710045_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua'

Division of Water Quality
acility Number 7 } �{ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
IMNSUP�-tine Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4dRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I o 1 y p - Arrival Time: g 3 l7 Departure Time: County: ��^� �E Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: —__ . Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: M
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = 6 = N Longitude: = e = . F] i,
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine
Capacity 'Ropulation
Wei Poultry ° Capacity
P.opulahon
Cattle -Capacity
opulation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La er
❑ Dairy Calf
Q Feeder to Finish
b1
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑la ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowl
-
❑ Turkeys
Other
❑Turke Points
100ther
Number of Structures:
❑ Other
I
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
❑ 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
❑ NN
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
El NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
VN
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: 111 — �/$" 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: LAG '
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 1.5
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
2No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
[Plo
❑ 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 ElE1 Yes
�
o
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance altematives that need ❑ Yes
0<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
E! No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
l2. Crop type(s) C W S
13. Soil type(s) UZ
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
eN o ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�eo ❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination,
❑ yes
N'o El NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
,E
El NA
L_�Zo
El NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
rarZ,rn t_.o,)1LS (-oaD
Reviewer/Inspector Name `O,,�4. Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: i0 IL/ Q
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection to
Required Records & Documents
19.
Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Ld No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
in
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Wyes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
[Crop
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain
Inspections
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
El NA
El NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
El Yes
L rNo
❑ A
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
L'J N
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
71A
[I NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
El Yes
VN
❑ N
El NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
El No
1� NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Rr Nc ❑ NA
[:I NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
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
Q 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
N ElNA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
El
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
'Addlrtional Comments and/orDrawja' s P 4�
� g
12/2&04

Type of Visit .0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: O Tune:
Q Not Operational C Below Threshold
EfPermitted Q Cerrt ied © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Opera r Above Threshold:
Farm Name: »-- d.�+ �--In. P County:
Owner Name: _ w ?_.i% ------- Phone No:
NLdIiiig Address:
Facility Contact: ___ �!f __ _. Title:.. Phones No:
Onsite Representative:..a_ne_------- Integrator..
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
A Swine ❑ Poultry,- ❑ Cattie ❑ Horse
z - CIII'F1
Swine
Operator Certification Number:
Latitude • 4 Du Longitude • 4 I�u
tnent
ui1ft*;n
o Feeder
"
Layer
to Fmish
Non -Layer
rFaTowto Wean
'-
to Feeder
-: Other
to Finish
x - T
ax:r
Gilts
El l3oars
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 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
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes JZ No
❑ Yes JZ No
❑ Yes 0 No
Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
Con inued

.r acillty Number: / — [f! Date of Inspection I/
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
D Yes No
seepage, etc.)
10
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancerimprovement?
❑ Yes A No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/'improvement?
❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
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.
'0
gYes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Poo�nding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type (_dgn/T
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes ZNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
'VNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes Uzi No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes .10 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 P
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. 10
Fl&tn 669P
Z.)
/Oz A'y
ReviewerAkspector Name %
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
❑ Feld Copy ❑ Final Notes
Date:
11JIVU3 t-onmiva

Facitity Number: 115 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documenti
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes JZNo
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes RNo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ,&No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes )ErNo
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ,fNo
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes JNo
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes Oi No
2$. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes '0140
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes �No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35) ❑ Yes ,"No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey? ❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You wr'g receive no further correspondence about this visit.
15) t&�7-
4hD
r
8Ebi
GAr��FO
12112103

