation =
56.2
feet
Inside
Dimensions of Lagoon at
Top of Dam
Length
- 252.0 feet Width ='
152,0
feet
Begin
Pumping Elevation =
55.2
feet
Stop Pumping Elevation --
52.4
feet
Volume
3"o Be Pumped =
67101.0
cubic feet

1. STEADY STATE LIVE WEIGHT
3900 head
weanl ing to
feeder
x 30 lbs. -
114000
lbs
0 head
feeder
to
finishing
x 135 lbs. -
0
lbs
0 saws
farrow
to
weanling
x 433 lbs. -
U
lbs
0 saws
farrow
to
feeder x
522 lbs. =
0
lbs
it sows
farrow
-to
finish', x
1417 lbs. -
0
lbs
TOTAL STEADY STATE LIVE WEIGH`f (SSLW) 114000 lbs
2. SLUDGE ACCUMULATION
Sludge accumulates at the rate of.0.080 cu. ft. per year
per pound of STEADY STATE LIVE WEIGHT in swine.
Years of sludge accumulation in design? 5.0
Sludge Volume =
45600.0 cubi.c.. feat
3. REQUIRED LIQUID VOLUME OF LAGOON
Design for 1.0 cu. ft. per pound SSLW
Total Volume = (SSLW * Design factor) -+- Sludge Volume
Total Volume = 159600.0 cubic feet
4. NORMAL LAGOON LIQUID LEVEL
Maintain normal lagoon liquid level at elevation 52.4 feet
Construct lagoon bottom elevation 46.0 feet
Lagoon size for normal lagoon liquid volume using prismodial formula
SS/END 1 SS/END2 .SAS/SIDE 1 SS/ S I DES? DEPTH
2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 6.4
AREA OF TOES
LENGTH *WIDTH =
233.0 133.0
AREA OF BOTTOM
Lb * Wb
201.0 101.0
AREA OF MIDSECTION
(Lm * Wm)
217.0 117.0
30999.0 (AREA OF TOP)
20301.0 (AREA OF BOTTOM)
25399.0 (AREA OF MIDSECTION)
CU. YD. = [AREA TOP + (4*ARF_A MIDSECTION) + AREA.BGTTOM3 * DEPTH/6
30989.0 101556.0 20301.0 1.067
VOLUME OF LAGOON AT NORMAL LAGOON LIQUID LEVEL 163035.7•CU. FT.
VOLUME NEEDED = 159600.0 CU . FT.
THE SURFACE DIMENSIONS OF THE LAGOON! AT NORMAL LIQUID LEVEL
ARE 233.0 FEET LONG BY 133.0 FEET WIDE
IS

5. DIKE
Place spoil as a continuous dike to elevation 56.2 feet.
6. TEMPORARY STORAGE REQUIRED
DRAINAGE AREA:
Lagoon ( top of dike)
Length Width
252. t-1 152. o 38304 square feet
Additional Drainage Area
0 square feet
TOTAL DA 38304 square feet
Pumping cycle to be 180 days.
6A. Volume of waste: produced
Volume = 114000 SSLW * 0.0101401 gallon/lb. SSLW/day �
in the pumping cycle / 7.49 gallons per cu. ft.
Volume = 27839.4 cubic feet
6D. Volume of wash water
This is the amount of fresh water used for washing floors or
volume fresh water used for a flush system. Flush systems that
recycle the lagoon water are accounted for in 6A.
Volume = 0 gallons/clay * 1.80 days in the pumping
cycle divided by 7.48 gallons per cu. ft.
Volume = 0.0 cubic feet
6C. Volume of rainfall in excess of evaporation
Use period of time when rainfall exceeds evaporation by largest
amount.
Excess rainfall (difference) = 12.3 inches
Volume = 12.3 inches * DA / 12 inches per foot
Volume = 39261.6 cubic feet
6D. Volume of 25 year - 24 hour- storm
Volume = 6.6 inches * DA / 12 inches per foot
Volume == 21067.2 cubic feet
TOTAL REQUIRED TEMPORARY STORAGE
6A.
27839.4
cubic
feet
6B.
0.0
cubic
feet
6C.
39261.6
cubic
feet
6D.
21067.2
cubic
feet
TOTAL TEMPORARY STORAGE 82168.2 cubic feet

7. DEPTH OF STORAGE REDUIRED (ABOVE NORMAL LIQUID ELEVATION OF LAGOON)
Depth required = Volume of temporary storage divided by surface
area of lagoon.
Depth required =
Depth required
88169 cu.ft. / 30989 =q. ft.
2.8 feet
Normal lagoon liquid elevation = 52.4 feet
Depth required 2.9 -feet
Freeboard - 1.0 feet
Top of Dam 56.2 feet
THE DIMENSIONS OF THE INSIDE EDGE OF THE DAM AT ELEVATION
ARE 252.0 FEET BY 152.0 FEET
8. SET BEGIN PUMPING ELEVATION
PUMPED STORAGE VOLUME
6A.
6B.
6C.
27839.4 cubic feet
0.0 cubic feet
39261.6 cubic feet
56.2
TOTAL
PUMPED VOLUME =
67101.0
cubic feet
Depth
required = Volume of
pumped
storage divided by surface
area of lagoon at
normal
water- level.
Death
required =
67101.0
cu.ft. / 30989.0 sq. ft.
Depth
required =
2.2
feet
DESIGNED BY: S. Baker APPROVED BY:Baker
DATE: 6-30-94 DATE: 6--3{ ►---94
9

