820731_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA ..�
Department of Environmental Qual

Ii ype of visit: ( krUomptiance Inspection V operation Review V structure Evaluation V "Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 040'utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 171cx Arrival Time: Z V r Departure Time: County: Region: r/46_
Farm Name: rltt G �45 t✓ 1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: 13 i'h �� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Title:
Phone:
Integrator: ,'&P. /�t
Certification Number: Ik'h- o?`�
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Layer
Design
Capacity
Cnrrettt
Pop.
Desigp Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
if
Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . P■onl
Ca aci
llio .
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
JMLIOther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (ga(lons)?
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?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes DNa--C:] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NYC—❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No E3-NA7 ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ter.?g'A❑ NE
❑ Yes ©moo' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21412015 Continued

Facill Number: Date of Inspection:
❑ Yes
e'l�o
❑ NA
Waste Collection & Treatment
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E -<o_
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) Iess than adequate?
❑ Yes
[311U-0 NA
❑ NE
a. if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[] No Q -N* -0 NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
❑ NA
Identifier:
the appropriate box.
Spillway?:
❑WUP ❑Checklists E] Design ❑Maps ❑LeaseAgreements
❑Other:
Designed Freeboard (in):
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Observed Freeboard (in): SO
EB<a
❑ NA
❑ NE
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Q.Aics" ❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ YesVNo
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[J.N;rte ❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
QNlo- ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E].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
Q -N sr"- ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
,��
ICl "'o ❑ 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
/jWindow [] Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): c f`J '6 'E u(. q '5 L �
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [! Na -F] 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 Fj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
e'l�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E -<o_
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
��
hd"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
'VU
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists E] Design ❑Maps ❑LeaseAgreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
EB<a
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application !] Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis [:]Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ YesVNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2015 Continued

FaciRty Number: jDate of Inspection: 0 1(3
'!4. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes gq-No- ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [] o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ failure to develop a POA for sludge Ievels
❑ 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 ErNo 0 NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [:]Yes El 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 CA WMP?
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 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes C2 -Ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes
❑ Yes rNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
rg _t �ki!kr-, 169Ty ". ,) m.th . Y _ Y ry :_ luny"other coirtments.
Us drawtn sof faciit t better a lain s tuat�uns ase add ttanaigpages as necessa �) mentlattons or
of - e, m
N'0
Reviewer/Inspector Name: `1 Phone.7(t 1- � - 333f
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: C) c Dl/t Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2015
V

r
I)i'vision ofWater Resources
Facility vumbcr - Division of Sol' and Water conservation
DQ Other Agency°
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation C) Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: f Q; D Departure Time: �Q County: .h Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &.34wMtn Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: H integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
k
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b- Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes. notify DWR)
e. 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 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
214/2015 Continued
Design Current
Design Current�.���; Design Current
Swine
.a aci Po
P h p•
Wet Poul
Ca aci pop Ca ori Po
p pti p t? p•
....
Wean to Finish
i
Layer
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
21
jNon-LMr
jDairy Calf
=s
Feeder to Finish
; Dairy Heiler
Farrow to Wean
Design -. Current:- Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
I MrV o
DED
ctri; Po - �Y Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
- Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
other f
� t
=6
Turkey Poults
Other
'
Other'
��-
,.
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b- Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes. notify DWR)
e. 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 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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No [] NA ❑ NE
214/2015 Continued