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Y fZoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of visit: D O Time:
E D_DF3=1 I Facility Number
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
PDPermitted 0 Certified D Conditionally Certified ©Registered
ate Last Operated r Above Threshold:
Farm Name: A Y C06 ' k R 11, County
Owner Name: try Ru Cd M Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: �._�RR+ -_
1.6
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' " Longitude ` 0
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes 9No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d_ Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ElSpillway ClYes AN0
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): 3l0
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Bonding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
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?
Required Records & Documents
l7. 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/ ATUP, 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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes -eNo
❑ Yes ?fNo
❑ Yes V1 No
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes �No
El Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [--]No
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes /No
❑ Yes / No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �4No
No
ElYes
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ;ZrNo
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
. -
Comments (refer to.gnest;ou. Explata anv YES answers'and/or,anyWcommendahons ©riany other�car_timents
$ 'K tti.a'9e 2
Use drawings of factity to better explain situations (use addrhonalpages,as necessary)[:I Field Copy El Final Notes `
T,
0 6�7_
s/�IhPL�-j
w
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Dumber: Date of Inspection
dor 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 0,N
No
29. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes o
roads, building structure, and/or public property) ////
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanentftemporary cover? ❑ Yes El No
-Additional Comments.and/or" Drawings: f4ieA 7.9
-
i
05103101

Type of Visit 40 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit WRoutine O Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: % Time: l `
L
O 'NotOperational O Below Threshold
13 Permitted {I'Certified © Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated oo/rJAbove Threshold: ...............
Farm Name:.....tLC.C4!I.....1`�2�r ............... ................................... County :........ �.!i!uJl�t .. _. ..
OwnerName:.........., /Eke.......... ! dk.c'�K................................................................... Phone No: .......................................................................... ....... .._.
FacilityContact: ............................................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone No:............... _.
MailingAddress:•......................................•--•............... ......
Onsite Representative: .........4 f!"Integrator: e r 01lS
---------------------------------------------..............---......................................._.................. ..... .... .._........... __
CertifiedOperator: ................................................... .................. .......................................... Operator Certification Number:.........................................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Ida ` " Longitude • 6 64
Design , Current .` Design Current =
5vvtne C ci Po Mahon: >�o�t3' Ca er " Po illation �-.CaitHe'
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
x [ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Boars
❑ Layer 1 1171 Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design. Capacity:;
T©tsl SSLW- .-.
Ntimber-of Lagoons ' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Ares -
-
"Halding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes IN No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? - ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes US No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes &No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes M No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
identifier: .........................................................................................................................................
.t.�...........................................................................
F b d (� hes)• t 3
ree oar Inc
5/00 Continued on b"k

i f
Facility Number: 71 — �L Date of Inspection /L 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes Ig No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes KNo
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes U No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes E9 No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes El No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ,SNo
12. Crop type COrA LLa, Zy
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes 91 No .
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes CZ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes
J9 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes JW No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes
® No
18, Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) Pg Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes
t,No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes
® No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes
09 No
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes
IS No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes
10 No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes
® No
yiQl t�ipnjs or dg�c�enc{�5 were pQted d�triog �h�s;vjtsit! Yoh wii] > ee�iye tko Fut t er
comes. deuce aka _ this visit:
t atn3ments (refer to,question #) Eiipisui<-any YES answers and/or aqy-reco umiencl>it>ion.4 ar any other rani uerats.
an
Use draw ngs^Of fScdlty t0:better eXp�anl sltuatloimi (ti§e addltionsunpages as neeessary) � ' s
-. _ r
CIS- �e soil s�•r,�rli �66 heeA -skpn 4xkeh /z/6/ao
�/s/dr
/ 11 ) I
C.�tSf ydON Sk►n�91� Keh �,4�� 4/'e u5e��[ 40 'V, e Cur-
N
i5aAer "am y/e f i10A,
Reviewer/Inspector Name 4, 6-4s �)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: JZ /77 let Sapp

Facility Number: 71 — Date of Inspection Q(
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 j$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 Wo
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 A No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes 15No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes A No
Additional-Conunents an or. raw�ngs:: , . -
J
5/00