TYPICAL CAL SE( T 1 (J,V OF LOGOOPI EI P(V-11::TtENT S I NL .: STAGE
f f W T TI I H11 OU T8.1 nr UPO i N(WE
F
I -Top Width
Sc4tled top of dam: 5�•2
.f1
E::pPc�ed h.i ghv►�a ker:----_.�.- /
Normal wa ter s 5---q es+6¢ F!�r ` t�
C0115trt_1Ct top Of dam
Natural c7r r.,i_ir+r.l eI ev. _ %� SM__
--_--_____________._.',----ct-nf f meal �,k _____.� i
^�-- - De th determihd b
5CS do site Y
Depends an ecl+_+i F�+r+ra+it:
Smttled top of
d,-Am elev. Ste
TYPICAL SECTION OF LAGOON F='OND SINGLE STAGE
(W111I NO OUTSIDE AFIEA)
N-=4.ur- )I or-et.inc.l rl r=v.
Bent
support— Minimum cl-r3 _h of +•ref=-r-
to be mnintai.r�md.--� 6'----
9b 4 $Yp
Iran c�F sI+«+cige nirv._
rl Udge aCCum1S1 at i r-r1
Bottom elev. _
Lagoon size: Length_-Z-50Q_ _- ulidth_J;j_u ('.t.+.Ydq. vxcavated__5z//__
BENCH MARL' DESCR I F'T I OFJ : cv _ -�� �Z /y'En�n� ors• ,
El w? v a t i On s 5v r d
GENERAL. INFORMATION
HAZARD CL.ASSs
*DENT SUPPORT: The bent: support
will be made of CCA salt treated
t X a post.
NOTE: If construc t.i on i s riot
started within one year, this
plan is not valid Until re--
evaluation of flood plain, -fear
sAf6ty hazard in mane.
LAGOON FOR ANIMAL WASTt
(SINGLE STAGE)
17lurrA Isar 5 FAflM
-!� - CI]UMTY
_ ,.,.. W C , _. -a STATE
U. S. DEPARTMENT Or AGRICULTURE
SOIL CONSERVATION SEWift
T)FSIGPIED
Ilr'F'C"if]VEb BYs
TITLE=
I)0TE:-_�� �`I_�_______.-_-___ ___
0

11/1/93
SWIG WASTE HAMGEMENT SYSTEM
OPERATION AND I nRIANCE PLAN
Producer: Murray_Farms
The purpose of this plan is to provide guidelines for carrying out
the routine operation and maintenance work needed to keep this swine
waste management system functioning as planned. Routine maintenance
is considered to be normal good care of the system. Good
maintenance adds to beauty, usefulness, and permanence.
A., Maintenance
The routine maintenance of the lagoon involves the following:
1. Maintenance.of a vegetative cover on the embankment top and
side slopes: Kentcky 31 Tall Fescue and Bahiagrass
is being established on these areas. Beginning in 1994_ and
each year thereafter, the embankment should be fertilized
with 800 pounds of 10-10-10 per acre to maintain a vigorous
stand.
2. Control of brush and trees on the embankment. This may be
done by mowing, spraying, or chopping, or a combination of
all three. This will need to be done at least once each
year and possibly twice in years favorable to heavy growth
of vegetation.
Maintenance inspections of the lagoon should be made during the
initial filling of the lagoon and at least annually. Items to
be checked should include, as a minimum, the following:
1. Waste inlet Pipes, Overflow Pipes
a. condition of pipes
(1) separation of joints
(2) cracks or breaks
2. Pool Area
a. undesirable vegetative -growth
b. floating or lodged debris
3. Embankment
a. settlement, cracking or "jug" holes
b. side slope stability - slumps or bulges
C. erosion and rodent damage
4. Transfer Pump
�s

1
11./f/93
swim VAM SYSTEM
OPERATION APO LuTENAMM PI.JkK
B. Operation
Your animal waste management facility was designed for a total
of _3800 sows/animals (.,_,-,,.71bs. to _301bs._). The lagoon
contains both permanent and temporary storage. The permanent
storage is not to be pumped in order to ensure that anaerobic
action will occur. The design includes permanent storage of one
cubic foot per pound of steady state live weight.
The temporary storage portion of the lagoon includes capacity
for the volume of waste produced over 180 days, the amount of
rainfall in a 25 year 24 hour storm event, and rainfall in
excess of evaporation. Your facility is designed for 180 days
of temporary storage; therefore, it will need to be pumped
every six months. Begin pump -out of the lagoon when fluid level
reaches elevation _55.2— as marked by permanent markers. Stop
pump -out when the fluid level reaches elevation _52.4
The attached waste management plan should be followed. This
plan recommends sampling and testing of waste (see -Attachment B)
before land application. The waste material should be analyzed
before each application cycle to determine its nutrient content.
A soil test of the area of application should be made annually
to insure the waste is applied as reasonably and practically
possible to recommended rates.
It is strongly recommended that the treatment lagoon be pre-'
charged to 1/2 its capacity to prevent excessive odors during
start-up. Pre -charging reduces the concentration of the initial
waste entering the lagoon thereby reducing odors. Solids should
be covered with effluent at all times.
The Clean Water Act of 1977 prohibits the discharge of
pollutants into waters of the United States. The Department of
Environment, Health, and Natural Resources, Division of
Environmental Management, has the responsibility for enforcing
this law.
/6