Facili Number: jDate of Inspection: 17—/IMZ
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:^
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?
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DVM
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? ❑ Ycs 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 ❑ YesNo [:]NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 1P
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): M4 P t-e[q tr- �5;-
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
r No
❑ Yes
to No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DVM
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? ❑ Ycs 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 ❑ YesNo [:]NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 1P
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): M4 P t-e[q tr- �5;-
❑ Yes
o No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
13. Soil Type(s):_/Va lY�
[:3NA [:]NE
the appropriate box.
14. Do the receiving crops dider from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
PO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
[] NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
o No
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ YesNo
[:3NA [:]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 [:1120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
23_ If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Tocility Number: 7 jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No
Other Issues
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA [:3 NE
❑ NA [] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
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?
0 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
`W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
1
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/lnspector 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
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: 15
21412015

t
M Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
EJ Other Agency
Facility Number 820731 Facility Status:
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Date of Visit: 09/23/2018 EntryTime: 10:00 am
Farm Name: Farm 2148
Active Permit: AWS820731
❑ Denied Access
Inactive Or Closed Date:
County: Sampson Region: Fayetteville
Exit Time: 11:00 am Incident #
caner Email:
Owner. Murphy -Brown LLC
Bradley Devone Herring
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address: 3521 Pine Ridge Rd
Name
Turkey NC 28393
Facility Status: Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35° 03' Longitude: 78° 12'25"
From Turkey to SR 1909 to intersection vAlh SR 1904, Turn left on to Pine Ridge Road and go approx. 0.25 miles to farm entrance
on the right.
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Question Areas:
Date:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Bradley Devone Herring
Operator Certification Number: 28545
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Norris
Phone ;
On-site representative
Mike Norris
Phone:
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Ir
Permit: AW5820734 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 09/23/46 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
$wine
Swine - Farrow to Feeder 1,400
Total Design Capacity: 1.400
Total SSLW: 730.800
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 2148 49.00 56.00
page: 2

Permit AWS820731 Owner- Facility Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number 820731
Inspection Date 09/23/16 Inpsection Type. Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Im acts
res
No Na Ne
❑ w ❑ ❑
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
❑
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Structure
❑
M ❑
❑
Application Field
❑
PAN?
❑
Other
❑
M ❑
❑
a_ Was conveyance man-made?
❑
[] M
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ ■
❑
c What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑
0 ❑
❑
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes. notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3- Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
■ ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
res
N4 Na No
❑ w ❑ ❑
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
Excessive Ponding?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le) large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
❑
PAN?
❑
6. Are there structures on-site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
❑
Outside of acceptatrle crop window?
❑
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na IN
11). Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance aiternatives that need
❑ w ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/1(J lbs,?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptatrle crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page- 3

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brawn LLC Facility Number:
620731
Inspection Date: 09/23116 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste ARPIlleation
Yes No Na He
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
❑
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 2
Wagrem loamy sand. 0 to
6% slopes
Soil Type 3
❑
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
❑
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ E ❑ ❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
determination?
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Records and Documents
res.
N9 No No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number:
820731
Inspection Date: 09/23/16 InpseOon Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine -
❑
Lagoon 1 Storage Pond
Records and Documents
Yes No No No
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
❑
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
❑
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
0 ❑
❑
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
M ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑
p
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
N ❑
❑
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?
❑
M []
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other issues
Yes No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29_ At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
(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 1 Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

Type of Visit:,.,ompliance Inspection Operation Review Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: l7 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: i Departure Time: County: 6A4't Region.
Farm Name: '€.t! cv-- 15 yv5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: L4e,_1 Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ��ft Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: _ Integrator: A J _
Certified Operator:,A Certification Number: 1 i.J D
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes g ° ❑ NA ❑ NE
k
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓�N�A
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
[Z�KA
Design Current
Design
Current
Design j m:urrent
Swine
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacify
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder
LFer
Da' Calf
Feeder to Finish
V
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P.oultr
Ca AN
Po
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
'
Turkeys
Other
Turkey Poults
Other Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes g ° ❑ NA ❑ NE
k
❑ Yes
❑ No
✓�N�A
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑ No
[Z�KA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Q1!o
[—]Yes &No
ONA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
(DNA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: r7 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 [] No -_J j] A 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 LjjWo ❑ 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 E 1YO ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes aleo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes DIN'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 Ek<o" ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Tla ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes LD�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): C 14
J
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑*%Foo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[3'1;
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
JL21110
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�_,Ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[2-110
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reouired 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
Eio
❑ 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
2<o
❑ 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
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number:- 1 Date of Inspection: '
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes t&"" ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. -Is the fteility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes E5<o [] NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail 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 [21<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:
❑ Yes [3To ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes El"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes []No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [7 No ❑ 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 [;jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer,to question ff): Explain any, YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments._ µ
N
Use drawines-of. facility to better exvlain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Cott r4,t-. -
1- X?' - 1-5
ReviewerMnspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: M3_333M
Date:
21412011