tD1yi$Ion Of water Quality
0
D1v>sian of Soil and-WaterCanservaLon
car
YF iyy
Agency t —
r
a` ,a�__.t#i lair ... .... ... -, .. ....,. - --� _n.Y.= _-._ :its. •.. _ -__ � -_ .A rr.....-s .�? E.. �- .. .« � .r .. .._.� .� a`.:'k�G.�'#-._. ��E'_ �._
Type of Visit (Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine p Complaint Q Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other -.-% ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit_ Time: I X� Printed on: 7/2I/2000
--J ' Not Operational Q Below Threshold
.Permitted dLCertified
�� ��© Conditionally C1� ified © Registered Date Last Operated or ove Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: t/41t~:4:4�.'r`a Y��. County: ...
........ _ ..................................................................................... I-S :...1................. .. Q ....
OwnerName: ....... ......�.1ct......................,'���Uv .. Phone Na:....................................................................................
$
Facility Contact: ......... ........ I.. ............-...Title:...... _ .... Phone No.. ...................................................
:Mailing Address: ....... ....... . .. ........................ .............. .-................ .... ......
...............
.....
Onsite Representative: „.. Integrator. -„-,,,,,-,-,-, .
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 4 L= Longitude • 1 ii
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
14 Feeder to Finish
V�
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lag—n Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed; was the conveyance nian-made'
b. If discharge v, observed. did it reach Water of the State-' (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharize is observed- what is the estimated flaw in gall nin?
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 Structure 2 Structure StructureStructure 5
Identifier: ...............................
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Yes &o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
if
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
'4No
❑ Yes
4No
❑ Yes 011�0
Structure 6
Continued on back

- �57 i-/-aa
FaciVity Number: Date of Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes '6No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
1�9:A10
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancehmprovement?
❑ Yes
{ZNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
1&0
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
INo
11. Is there evidence g{ over a p 'cation? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
-No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
&Oio
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
R�No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
ZNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
V0
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
q�l0 ,
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
RNO
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
42LNo
18- Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Yes
rs No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
fi<Yes
❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
[] Yes
0A
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0.jb e
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
Iff-h10
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
-ffNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
'FYNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
C`No
0: Rio •violafid is:oe deficiencies -were rooted• OiWitig �bis:visit.' • Y:ou will receive Rio fh ther
ctirresporidence: a'b' ' i this visit : . . : : . : : : .
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):
a+� ey- etocKw_Y vii Akav�oAvka,
�t,&Da,r4
ind,� T
OV\-
�s kis
0� 0
CJ-
Reviewer/Inspector Name O. 1 d _
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: 5/00
4 ( VY Ztit-- 11o0 x z

Focility Number: — Date of inspection Printed on. 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor blow ❑ Yes Q�—o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes , No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Ro
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the Iagoon? ❑ Yes kNo
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 RfNo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes KNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes �No
' bona ommenit en orDrawings:'
VVGLSW U,1-,�-
� Isla v. �r c v� �',� ai- 6V4
bI—V v o.F� a
Sbi ZOO()
\tj 0\,'S P Y VV"- 4LPJ
VOUP
-L---� � I - - , L. /), I P
5/00
W-,A f

Caiiiity Number: —7 — C Date of inspection
a
vl-.
h.v r-Lctit. w a` i-�I Q yam �}. S
#S
AD �.
`
o
�/Co6mfL.-
2->
�tivy weU kAnd-
7/25/97

}
y D Division of soil and Wateec&servahon - OpSi ation Review
- ivision of Soil and;Water nse Corvati O'Don -.Compliance Inspection s,
T ivision of Water' pall ,gb� Q tY Comp i
lanceInspec4on 1
0:Otiier Agency: OperationReview
112 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DW2 ins ection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Q Permitted XCertified J3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: County:.......Fe.�'1. .............. r'�J�..!........
....... S sl. .'` ...... ' ^.............................. .............................. . ..
Owner Name :...................................
................
Facility Contact:..............................................................................Title:
MailingAddress:..........................................................................................
Onsite Representative: .....M!.�� ...... ..................
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:.... ...............................
.................................
Phone No:
Integrator: ccle-o 1) 5
..... ......................
Operator Certification Number-
Z
.........................................
Latitude Longitude • �' �"
Design Current y'. ., Design Current Design urrent
Poiilf
:CactyPpulatae Capacity Po ulationSwinCapacityPo ulation, C,
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish I[] Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy -
❑ Farrow to Wean _.
❑
' ❑Farrow to Feeder '" Other "„',
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars TotaVSSLW
iNumber of Lagoons W ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �<No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes dNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes AN 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes kNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
ZL
Freeboard(inches):................................... ............. ....................... ............. I..................... ..................... I.............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes No
Continued on back
3/23/99