Insect Control Checklist for Animal Operations
Source Cause BMPs to Control Insects Site Specific Practices
sufficiently to remove accumulated solids
/gutters as designed.
Q Remove bridging of accumulated solids at
from
discharge
Lagoons and Pits Crusted Solids Maintain lagoons, -settling basins and pits where
pest breeding is apparent to minimize the
crusting of solids to a depth of no more than 6 -
8 inches over more than 30% of surface.
Excessive Vegetative • Decaying vegetation Maintain vegetative control along banks of
Growth lagoons and other impoundments to prevent
accumulation of decaying vegetative matter
along watees edge on impoundment's perimeter.
Dry Systems
Feeders • Feed Spillage 0 Design, operate and maintain feed systems (e.g.,
bunkers and troughs) to minimize the
accumulation of decaying wastage.
Cl Clean up spillage on a routine basis (e.g., 7 -10
day interval during summer; 15-30 day interval
during winter).
Feed Storage Accumulations of feed residues CI Reduce moisture accumulation within and
around immediate perimeter of feed storage
areas by insuring. drainage away from site
and/or providing adequate containment (e.g.,
covered bin for brewer's grain and similar high
moisture grain products).
O Inspect for and remove or break up accumulated
solids in filter strips around feed storage as
needed.
AMIC - November 11, 1996, Page 1

Source Cause
Animal Holding Areas . Accumulations of animal wastes 13
and feed wastage
17
Dry Manure Handling • Accumulations of animal wastes
Systems
O
O
BMPs to Control Insects. _ Site Specific Practices
Eliminate low areas that trap moisture along — -
fences and other locations where waste
accumulates and disturbance by animals is
minimal.
Maintain fence rows and filter strips around
animal holding areas to minimize
accumulations of wastes (i.e., inspect for and
remove or break up accumulated solids as
needed).
Remove spillage on a routine basis (e.g., 7 - 10
day interval during summer, 15-30 day interval
during winter) where manure is loaded for land
application or disposal.
Provide for adequate drainage around manure
stockpiles. _
Inspect for and remove or break up accumulated
wastes in filter strips around stockpiles and
manure handling areas as needed.
For more information contact the Cooperative Extension Service, Department of Entomology, Box 7613, North Carolina State University,
Raleigh, NC, 27695-7613. -
AM IC -November 11, 1996, Page 2

Swine Farm Waste Management Odor Control Checklist
Saur'cc Cause - - ]IMPS to.Mirlilnizc odor - — - - Site stcccific Practices - --
Fauu�t�ad Swine production Vegetative or wooded buffers;
M/ Recommended best management practices;
f/ Good judgment and common sense
Animal body surfaces Dirty nlanurc-covered animals 0 Dry floors
Flour surfaces Wet nlanurc-covered floors Slotted floors;
M Waterers located over slotted floors;
© /l:eeders at high end of solid floors;
B Scrape manure buildup from floors;
O Underfloor ventilation for drying
M'Ilulre cullectiurl pus • Urine; r;y Frequent manure removal by flush, pit recharge:,
• Partial microbial decon►positinn or scrape;
rl Underfloor ventilation
Venllldtioll exhaust Cans • Volatile gases; f, Fall nlaniterialsce;
Dust CI Efficient air movement
luclour stirf:tccs
Dust
5r
Waslldown Mween groups ofallinrals;
0
Feed additives;
elf
Fe:edcr covers;
C•i
Feed delivery downspout extenders to feeder
covers
Flcuh tanks
Agitation of recycled lagoon
O
Flush lank` covers;
liquid while tanks are lilting
❑
Extend fill lines to Ilear holtoln of taliks wills
anti -siphon vents
Flush a!lcys
Agitation during w:tstewaler
Cl
Underfloor 11t1sh with wideriltior ventilation
conveyance
PI( tcc:h,ut;c puirtts
Agitation nhrccycictl laguotr
L7
Extend recharge lines to ocari>uttntu o! bits — ----- --- —
liquid while: Ails are filling
with ao[i-siphon vents
Lift �Ialions
Agitation during sump tank
❑
Suolp tank covers
tilling and drawdown
tlut,icle; drain collcclion
Agitation ihtrlllg W;61ewater
I7
iiux lovers
ur jolttaiort buses
cunveyallce
AhI()[: - Novcltiber 11, 1996, Page 3

Source Cuuse BMPs to Minimize Odor Site Specific 11'racticcs
End of drainpipes at Agitation daring wastewater © Extend discharge point of pipes undemeath
lagoon conveyance lagoon liquid level
Labour surfaces 0 Volatile gas emissions;
• Biological mixing;
• Agitation
GY Proper lagoon liquid capacity;
trCorrect lagoon startup procedures;
a/Minimum surface area -to -volume ratio;
C'Minimum agitation when.pumping;
❑ MechanicaI aeration;
❑ , Proven biological additives
Irrigatiutm sprinkler m I ligh pressure agitation; 15 Irrigate on dry days with little or no wind;
nozzles a Wind drift IR Minimum recommended operating pressure;
I°I Pump intake near lagoon liquid surface;
Suuagc tank or hasut
mill -ace
❑ Pump from second -stage lagoon
• Partial microbial 11ccomposllion; Cl 110110111 or midlevel loading;
• Mixing while filling; ❑ Tank covers;
• Agitation when emptying ❑ Basin surface mats of solids;
❑ Proven biological additives or oxidants
Scaling basin surlace Partial nnierobiul decomposition; ❑ Extend drainpipe outlets underneath liquid
• Mixing while filling; level;
• Agitation when emptying ❑ Remove settled solids regularly
Manure, slurry or sludge • Agitation when spreading; ❑ Soil injection of slurry/sludges;
spreader outlets 0 Volatile gas emissions ❑ Wash residual manure from spreader after use;
Proven biological additives or oxidanls
I Incovered InaluInalmrc, Volatile gas emissions while ❑ Soil injection of'slurry/sledges —
slurry or shmdge cln field drying
❑ Soil incorporation within 48 brs.;
sin likes
❑ Spread in thin uniform layers fur rapid drying;
❑ Proven biological additives or oxidants
Dead aninmals a Carcass decomposition )'roper disposition of carcasses
Dead animal dislxfsal • 'Carcass decomposiliotl Nt Complete covering of carcasses in burial pits; - -
]mils R"' Proper location/constn[ction ofdisposal pits
lucincimois a incoumplele cumbuslion ❑ Secondary stack hursiers
AM()( enther It. 1996, Page 4