0 Division of Water Resources
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
L1 Other Agency
Facility Number,
820731
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS820731
[] Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Name
inactive Or Closed Date:
24 hour contact name
Reason for visit:
Routine
County:
Sampson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
11/05/2015 Entry Time: 08:00 am Exit Time: 9:00 am Incident r1
Phone:
Farm Name:
Farm 2148
Date:
Owner Email
Owner;
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-29&1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
3521 Pine Ridge Rd
Turkey NC 28393
Facility Status:
0 Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator.
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35" 03' Longitude:
78" 12'25"
From Turkey to SR 1909 to intersection with SR 1904. Turn left on to Pine Ridge Road and go approx. 0.25 miles to farm entrance
on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Star, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator:
Michael Leon Norris
Operator Certification Number: 19861
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s):
Name
Title Phone
24 hour contact name
Mike Norris
Phone;
On-site representative
Mike Norris
Phone :
Primary Inspector:
Robert Marble
Phone:
Inspector Signature:
Date:
Secondary Inspector(s).
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number_ 820731
Inspection Date: 11/05115 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Feeder 1,400
Total Design Capacity: 1,400
Total SSLW: 730,800
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 2148 19.00 46.00
page: 2

f 14
Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 11/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
0
Discharge originated at:
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Structure
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Application Field
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Other
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■ ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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)
0
0 []
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
M ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
■ ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le -1 large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on-site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
[]
Application outside of application area?
❑
page. 3

Permit, AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date 11/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compiiance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
Checklists?
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
❑
(Hay)
❑
Crop Type 2
small Grain Qverseed
Crop Type 3
❑
Soil analysis?
Crop Type 4
Waste Transfers?
❑
Crop Type 5
❑
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk loamy sand,
U to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 2
Wagram loamy sand. 0 to
6% slopes
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ N ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes No Na N
19 Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAVVMP readily available?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21 Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 11/05/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
Rainfall?
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
Stocking?
❑
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
Crop yields?
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
120 Minute inspections?
❑
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
Sludge Survey
❑
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
E ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
0 ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
Lagoon / Storage Pond
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate box(es) below:
32, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
❑
CAWMP?
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
List structure(s) and dale of first survey indicating non-compliance:
0 ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
N ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
N ❑
❑
Other Issues
res No Na Ne
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
N ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
N ❑
❑
CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑
❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page: 5

■ Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Wafter Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number.
820731
Facility Status: Active
Permit: AWS820731
Q Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for visit:
Routine
County:
Sampson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
12!1612014 Entry Time: 07:45 am Exit Time: 8:30 am Incident #
Farm Name:
Farm 2148
Owner Email:
Owner:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-291}1800
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
3521 Pine Ridge Rd
Turkey NC 28393
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator.
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm-.
Latitude:
35° 03' Longitude:
78° 12-25"
From Turkey to SR 1909 to intersection with SR 1904. Turn left on to Pine Ridge Road and go approx. 0,25 miles to farm entrance
on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Cal, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other issues
Certified Operator: Bradley Devone Herring Operator Certification Number: 26545
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(!!): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Norris Phone:
On-site representative Mike Norris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 12/16/14 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine -Farrow t0 feeder 1,400
�]
Total Design Capacity: 1.400
Total SSLW, 730,800
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Lagoon 2148 19.00 49.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date 12/16/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes No Na Ne
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed From any part of the operation?
❑
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
Excessive Ponding?
Structure
❑
❑
� ❑
Application Field
❑
❑
PAN?
Other
❑
❑
M ❑
a Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ 0
❑
b Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ 0
❑
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ M
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
Excessive Ponding?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le) large
❑
� ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
❑
PAN?
❑
6. Are there structures on-site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
B. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9 Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
■ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
10 Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■ [] ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
is PAN > 10%/10 lbs ?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