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/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenarice/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
Z-3-
12- Crop type C .n r ki s4V ec, fit/
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?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: 10 yiolaftoris:or defcieucies •mere noted• du4�ng �his.visit.' • Y:oi} :Will•reoeiye iio further
.................................
:: corresporideitce: ahou>t this visit.
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes egl'jNo
❑ Yes ,<No
❑ Yes A'filo
❑ Yes eNNo
❑ Yes R�rNo
❑ Yes �Wo
❑ Yes N ,No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
'Yes ❑ lNo
❑ Yes w'P10
❑ Yes DVIO
❑ Yes Da'ilo
,KYes ❑ No
❑ Yes CV�o
❑ Yes )j(No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes Ja No
❑ Yes 1'%40
Comments {refer to question #) Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or�any:other.:comments _
Use drWiwi ngs.of facility iWbetter explain situations {use addiiioopipal•es as necessary)
_ - _
_.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 3"�'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Az_ 's --11 I
3/23/99

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 7-3^
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
0
r
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
I�No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ YesN0
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
Iro
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged till pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
YNo
Additional, Comments an . /or- _ rawrn
�&t
3/23/99

v
0
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine O Corn taint O Follow-up of DW ins ection O Follow-u of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 1al1�g
Facility Number Time of Inspection [ } 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered *Certified 0 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
FarmName:............! r u.G !' )..... r County:__ ........................................................ .......................
Owner Name: ..............!' ..k.+. �`t~.�...t��; c d � .... ... Phone No: 9 fU ...z� c�.�E..�. . ..........................
FacilityContact: ............t..........................................................`............ Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: . i 3 � �/ �" ��' 4 AA: ......z................................................................... l'►t---�.�........... ......
OnsiteRepresentative: .....
Integrator: '' r6�j...................
p........................................................................
Certified Operator:............1.�....a~?� ..�aY' I. ... Operator Certification Number;,,.�
Location of Farm:
Latitude Longitude
z'
Design. Current Design Current Design Current`
,, Swine Capacity Population... Poultry :Capacity Population Cattle ,�Capaciiy ropttlatron,
to Feeder
Van
der to Finish
row to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes WNO
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes VNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes rNo
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes %No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? C
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system`? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes �No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ('No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes JR(No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes VNo
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes XNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes )No
7/25/97

f
acility Number:- —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.11olding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.1
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 -Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): .............1. .....................I....
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ......... s y...t...tY f... E'........................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
0-No.viaiations•or. deficiencies:werenotedduring this'. visit'. recei�e•iro`ftirther
.:correspQndenc� aboir> this:visit;
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes lr No
Structure 6
❑ Yes [N[No
XYes ONo
Xyes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes P110
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes /�No
❑ Yes 'ErNo
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes VNO
❑ Y 1 No
�.b.=ram �vn� , fc p: r (� w; (✓�.� dry Q-4 rz.
iZ, Re-,e-5e- .Fc- to e- GjYec_S o; - a -,/ 41 a lR5rwtA tvc I #Uldr6v"�e-Y�S:oyi
13. Cl ee K 044,1 ICW dkv✓ Go r✓e_c,+' !%i. {` . t^r-y 1Q�,fCO row, 1 -
22. �Ceep reorr/s mod` wr�lcPy �rGe �oGr�! le-v��t
a�e_,- I.✓a.,-44c.ry6P5 -.,+4nn .6,vdyjG4- /tr.sL`
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
7/25/97
Date: //9 , / 1/ • ...