Source Cause / 11MPs to Misrinrize Odor -- —Si1c Specific 1': ;Eetices —
Standing water around a Improper drainage; M Grade and landscape such that water drains
facilrncs • Microbial decomposition of away from facilities
organic matter
Manure track-ed onto Poorly maintained access roads 9 Farm access road maintenance
public roads [iorn farm
access
Additional Information :
Swine Manure Management ; 0200 Rule/131VIP Packet
Swine Production Vann Potential Odor Sources and Remedies ; EBAE Fact Sheet
Swine t'rodnclioll Facility Manure Management: Pit Recllarge - Lagoon Treatment ; I-BAE 128-88
Swine Production facility Manure Management: Underfloor Flush - Lagoon Treatment ; EBAE 129-88
1-abaom Design and Management for Livestock Manure Treatment and Storage ; EI3AE 103-83
Calibration of Manure and Wastewater Application Equipment ; C-BAE Fact Street
Controlling Odors from Swine Buildings ; P111-33
Enviruruuemal Assurance Program ; NI'1'C Manual
Opiimis 14,r Nlaiwgiiig Odor ; a repnrt From the Swine Odor Task Force
Nni5anee ('onccncs in Animal Manure Management: Odors and Flies ; PR0107, 1995 Coriference Proceedings
Available From :
NCSU, Coutuy Fxmision Ccntcr
NCSiJ - IJAF
NCSIJ - BAIi
NCSIJ - BA[:
NCSIJ - BAF
NCSIJ - BAE:
NCSIJ - Siville Extension
NC Pork Producers Assoc
NCSIJ Agri Communications
l"lnrid:r ('0911)ercrlive FXMIsiun
ANIO(: - 14ovembur 11, 1990. Page 5

Mortality Management Methods
(check which method(s) are being implemented)
a2 BuriaI three feet beneath the surface of the ground within 24 hours after
knowledge of the death. The burial must be at least 300.feet from any flowing
stream or public body of water.
❑ Rendering at a�rendering plant licensed under G.S. 106-I68.7
❑ Complete incineration
❑ In the case of dead poultry only, placing in a disposal pit of a size and design
approved by the Department of Agriculture
❑ Any method which in the professional opinion of the State Veterinarian would
make possible the salvage of part of a dead animal's value without endangering
human or animal health. (Written approval of the State Veterinarian must be
attached)
December I8, 1996

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN
PHONE NUMBERS
DWQ 919 571-- 4700
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 919-459- 7376
SWCD 919- 459--4115
NRCS 919- 459-4115
This plan will be implemented in the event that wastes from
your operation are leaking, overflowing, or running off
site. You should not wait until waste. reach surface waters
or leave your property to consider that you have a problem.
You should make every effort to ensure that this does not
happen. This plan should be posted in an accessible
location for -all employees at the facility. The following
are some action items you should take.
1. Stop the release of wastes. Depending on the
situation, this may or may not be possible. Suggested
responses to some possible problems are listed below.
A. Lagoon overflow -possible solutions are:
a.
Add
soil to berm to increase
elevation of 'dam.
b.
Pump
wastes to fields at an acceptable rate.
C.
Stop
all flows to the lagoon
immediately.
d.
Call
a pumping contractor.
e.
Make
sure no surface water is
entering lagoon.
B: Runoff from waste application field -actions
include:
a. Immediately stop waste application.
b. Create a temporary diversion to contain waste.
40 C. Incorporate waste to reduce runoff.
d. Evaluate and eliminate the reason(s) that
caused the runoff.
e. Evaluate the application rates for the fields
where runoff occurred.
C: Leakage from the waste pipes and sprinklers -action
include:
a. Stop recycle pump.
b. Stop irrigation pump.
C. Close valves to eliminate further discharge.

S
d. Repair all leaks prior to restarting pumps.
D: Leakage from flush systems, houses, solid
separators -action include:
a: Stop recycle pump.
b. Stop irrigation pump.
C. Make sure no siphon occurs.
d. Stop all flows in the house, flush systems, or
solid separators.
e. Repair all leaks prior to restarting pumps.
E: Leakage from base or sidewall of lagoon. Often
this is seepage as opposed to flowing leaks -
possible action:
a. Dig a small well or ditch to catch all seepage,
put in a submersible pump, and pump back to
lagoon.
b. If holes are caused by burrowing animals, trap
or remove animals and fill holes and compact
with a clay type soil.
C. Have a professional evaluate the condition of
the side walls and lagoon bottom as soon as
possible.
2. Assess the extent of the spill and note any obvious
damages.
a. Did the waste reach any surface waters?
b. Approximately how much was released and for what
duration?
C. Any damage noted, such as employee injury, fish
kills, or property damage?
d. Did the spill leave the property?
e. Does the spill have the potential to reach surface
waters?
f. Could a future rain event cause the spill to reach
surface waters?
g. Are potable water wells in danger (either on or off
of the property) ?
h. How much reached surface waters?
3: Contact appropriate agencies.
a. During normal business hours, call your DWQ
(Division of Water Quality) regional office; Phone
919571 - 4700. After hours, emergency number: 919-
733-3942. Your phone call should include: your
name, facility, telephone number, the details of