0
Permit AWS82D731 Owner - Facility Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number 820731
Inspection Date: 12/15/14 Inppection Type Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Coastal Bermuda Grass
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
(Hay)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain overseed
Crop Type 3
❑
Crop Type 4
❑
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 2
Wagram loamy sand, 4 to
6% slopes
Soil Type 3
❑
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
❑
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ E ❑ ❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
1 B_ Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ ELI ❑
Records and Documents
Yod
No Na Ne
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20 Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page_ 4

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number. 820731
Inspection Date: 12/16/14 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
Rainfall?
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rales?
Stocking?
❑
29- At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
Crop yields?
❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
120 Minute inspections?
❑
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWn of emergency situations as required by Permit?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
❑
(i.e , discharge, freeboard problems. over -application)
Sludge Survey
❑
31 Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
N ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
E ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate bax(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?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
N ❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rales?
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
29- At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
If Other, please specify
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWn of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
N ❑
❑
(i.e , discharge, freeboard problems. over -application)
CAWMP?
31 Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
[]
E ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
[]
If Other, please specify
32 Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
❑
❑
CAWMP?
33 Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
1 5

f
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number.
820731
Facility Status: Active
Permit. AWS820731
Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County:
Sampson Region:
Fayetteville
Date of Visit:
12/11/2013 Entry Time: 02:30 pm Exit Time: 3:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name:
Farm 2148
Owner Email:
Owner.
Murphy -Brown LLC
Phone:
910-2961 BDO
Mailing Address:
PO Box 487
Warsaw NC 28398
Physical Address:
3521 Pine Ridge Rd
Turkey NC 28393
Facility Status:
Compliant ❑
Not Compliant Integrator:
Murphy -Brown LLC
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
35° 03' Longitude:
78° 12'25"
From Turkey to SR 1909 to interred ion with SR 1904. Tum left on to Pine Ridge Road and go approx. 0.25 miles to farm entrance
on the right.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Waste Application
Records and Documents
Other Issues
Certified Operator Bradley Devone Herring Operator Certification Number: 25545
Secondary OIC(s)_
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Mike Norris Phone :
On-site representative Mike Norris Phone:
Primary Inspector: Robert Marble Phone:
Inspector signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

Permit' AVV5820731 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 12/11/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Feeder
Total Design Capacity:
Total SSLW:
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freaboard
Lagoon 2148 19.00
page: 2

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
inspection Date: 12/11/13 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No Nj N
❑ M ❑ ❑
1_ Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Structure
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Application Field
❑
PAN?
❑
Other
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
❑ N
❑
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)
❑
❑ N
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
0 ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
res No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (LeJ large
❑
M ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on-site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
N ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 3

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility : Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date 12/11/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1 Coastal Bermuda Grass
(Hay)
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1 Norfolk loamy sand, 0 to 2%
slopes
Soil Type 2 Wagrum loamy sand, 0 l
6% sEopes
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 8
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑
0 ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑
0 ❑
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
E ❑
[]
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[]
0110
Records and Documents
Yes No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
E ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWNIP readily availabie?
❑
z ❑
❑
if yes, check the appropriate box below.
Wtl P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
page: 4