Mn
DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review, ;
�hf� r.,�"`� *�. „�,� .,.: ,c,.,,-...'�x� 4--_:'',� 1 .f" _ ^x �3 s � cp�w�.as� - ;• - -' ' ,.,.,� � wr` I
r � � [DWQ An><malpFeedlot Opei-atioa Stte Inspection -
:.® Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DCVO inspection O FoliorV--uD of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number , l�s
Time of Inspection i Gc c Use 2.3 hr. time
Farm Status: ..CCA. _ ,. Total Time (in hours) Spent anReideiv
or Inspection (includes travel and processing)
Farm Name: " �..t - - County: P?li
iz� ___. _.... ..... ._. �W..._..
Owner name-. LUCDN' _ _ Phone No:
Mailing Address: ' • uc} 1—liku� L116, � K L .^ Z�4 ? I
OnsiteRepresentative:
Certified Operator: _ � A ; L. LuLmn.........__ - r ---- Operator Certification Number: _.................
_
Location of Farm:
Latitude �•�+ �� Longitude �• �� Os.
© Not U erational Date Last Operated:
- - r-pe of Operation and Design Capacity
x 3 ;
Swine_ " o r;NumbePoultiy AN Cattle
;. umber.. , <, number
„ ,. _ ....
- ..,.
-3^ - .. -.
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Dairy
� -
Feeder to Finish
7 ❑ on z�` ❑Beef
FM
El Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
=� s .... `
Farrow to Finish
4
❑ Other of Livestock
Type
N�imber oiLa�aans ! HoldtngPonds ❑ Subsurface Drains Presentk
O Lagoon Area ❑ a " 5prav Field Are ,.
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? El yes JQ No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [ONO
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 0 No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? N LA
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ERNo
i. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Ea No
Y 4. Was there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes Q No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ® Yes ❑ No
maintenance!improvement?
Conrinued orr hack

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after I/1/97)?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons and/or Noldina pondsl
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon 1
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/'unprovement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
11 Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste ABnlication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type U Rv'01
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
IS. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Only- -
20..Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal. Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes JR- No
C.Yes W No '
❑ Yes JO No
❑ Yes a' N`O
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes 5 No
Yes ❑ No
D9 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Ej No
❑ Yes [9No
❑ Yes V\o
❑ Yes JZ.tio
❑ Yes .® No
❑ Yes 5 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I$D No
❑ Yes R No
❑ Yes [S No
CoFruuents'(refer to questron.� EzpIatn anv YFS answers audlor anv receinrnendat~ons or, any otlie� corru�c-tts - -
.a..., "£.� - :x ^s.' -x f.-`� .n_ � r'.= -- :� r& �',�'� <.b^' z`.A- `fie n�.�"`= �,r^• -�: ,�s;,�"t�t �� �z. `� � �„�",�, -..- . a
Llse drawrria§ offaci�i #t r�oetter,,ex�rlaui.`situatrons e use aadradnal�pages as necessary)�� .;�-, ,Y,�,,�,,,�._� ,� �- -
ant Cymloh Cv4K.. Wert 66,S,�Cj 4ene3 ` Ixi d4clurl CAdiu.[ttj 5? ray �eos, to
rued 'v he nle}n,'-bed Aor ewc) prr�er �4'4'0-s
j�ced C 1-..L��.
q,_x a crz G�a� tc} ,1r; ��e w�� CFr�i iet� f d��r c �ccrc�s �•1c��cA
11•N tre5,on 6-fectS ijCV`t CLIVved I&rr, toMf oavuv\v 1n�Iok) :f�[Stm 6un.
.rn.vu) twel d-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
ReA erl'InspectorSignature: r7 - Date: %rl
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 11/141?96

10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection 417197
Facility Number 71 4b
Time of Inspection 16.00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: Calffid............................................................................. (ex:1.25 for 1 hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
or Inspection (includes travel and rocess'
Farm Name: fttk um.Farm......................................................................................... ........ County: Peadcr ............................................... �?4'JRQ...----..
OwnerName: Aldw....................................... ]El. now...................................................... Phone No: 2,52z.9.UZ ...................................................................
MailingAddress: 93A.Shady..L ue.-Road................ ...................................................... Watu..SIC.............................................................. 28,47.1---.---.----..
Onsite Representative: Mlle-BameRm...................... ............. Integrator:.CaxxoU'm.E4Qdx.Iate.........
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
Latitude 34 • 36 15 '* Longitude 77 • 5t? L 0$
0 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ...............................................................................
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? C1 Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
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 Iagoon 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?
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
0 Yes ® No
NIA
❑ Yes M No
[]Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
M Yes D No