the incident from item.2 above, the exact location
of the facility, the location or direction of
movement of the spill, weather and wand conditions.
The corrective measures that have been under taken,
and the seriousness of the situation. '
b. If spill leaves property or enters surface waters,
call local EMS Phone number 919-459-7376.
C. Instruct EMS to contact local Health Department.
d. Contact CES, phone number 919-459 -9810, local swCD
office phone number '919-459- 4115, and local NRCS
office for advice/technical assistance phone number
919- 459- 4115.
4: If none of the above works call 911 or the Sheriff's
Department and explain your problem to them and ask
that person to contact the proper agencies for you.
5: Contact the contractor of your choice to begin repair
of problem to minimize off --site damage.
a. Contractors Name:
b . Contractors Address: 3-`-04- r Z 3.2- Y V /I r-S A, ✓"Zke y
C. Contractors Phone: 4 / Y-!g __ 32
6: Contact the technical specialist who certified the
lagoon (NRCS,'Consulting Engineer, etc.)
a. Name: NRCS/SWCD
b. Phone: T(919)459-4115 _
7: Implement procedures as advised by DWQ and technical
assistance agencies to rectify the damage, repair the
system, and reassess the waste management plan to keep
problems with release of wastes from happening again.
yiudrlrM.IJwordfw q=tpf�.dtx.
*opt 12.26

Nutrient Management Plan For Animal Waste Utilization
10-27-2000
This plan has been prepared for:
Murray Farms Inc.
Phillip Murray
5010 ridge Rd.
Spring Hope, NC 27882
252-278-3076
This plan has been developed by:
J. EDWARD LONG
NRCS I NASH SWCD
ROOM 107 AG CENTER DRIVE
NASHVILLE, NC 27856
252-459-44115
0
6/cveloper Signature
Type of Plan: Nitrogen Only with Manure Only
Owner/Manager/Producer Agreement
I (we) understand and agree to the specifications and the operation and maintenance
procedures established in this nutrient management plan which includes an animal waste
utilization plan for the farm named above. I have read and understand the Required
Specifications concerning animal waste management that are included with this plan.
Signature (owner) Date
Signature (manager or producer) Date
This plan meets the minimum standards and specifications of the U.S. Department of
Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service or the standard of practices adopted
by the Soil and Water Conservation Commission.
Plan Approved By: e4jL=Z1O od
echnical Specialist Signature Date
-- - - -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Cover Page 1

Nutrients applied in accordance with this plan will be supplied from the
following source(s):
Commercial Fertilizer is not included in this plan.
S5
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid waste generated 725,800 gals/year by a
3,800 animal Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid operation. This production
facility has waste storage capacities of approximately 180 days.
Estimated Pounds of Plant Available Nitrogen Generated per Year
Broadcast
1675
Incorporated
2877
Injected
3169
Irrigated
1821
Actual PAN Applied
Year 1
2050
Notes:
In source ID, S means standard source, U means user defined source.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed. 10-27-2000 Source Page I

The Waste Utilization table shown below summarizes the waste utilization plan for this operation. This plan provides an estimate of the number of acres of cropland
needed to use the nutrients being produced. The plan requires consideration of the realistic yields of the crops to be grown, their nutrient requirements, and proper
timing of applications to maximize nutrient uptake.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitrogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the quantity of solid and liquid waste that will be applied an each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
A balance of the total manure produced and the total manure applied is included in the table to ensure that the plan adequately provides for the utilization of the
manure generated by the operation. Animal operations that generate liquid waste and utilize waste storage facilities (lagoons or holding ponds) may apply more or
less waste in any given year than is annually generated by the facility. In order to determine whether the plan adequately utilizes the waste produced by the facility,
the storage capacity table included in this plan should be reviewed to ensure that the design] capacity of the storage facility is not exceeded during the planning period.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applied. Soil tests should be used to balance the
nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table Year I
Tract
Field
Source
I.D.
Soil Series
Tout
Acre
Use.
Acres
Crop
RYE
RYE
unit
Applic.
I Period
NnTogcn
PA
Nutrient
Req'd
Comm.
Fat
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(1bs1A)
N
Applic.
Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
lbs1A
1000
311A
tans
1000 gals
tons
2611
4
S5
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
Bermuda ss Hay
•4.0
Tons
"4/1-9130
' 200
0
0
Irri&
200
79.7
0.0
247.1
0.0
2611
4
S5
GEORGEVILLE
4.2
3.1
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
1011-3131
50
0
0
Irrip,
50
19.9
0.0
61.8
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3.4
2.6
Bermudagrass Hav
•4.0
Tons
$411-9130
200
0
0
Irri .
200
79.7
0.0
207.2
0.0
2611
5
S5
GEORGEVILLE
3.4
2.6
Small Grain Overseed
1.0
Tons
10/1-3131
50
D
0
Irrig,
50
19.9
0.0
51.9
0.0
2611
6
S5
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Bermuda ssHav
1 -4.0
1 Tons
-411-9/30
1 200
0
0
lm
200
79.7
0.0
127.5
0.0
2611
6
SS
GEORGEVILLE
2.2
1.6
Small Grain Ovaseed
1 1.0
1 Tons
10l1-331
50
0
0
lrri
50
19.9
0.0
31.9
0.0
2611
7A
55
GEORGEVILLE
1.2
0.9
er Bmuda n Hay 1
*4.01
Tons 1
'4l1-9130
1• 2001
0
0
Trri .
200
79.7
0-0
71.7
0.0
------------------------ •----------------•------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 VIIUT Page l

Waste Utilization Table
Year 1
Tract
Field
Source
I I.D.
Soil Series
Total
Acre
Use.
Acres
CrOD
RYE
RYE
I Unit
Applic.
I Period
Nitrogen
PA
Nutrient
Re4d
Comm.
Fert.
Nutrient
Applied
Res.
(Ibs/A)
I N
Applic.
I Method
Manure
PA
Nutrient
Applied
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(acre)
Liquid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
Solid
Manure
Applied
(Field)
N
N
lbslA
1000
I Kal/A
I tons
1000 gals
tons
26111
7A
I SS
I GEORGEVILLF
1 1.21
0.91
Small Grain Ovecseed
I LQ
Tons
10l1-3131
1 50
01
0
1 Irrip,
1 501
19.91
0.01
17.9
0.0
Lagoon Liquids
Total Applied, 1000 p1lons
817
Total Produced. I00a gallons
726
Balan 1000 110
-91
Manure Solids
Total Applied, tons
0
Total Produced, tons
0
Balance. tons
0
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol —means leased, otherwise, owned 2. Symbol' means user entered data.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- — --------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUT Page 2