Permit: AWS820731 Owner - Facility: Murphy -Brown LLC Facility Number: 820731
Inspection Date: 12/11/13 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Rainfall?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Stocking?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
M ❑
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
M ❑
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
■ ❑
❑
(NPDES only)?
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑
❑
appropriate bDX(es) below:
Failure to complete annual sludge survey
❑
0 ❑
❑
Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑
Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
❑
0 ❑
❑
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
❑
M ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
M ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
M ❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No No No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
0 ❑
❑
and report mortality rales that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
M ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or
❑
0 ❑
❑
CAWM P?
33_ Did the Reviewertinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑
0 ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
M ❑
❑
page: 5

of Visit:
for Visit: 0 Routine O
Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: L.� Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
tI �_
Facility Contact: I1 p A kE c 'l '? Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: 4 integrator. j,t {/iA
a
Certified Operator: � �f'l� Certification Number: �� J
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm- Latitude: Longitude:
Discharves and Stream Imnacts
I _ Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
sign Com entDesiga
CurrentDesign
�rrent
Swine -
Ca aci Po
Wet Roultry
Ca aci Po
Cattle . Capacity Pap.
❑ Yes
❑ No
IPNA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Wean to Finish
Layer
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
❑ NE
Non -La er
❑ Yes
[y�No
TM
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
N
No
❑ NA
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Desigri
Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr, P,ou1
Ca achy
P,o -
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
a
Turkeys
Irf
Outer
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharves and Stream Imnacts
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
❑ No
q NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
IPNA
❑ 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
❑ No
Eg NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[y�No
TM
E] NA
E] 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

Facili Number: EDa-t 9 1
I ti7
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [!�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
5tructpre 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 7 y
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ YesNo ❑ 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 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 1PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [�?No [DNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ YesNo [:]NA 0 NE
F]Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload E] Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, 7_n, et .)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reouired Records & Documents
❑ Yes
F_NNNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ YesNo
[:]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 t�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield p 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge
Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/2011 Continued

Facility Number: -f jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
EpNo
❑ 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 0Failure 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?
T
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
El Yes
No
E] 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.
E] 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
ITNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ YesNo
❑ NA
[:]NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or an} additionalrecommendations or any othei comffi6M?.T x;
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional Dam -as necessarv).
`7/1 311-2-
Reviewer/Inspector
Name: � � Phone: 7 1 T33 33Q7
Reviewer/inspector Signature: ' , wg,�A_�[I� ✓ Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/2011

i11oi1rr
t ype of visit: w uomptiance inspection v uperanon Kevaew V structure r valuation v t ecnnicai Assistance
Reason for Visit: 40 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit:Q Arrival Timer Departure Time: Zit County: s9+� Region: -�
Farm Name: rt 4161 Owner Email:
Owner Name: UC- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: L S Title: Phone:
H
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Integrator: 64
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm;:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
Design Current
NA
Design Current
4 Design Current
[—]No
NA
Swine
Capacity pop.
Wet Poultry
,._..�C' apac�ty Pap err :
�C� attEe Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
La er
Non -La er
-
Da Cow
Da Calf
Feeder to Finish
a ..; _:u;.
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
V
Design Currents
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . l;oultry
Ca aci Pio
airy
Farrow to Finish Layers
Gilts Non -Layers
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Boars
i
Puliets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[—]No
NA
❑ NE
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ' NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes E� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes M] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Ins ection: 7 -
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stone storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 1p 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. f
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? [:]Yes M No [—]NA E] 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 IF] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
M
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat; notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes t No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDUC26011
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesNo [:]NA E]NE
maintenance or improvement? 41
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Ep 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
P] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
TT
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reguired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[]Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑ Maps [j Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes FA No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis [] Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [ No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
E] NA C-] NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page 2 of 3 214/1011 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus toss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
Q9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes `P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerAnspector 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 T No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #). Explain any Use drawings of facility to better explain situations s (use additnional pages asnecesssry), d/or any additional recommendations or any other comment =
1plelll
Vis t
Reviewer/Inspector Name: eplb6CL M"MIC Phone:
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: Date: �a N
Page 3 of 3 V412011