Q Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/I/97)?
.a
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures -(Lagoons =and/or Holding _Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Lagoon I Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3
................24.5.............................................................................................. ...
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
'7 immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
Waste APp[icatiop
===---------------------------------
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .....Ltt. r '............................................................................................
16. Do the active crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the cover crop need improvement?
19. Is there a Iack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Onlv
--------------
20. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
21. Does the facility fail to comply with the Animal Waste Management Plan in any way?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
FRIUMOME,
N Yes © No
El Yes N No
E] Yes N No
Lagoon 4
❑ Yes ® No
N Yes © No
N Yes © No
❑ Yes N No
Q Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
Q Yes N No
0 Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
23. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ® No
24. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge? ❑ Yes N No
ii ii ii "refi t ' es :: " 1' ' siisi psi r:aip�':r, eaQii ieiicl�iibh;i - sr aiL .di er:ea>a iieii : 7 ' #G
5� Kit" €aOTkt '�I'Tt S[33iIOn9: LiSE'3dtl}t ': D8 tl .. s'df o er n7ria ' ' : es
! ._.......ty...........'art...........(........ p ........ci .........................?:......................... .............
5. Some erosion cuts were observed along the ditches adjacent to the spray fields. To reduce the risk of runoff these cuts need to be
monitored for further erosion and proper buffers need to be kept-
7. Although the operator claimed that he was certified, our records indicate that a certified operator has not been designated for this
11./12. Erosion areas were observed in lagoon wall around inflow pipes from houses. These areas need to be filled and reseeded.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Revie.werlInspector Signature:
Date: Li f t
V,

0
a
•
Site Requires Immediate' Attention: 130
Facility No. _-1-ySe y co
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD`
DATE: ��� 1995
Time:`?
Farm Name/Own(
Mailing Address: `? 4 S U ,_,I Lau-e_ KA. W 4.xk' a N C_ Z-z5fflt i
County:
Integrator. Phone: a S`� - 1 2Z.
On Site Representative:
Physical Address/Location: Ib( -
Type of Operation:
Phone:
Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: �-7 ( o - Number of Animals on Site: - 11(b _.
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude:3 `4 ° 3 i Longitude: _�_Z ' Elevation: Feet
a h�� Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) (Yes* No Actual Freeboard`: Ft. e� Inches
Was any seepage observed from the iagoon(s)? Yes -or S� Was any erosion observed? Yes orfNoJ
Is adequate land available for spray? e or No Is the cover crop adequate? or No ��
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria?. 200 Feet from wellings?�s or No
100 Feet from Wells? e ` r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or Co
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
Swine
similar man-rhade devices? Yes or o If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or�
Additional Comments:
Inspectoir Nam
ca
Signa
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed_

J-L1 -- 'J.l- j
•
Site Requires Immediate Attention
Facility Number: 71 -� 1
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 17 , 1995
Owner: Mike Baucom • Farm Name:
County;
Agent Visiting Site: &I & Es - 05 Phone: [phone]_
Operator:._�si.,kep-- Phone: [phone]
On Site Representative: Unavailable Phone:
Physical Address: loggted at the end of SR 1348.
Mailing Address: 936 Shady Lane Rd.
Watha, N.C. 28471
Type of Operation: 'Swine x Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 1760 Finishing Numbet of Animals on Site: 1760 Finishing
Latitude: v -' " Longitude: '
• Type of Inspection: Ground x Aerial
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) 10 or No Actual Freeboard: 3 Feet 6 inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or & Was there erosion of the dam?: 10s or No
Is adequate land available for land application? Yes or No is the cover crop adequate? las or No
Additional Comments: water level provided 3' 6'- freeboard with level above bottom
f pipe. Erosion of sane of interior dike and sane along exterior - 25%.
Minimal,2stablished cover. Temporary storage is at maximum capacity -
erosion poses no apparent threat.
0
Fa41 x to [phone] - Signaturc of Agent