The Waste Utilization table shown below lists the fields in this plan that are identified as backup waste application fields. On the basis of estimated nutrient content
and volume of waste generated, these fields are not needed to utilize the nitrogen generated by this animal operation during the plan year shown. However, if the
nutrient content and/or volume of waste exceeds the expected values, waste can be applied to these fields so as to meet the nitrogen requirements of the indicated crop.
This table provides an estimate of the amount of nitogen required by the crop being grown and an estimate of the nitrogen amount being supplied by manure or other
by-products, commercial fertilizer and residual from previous crops. An estimate of the amount of solid and liquid waste that can be applied on each field in order to
supply the indicated quantity of nitrogen from each source is also included.
Depending on the requirements of the crop and the nutrient content of the waste, some nutrients will likely be over or under applied if animal waste is being utilized.
Waste should be analyzed before each application cycle and annual soil tests are required if animal waste is being applie(L Soil tests should be used to balance the
nutrient application amounts with the realistic yields of the crop to be grown. Nutrient management plans may require that the application of animal waste be limited
so as to prevent over application of phosphorous when excessive levels of this nutrient are detected in a field.
Waste Utilization Table (Backup)
Year 1
Nitrogen
Comm.
Res.
Manure
Liquid
Solid
Liquid
Solic
PA
Fert.
(Ibs/A)
PA
Manure
Manure
Manure
Manu
Nutrient
Nutrient
Nutrient
Applied
Applied
Applied
Appli-
Req'd
Applied
Applied
(acre)
(acre)
(Field)
(Fielr
lbs/A
(lbs/A)
1000
Source
Total
Use,
RYE
Applic.
Applic.
Tract
Field
1 I.D.
Soil Series
Acre
Acres
Crop
I RYE
r Unit
1 Period
I N
I N
I N
Method
I lbs/A
I Ral/A
tons
1 1000 PAIS
tons
26121
71
SS
I NORFOLK
4.81
3.6
11 Wheat, Grain
*55.0
1 Bushels
9/1-3/31
* 11
0
Irrip,
1 110
43.8
0.0
157.8
26121
81
SS
NORFOLK
1 7.71
5.7
1 Wheat. Grain
1 *55.0
1 Bushels
9/1-3/31
" 11
0
IrriF,
1 1101
43.8
0.0
249.9
Lagoon Liquids
Total Applied, 1000 gallons
408
Manure Solids
Total Applied, tans
Notes: 1. In the tract column, symbol -- means leased, otherwise, owned 2. Symbol * means user entered data.
--------------------------------------------------------------------•--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 WUTB Page 1

The Irrigation Application Factors for each field in this plan are shown in the following table. Infiltration
rate varies with soils. If applying waste nutrients through an irrigation system, you must apply at a rate
that will not result in runoff. This table provides the maximum application rate per hour that may be
applied to each field selected to receive wastewater. It also lists the maximum application amount that
each field may receive in any one application event.
Irrigation Application Factors
Tract
Field
Soil Series
Application Rate
inchmhour
Application Amount
inches
2611
4
GEORGEVILLE
().qO -0-3e
1.00
2611
5
GEORGEVILLE
0.q0 44+
1.00
2611
6
GEORGEVILLB
WO 439
1.00
2611
j7A
GEORGEVILLE
0.q0 4,30
1.00
2612
7
NORF'OLK
0.50
1.00
2612
18
NORFOLK
0.50
1.00
ro1��00
7 op SpRAq
D�POOL, 6uSflE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 IAF Page 1

The following Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization table provides an estimate of the number of acres needed for
sludge utilization for the indicated accumulation period. These estimates are based on average nitrogen
concentrations for each source, the number of animals in the facility and the plant available nitrogen application rates
shown in the second column.
Lagoon sludge contains nutrients and organic matter remaining after treatment and application of the effluent. At
clean out, this material must be utilized for crop production and applied at agronomic rates. In most cases, the
priority nutrient is nitrogen but other nutrients including phosphorous, copper and zinc can also be limiting. Since
nutrient levels are generally very high, application of sludge must be carefully applied.
Sites must first be evaluated for their suitability for sludge application. Ideally, effluent spray fields should not be
used for sludge application. If this is not possible, care should be taken not to load effluent application fields with
high amounts of copper and zinc so that additional effluent cannot be applied. On sites vulnerable to surface water
moving to streams and lakes, phosphorous is a concern. Soils containing very high phosphorous levels may also be a
concern.
Lagoon Sludge Nitrogen Utilization Table
Crop
Maximum
PA-N Rate
lb/ac
Maximum Sludge
Application Rate
1000 al/a
Minimum Acres
5 Ycars Accumulation
Minimum Acres
10 Years Accumulation
Minimum Acres
15 Years Accumulation
Swine Nursery Lagoon Sludge - Standard
Com 120 bu
1 150
13.16
T 9.67
19.34
29.02
Hay 6 ton R.Y.E.
300
26,31
- 4.84
9.67
14.51
Soybean 40 bu
1 1601
14.041
9.071
18.141
27.20
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----g--------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Sludge Page I

The Available Waste Storage Capacity table provides an estimate of the number of days of storage
capacity available at the end of each month of the plan. Available storage capacity is calculated as the
design storage capacity in days minus the number of days of net storage volume accumulated. The start
date is a value entered by the user and is defined as the date prior to applying nutrients to the first crop in
the plan at which storage volume in the lagoon or holding pond is equal to zero.
Available storage capacity should be greater than or equal to zero and less than or equal to the design
storage capacity of the facility. If the available storage capacity is greater than the design storage capacity,
this indicates that the plan calls for the application of nutrients that have not yet accumulated. If available
storage capacity is negative, the estimated volume of accumulated waste exceeds the design storage volume
of the structure. Either of these situations indicates that the planned application interval in the waste
utilization plan is inconsistent with the structure's temporary storage capacity.
Available Waste Storage Capacity
Source Name7
Swine Nursery Lagoon Liquid
Design Storage Capacity (Days)
Start Date
09/30
180
Plan Year
Month
Available Storage Ca aci (Da s)
!
1
98
1
2
90
1
3
80
1
4
116
1
5
134
1
6
153
1
7
171
1
8
195
1
9
226
1
10
216
1
11
207
1
12
176
* Available Storage Capacity is calculated as of the end of each month.
-------------------- ry g
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Ca ci Page 1

Required Specifications For Animal Waste Management
1. Animal waste shall not reach surface waters of the state by runoff, drift,
manmade conveyances, direct application, or direct discharge during
operation or land application. Any discharge of waste that reaches surface
water is prohibited.
2. There must be documentation in the design fold that the producer either
owns or has an agreement for use of adequate land on which to properly
apply the waste. If the producer does not own adequate land to properly
dispose of the waste, he/she shall provide evidence of an agreement with a
landowner, who is within a reasonable proximity, allowing him/her the use
of the land for waste application. It is the responsibility of the owner of the
waste production facility to secure an update of the Nutrient Management
Plan when there is a change in the operation, increase in the number of
animals, method of application, receiving crop type, or available land.
3. Animal waste shall be applied to meet, but not exceed, the nitrogen needs
for realistic crop yields based upon soil type, available moisture, historical
data, climatic conditions, and level of management, unless there are
regulations that restrict the rate of applications for other nutrients.
4. Animal waste shall be applied to land eroding less than 5 tons per acre per
year. Waste may be applied to land eroding at more than 5 tons per acre
per year but less than 10 tons per acre per year provided grass filter
strips are installed where runoff leaves the field (see USDA, NRCS Field
Office Technical Guide Standard 393 - Filter Strips).
5. Odors can be reduced by injecting the waste or by disking after waste
application. Waste should not be applied when there is danger of drift
from the land application field.
6. When animal waste is to be applied on acres subject to flooding, waste will
be soil incorporated on conventionally tilled cropland. When waste is
applied to conservation tilled crops or grassland, the waste may be
broadcast provided the application does not occur during a season prone
to flooding (see "Weather and Climate in North Carolina" for guidance).
7. Liquid waste shall be applied at rates not to exceed the soil infiltration
rate such that runoff does not occur offsite or to surface waters and in a
---------------------

method which does not cause drift from the site during application. No
ponding should occur in order to control odor and flies.
8. Animal waste shall not be applied to saturated soils, during rainfall
events, or when the soil surface is frozen.
9. Animal waste shall be applied on actively growing crops in such a manner
that the crop is not covered with waste to a depth that would inhibit
growth. The potential for salt damage from animal waste should also be
considered.
10. Nutrients from waste shall not be applied in fall or winter for spring
planted crops on soils with a high potential for leaching. Waste/nutrient
loading rates on these soils should be held to a minimum and a suitable
winter cover crop planted to take up released nutrients. Waste shall not be
applied more than 30 days prior to planting of the crop or forages
breaking dormancy.
11. Any new swine facility sited on or after October 1, 1995 shall comply with
the following: The outer perimeter of the land area onto which waste is
applied' from a lagoon that is a component of a swine farm shall be at least
50 feet from any residential property boundary and canal. Animal waste,
other than swine waste from facilities sited on or after October 1, 1995,
shall not be applied closer that 25 feet to perennial waters.
12. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to wells.
13. Animal waste shall not be applied closer than 200 feet of dwellings other
than those owned by the landowner.
14. Waste shall be applied in a manner not to reach other property and public
right-of-ways.
15. Animal waste shall not be discharged into surface waters, drainageways,
or wetlands by a discharge or by over -spraying. Animal waste may be
applied to prior converted cropland provided the fields have been
approved as a land application site by a "technical specialist". Animal
waste shall not be applied on grassed waterways that discharge directly
into water courses, and on other grassed waterways, waste shall be
applied ar agronomic rates in a manner that causes not runoff or drift
from site.
----------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 2

16. Domestic and industrial waste from washdown facilities, showers, toilets,
sinks, etc., shall not be discharged into the animal waste management
system.
17. A protective cover of appropriate vegetation will be established on all
disturbed areas (lagoon embankments, berms, pipe runs, etc.). Areas
shall be fenced, as necessary, to protect the vegetation. Vegetation such as
trees, shrubs, and other woody species, etc., are limited to areas where
considered appropriate. Lagoon areas should be kept mowed and
accessible. Berms and structures should be inspected regularly for
evidence of erosion, leakage, or discharge.
18. If animal production at the facility is to be suspended or terminated, the
owner is responsible for obtaining and implementing a "closure plan"
which will eliminate the possibility of an illegal discharge, pollution, and
erosion.
19. Waste handling structures, piping, pumps, reels, etc., should be inspected
on a regular basis to prevent breakdowns, leaks, and spills. A regular
maintenance checklist should be kept on site.
20. Animal waste can be used in a rotation that includes vegetables and other
crops for direct human consumption. However, if animal waste is used on
crops for direct human consumption, it should only be applied pre -plant
with no further applications of animal waste during the crop season.
21. Highly visible markers shall be installed to mark the top and bottom
elevations of the temporary storage (pumping volume) of all waste
treatment lagoons. Pumping shall be managed to maintain the liquid level
between the markers. A marker will be required to mark the maximum
storage volume for waste storage ponds.
22. Waste shall be tested within 60 days of utilization and soil shall be tested
at least annually at crop sites where waste products are applied. Nitrogen
shall be the rate -determining nutrient, unless other restrictions require
waste to be applied based on other nutrients, resulting in a lower
application rate than a nitrogen based rate. Zinc and copper levels in the
soils shall be monitored and alternative crop sites shall be used when these
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 3

metals approach excessive levels. pH shall be adjusted and maintained for
optimum crop production. Soil and waste analysis records shall be kept
for a minimum of five years. Poultry dry waste application records shall
be maintained for a minimum of three years. Waste application records
for all other waste shall be maintained for a minimum of five years.
23. Dead animals will be disposed of in a manner that meets North Carolina
regulations.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------
425370 Database Version 1.04 Date Printed: 10-27-2000 Specification Page 4

7V
r�
?r
Hp='
r� k/T4.t • S 3T�Y v,I i7'TSf �"c (�' '� ��
y
jig
�9 t
ASIU
'..�fut�
F K t YI

U.S. FPAR;MflT OF AGRICULTURE
NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION SERVICE
PAGE 1 OF 1
10/9/00
SOIL MAP LEGEND
Legend
Map Soil name
symbol
AaA lAltavista sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
ABA Altavista -Urban Land complex, 0 to 3 percent slopes
AuB lAutryville loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Bb jBibb loam, frequently flooded
BnB IBlanton loamy sand, 0 to 6 percent slopes
BOB jBonneau loamy sand, 0 to 4 percent slopes
Co lCongaree fine sandy loam, frequently flooded
DoA (Dothan loamy sand, 0 to 3 percent slcpes
FaB IFaceville loamy sand, 1 to 6 percent slopes
GeB lGeorgeville loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Gec IGeorgeville loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
GeB lGeorgeville loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes
GgB �Georgeville gravelly loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
GgC IGeorgeville gravelly loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
GgE jGeorgeville gravelly loam, 10 to 25 percent slopes
GOA IGoldsboro fine sandy loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes
GrB IGritney sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
GrC IGritney sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
GuB lGeorgeville-Urban Land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
HeB (Helena coarse sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
Me IMeggett loam, frequently flooded
NaC INankin sandy loam, 2 to 10 percent slopes
NnB INason loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NnC INason loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
NOA (Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2 percent slopes
NoB (Norfolk loamy sand, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NpB Norfolk -Wedowee complex, 2 to 6 percent slopes
NrB INorfolk, Georgeville, and Faceville soils, 2 to 8 percent slopes
NuB (Norfolk -Urban Land complex, 0 to 6 percent slopes
Ra lRains fine sandy loam
Rb Rains -Urban Land complex
To ITomotley fine sandy loam
Ud jUdorthents, loamy
Ur jUrban Land
W (Water
WeB 1wedowee coarse sandy loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes
WeC 1wedowee coarse sandy loam, 6 to 10 percent slopes
Wh lWehadkee loam, frequently flooded
WkA jWi0kham fine sandy loam, 0 to 3 percent slopes
WcA lWorsham loam, 0 to 2 percent slopes

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
Jaynes B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Keith & Phillip Murray
Murray Farms Inc
5010 Ridge Rd
Spring Hope NC 27882
Dear Keith & Phillip Murray:
e��
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
%l
c ti (�
December 30, 1999
tiAN
Subject: Fertilizer Application Recordkeeping
Animal Waste Management System
Facility Number 64=71
Nash -County
This letter is being sent to clarify the recordkeeping requirement for Plant Available Nitrogen (PAN)
application on fields that are part of your Certified Animal Waste Management Plan.
In order to show that the agronomic loading rates for the crops being grown are not being exceeded, you
must keep records of all sources of nitrogen that are being added to these sites. This would include nitrogen
from all types of animal waste as well as municipal and industrial sludges/residuals, and commercial fertilizers.
Beginning January 1, 2000, all nitrogen sources applied to land receiving animal waste are required to
be kept on the appropriate recordkeeping forms (i.e. IRR1, IRR2, DRY1, DRY2, DRY3, SLUR1, SLUR2,
SLD1, and SLD2) and maintained in the facility records for review. The Division of Water Quality (DWQ)
compliance inspectors and Division of Soil and Water operation reviewers will review all recordkeeping during
routine inspections. Facilities not documenting all sources of nitrogen application will be subject to an
appropriate enforcement action.
Please be advised that nothing in this letter should be taken as removing from you the responsibility or
liability for failure to comply with any State Rule, State Statute, Local County Ordinance, or permitting
requirement.
If you have any questions regarding this letter, please do not hesitate to contact Ms. Sonya Avant of the
DWQ staff at [phone] ext. 571.
0
cc: Raleigh Regional Office
Nash County Soil and Water Conservation District
Facility File
Sincerely,
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
Division of Water Quality
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 'Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10% post -consumer paper

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
September 6, 2000
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Keith & Phillip Murray
Murray Farms Inc
5010 Ridge Rd
Spring Hope NC 27882
Farm Number: 64 - 71
Dear Keith & Phillip Murray:
,Tk?WA
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
You are hereby notified that Murray Farms Inc, in accordance with G.S. 143-215.10C, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sizes (60) days to submit the
attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular
Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specified date. Your application must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subject your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Plan Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call Stephanie Milam at [phone] extension 54.4 or
Charles Alvarez with the Raleigh Regional Office at [phone].
Sine ly, /
' /?
C
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Raleigh Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper