710061_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qua

-) I
Type of Visit C�pfiance Inspection Operation Review Structure Evaluation Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 7 l o �' Arrival Time: 1G 3 U Departure Time: County: QtN D E Region:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1 Title:
Onsite Representative: O ✓J _ _14 Al C'L �_
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
�o
Latitude:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Other
❑ Other -- -- -..
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharees & 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?
< 0Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Cow
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
� [INA
ElNE
ElYes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — ( Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
��/
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
El Yes E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: L6 % 0 -iJ
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): - 1,0
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 '3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes LI 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 dNo
❑ 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 IdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes CKo ❑ 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 El Yes L o El NA El NE
maintenance or improvement? //
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [;KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? �
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ �.,
Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) C'W S
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
L�No
El NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
21No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑
Yes
*o
El NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
.)1.) C*'OP gSf.t0 LIP va c
St,UoGE 4r,&uQE0 12-1 0y ,
Reviewer/]nspector Name �.I Phone:0fa 6
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: D 5
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: '1 — Date of Inspection '}
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropiate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ ❑ Maps
Design
g p ❑Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. s ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Wee Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis El Waste Transfers El Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facili fail to install and maintain a rain au e? El R No El NE
El Yes �No El NA El NE
El Yes 6No El NA ❑ NE
tY g g ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes rN
ViNA El NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility Y P g fail to have an active/ certified operator in charge? ElYes ZNo
7NA
Other issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
[I Yes
�/�
L✓1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E2"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
LJ 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
El Yes
{,�'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
Z?i
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comment" -ii ' d/or:Draw ngs
12128104
12128104

Type of Visit 9f Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit i6 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other p Denied Access
Facility Number (Q Date of Visit: / D Time:
Q Not eratiomal Q Below Threshold
PPermitted [3 Certified © Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Opera or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _.�(L �LJ2oY l,t'�sirn_ _ County:
Owner Name:..._ ]� OrJC(J I`!.�-�- Phone No:
Mailing Address:
FacilityContact: .................................. ................................... Title: ........ ...... ...... _............... ........... .....� .._..... Phone No: _............................................
Onsite Representative: 0 I�%lJ Elm - Integrator- R „ ............ __..._� ..
/....._.....�._ �__ _ __._...._ ____._........_�._..... __. I��..__....
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 < " Longitude • 4 "
Swine,_ _ ZCaE a Po— elation: "Pi
eeder
= C[]
-_Finish
Q
1C
Wean
Feeder
rFarrowtoFinish
h
Disc�es & Stream Impacts
1. Isany 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?
�TM� � Dauy
.`` Non -Dairy
Ygn Capae~ilty'e C
['otal SSLW =.eC
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
pit .
❑ Yes
0lo
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes Z$Fo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 4EMo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes '01l0
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: ............................................................ ....... ... ............ ...... ........ _. .
Freeboard (inches): 85
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes JO'hlo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes �TO
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes o$io
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level ❑ Yes ,fNo
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,ErNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IE'flo
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type L:OEtJ . W t*Z PRf .�o� $EPtJ :>
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes _ONO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
[:]Yes
2No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
ENO
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ONO
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
,2 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
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
ET&o
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
,�io
Air Quality representative immediately.
e.ommenrs ureter, w question ) rxptam any Yrzanswers aniflor arey �anoaS,or.;any ocher comments "
x . - }
Use drawings of faceiity�tb better explain situatrons. (ase adcLt;anal page`s as necessary) FielField Copy ❑Final Notes 4 m
_5
',,�g�^-=_ ,y...'o...._.._
Y
r S u� oc� E �07 � a c o
gf�E
22} OF_Fq LKGGoo►J1,);:ORmR7e-oP Apo �t�EC+�LzSrs �t_i 711 RECOQQS
SfE f_oblj�fL CCU01-Iq JDz� � (.I)AZ F'R CoNSERvAr72Ct-4 D:r57RGCr-
�XC�L���JT--�'t"ir�s\?O OF
UD r\—
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
12112103 Continued

Ea2ty Number: - _ Date of Inspection /Z
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 2rNo
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 ONo
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes VNo
❑ 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 P No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes PfNo
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes JVNo
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes [T0
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes EgNo
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 E2(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
rk-UP-7 %

FXP .. ._ - !'
s
(i D6Vlston of W
�ater Qualrty x j x
©tvtston of Sail and Wafer Conservation ,�
a a _� the� Agency, I r�4
t�
Type of Visit 0,Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit (23Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Uate of Visiu 1 21 Time: IbGfn Printed on. 7/21/2000
.,... ... ,..,� 0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
.Permitted M Certified ff❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or
Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ...... tC2l'l..P..!.�.......! .!bs .(..... County:......__._I.__.....v..........................I...._.............._.....
rr�� ,,`` ����jpp`
OwnerName: ►'�/'hDn d'..`''.���................................ ............... ....................... Phone No:.......................................................................................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:......................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: ..................................................................................................................... .................................................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: .... ..D.!'?kP✓ ........... lntegrator:.....h.
Certified Operator: ........... ................................................................................................. Operator Certification \'umber:......................_..............
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 19 Longitude 0 6 44
- -- " Design Current
Design Current Desin - Curretut
1t ; `Ca
.
POucity �a0 �ve
kl
Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
_
vM" Farrow to Wean
i
Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Caipacio
_ Gilts
Boars
Total SSLW .
gi&�of ' bpps
Subsurface Drains Present Lag wm Area
Spray Feld Area
Ponds I, Solid; Traps
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
:.
Discharees & 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. 117discharge 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 KNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes KINo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ®+No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier.....................................................................
Freeboard (inches):
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes 09No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes CgNo
(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 j19 No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes R No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes allo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes Lallo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes [& No
12. Crop type h fw 1�1a.J:: .Se
13_ Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes W No .
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes B No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination'! ❑ Yes F�LNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ®No
15,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
C No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
j!3 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)
S Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
9No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
S No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
]UNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
DNo
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes.
No
yiot tigns;er Befie were ni►tet during his:v�slt! Yop vt di ree¢iye o fut ter
correspotideQce ahoui" this visit .......:......................:... .
/y t
IC 4,
L 9/2y 04 Gas; ��
��J cw f �v �)e rips&/ S - Scar
`rAQ r -�1 a -s-in -Ye Eor�Y1
QI"2 in �/"t�T 3��•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: _ Date: /�2r v�I� 5100

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection �-`-`�"�
Odor Issues �"—�
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes QikNo
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes )Q No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application'? O.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes KNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes M 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 J9 No
31 _ Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes WO
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes allo
Addifional.Comments and/orDrawings:_ ; . v

Facility Number ry Date of Inspection y'Ltr1
Time of inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted © Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered E3 Not Operational f�Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: I:....l f/ !J,Ap5 �t County: .........1.. e.l.F.fr..�►............[�,r.,..........................
...".....rr.................. J/ I......I-—...........
Owner Name .�r�rr!'illk ./..�z1a-
L..Ci?iLB`1..... .... Phone No: �111 ... fJ.. .. ...................... I.......
r�
Facility Contact. ff-94 t......... ...............Title: B fLE�IPhone No:. 1/r�..
MailingAddress:.....................................................................................................................
Onsite Representative:...... ....... t! Y ....... r�%lC!.el..l ....... Integrator:.....1..:..4 1.............................................................
Certified Operator:....... j6.10!iM... ......... .................. Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
:.......... ............ .......... ... .........................................................
Latitude �' •' Longitude
,'
:Design , ; _' Ciiirr"enf' Design Current`" Design ^ ^ ;;;Curient
Scene -Ca aeity Population Poultry Capacity: -Po ulaiion _Cite :Ca aci ' Po a ahon
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
eeder to Finish p ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean =
ElFarrow to Feeder ❑ Other I VF
_: ❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capac�fy:::
❑ Gilts
❑Boars TOtal'SS A =:,
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area a
Holding Ponds [Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System -
Disci & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon ❑ Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the convevance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan 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 PNo
❑ Yes %No
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes PNo
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes UNo
❑ Yes XNo
Structure 6
Identifier:Al
i!
Freeboard (inches):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
r

Facility Number: 7L — 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 4-5 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of_over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type ( " /,// _
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: Rio yiolat tis:oc deft, e..... vt re pofed diming this:visit' • Yo4 wil-teeeiye iio further. • : -
coriesporiden e' allou this :visit:
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [ No
❑ Yes q�No
❑ Yes O�No
❑ Yes [X No
❑ Yes D(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes qNo
❑ Yes [fNo
❑ Yes Jj No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes j( No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes Po
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes [(No
7.
Comments (refer to:question #) Explain any'YES answers and/orany:reconimendations or:any other comments ^a
U e:drawings of facility to;better explaiin.sttuatioits (use;a( tional pages as necessary) �r x
--,_ ... _.. - : a _
welled Atr/s owlle led ow-itwu
qV
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature-_0 Date: !k a1Q_�

Facility Number: -71 — Date of Inspection L�l
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 WO
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ENo
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 WNo
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 91No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes R'No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? MYes ❑ No
Add
drones omments an or. .rawings:.
a
J

Division of Soil and'Water Conservation Qperation Review
- - s
0 Division of Soil and Water COaservahon Compliance Irispectron a
x
Division of Water (Qpliance Inspection $ .'
Other Agency= Oper'a4on Review _
_
Kk Routine JECornglaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow -tip of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection 9
Time of Inspection I J"()gIA hr. (hh:mm)
PPermitted 0 Certified [3Conditionally Certified © Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .............. Y1YLL.,.�....... 5- ......1 >?Y�r�... .�. County: ....... �iG 4cy..................................... .......................
Owner Name: ................... Vt, ".yx........... ....... Anllk............................................. Phone No:.... �.°� 1Q . 2 q .-..
...a . ....................................
Facility-Contact:.............................................................................. Title: ................................................................ Phone No:
Flailing Address: �P0.....J. k& ..•1•'41. .... Y�R1 ... .......toL2 l .... h...N�r................................ ..z.A?l........
..................... ....fir 3 _.�...i.............................. 1 #-
Onsite Representative:.......... v$xy..W-\........"�t........fti,k� ............................. Integrator:...... .�y�..............................................
Certified Operator:................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
rA.............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................I.....................
Latitude Longitude
Design Current Desi' " g = gn Current Design'_., Current
1 _�..
Swine _ ..'Capacity -Po Populationi Capacity Po ulation _attle •Ca acity Population-.
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean ;.
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
[]Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity . _
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars. _. _ Total;SSW
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made.?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Identifier:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure ,I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Freeboard(inches):.......................................................................................................... ............................
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
3123/99

Facility, Number: -1— 41 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?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type
7 i3
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
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: Nb •yi6latioris or atficie.nd.es -were n6fed• during this.visit. • Y:oif wi11•reeeiye t furthgr
corresvondence: ahoul this visit:.....::::::..:: ....:.:.:........ :
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
3/23/99

R:vised January 22, 1995
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number-� Operation is"flagged for a wettable
:
Farm Name-,�-.�5 acre determination due to failure of
On -site Representative: Part Il eligibility items) F1 F2 F3 F4
Inspector/Reviewer's Name: Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
Date of site visit: & Lc�� exemption El E2 E3 4
Date of most recent WUP: Annual farm PAN deficit: P-q9�- pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: 1. hard -hose traveler, 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system w/permanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system w/portable pipe;
&tationary gun' system w/permanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system w/portable pipe
PART I. WA Determination Exemptions (Eligibility failure, Part II, overrides Part I exemption.)
E1 Adequate irrigation design, including map depicting wettable acres, is complete
and signed by an I or PE.
E2 Adequate D, and D2/D3 irrigation operating parameter sheets, including map
depicting wettable acres, is complete and signed by an I or PE.
E3 Adequate D, irrigation operating parameter sheet, including map depicting
wettable acres, is complete and signed by a WUP.
E4 75% rule exemption as verified in Part ill. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part 11. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part 11- F1 F2 F3, before'completing computational table in Part 111).
PART 11.75% Rule Eligibility Checklist and Documentation of WA Determination
Requirements. WA Determination required because operation fails one of the eligibility
requirements listed below:
F1 Lack of acreage which resulted in over application of wastewater (PAN) on spray
field(s) according to farm's last two years of irrigation records.
F2 Unclear, illegible, or lack of information/map.
F3 Obvious Meld limitations (numerous ditches; failure to deduct required
buffer/setback acreage; or 25% of total acreage identified in CAWMP includes
small, irregularly shaped fields - fields less than 5 acres for travelers or less than
2 acres for stationary sprinklers).
F4 WA determination required because CAWMP credits field(s)'s acreage in excess
of 75% of the respective field's total acreage as noted in table in Part Ill.

Facility Number- b L
Revised January 22, 2 9_
Part 111. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBER1-2
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
(q -56
{ 9
I
I
I
�
I
I
I
I
-
C
I
I
I
I
FIELD NUMBER'-
hydrant pull zone or point numbers may be used in place of field numbers
depending on CAWMP
and type of irrigation system. if pulls, etc. cross more than one field, inspectodreviewer will have to combine fields to
calculate 75% field by field determination for exemption if possible; otherwise operation will be subject to WA
determination_
FIELD NUMBER2 - must be clearly delineated on map.
COMMENTS' - back-up fields with CAWMP acreage exceeding 75% of its total acres and having received less than 50%
of its annual FAN as documented in the farm's previous two years' (1997 & 1998) of irrigation records, cannot serve as the
sole basis for requiring a WA Determination. Back-up fields must be noted in the comment section and must be accessible
by irrigation system.

E3'Division of Soil and Wafer Conservation -Operation Review a
Division of Soil and Water -Conservation -Compliance Inspection
_ Division of Water. Quality - Compliance Inspection -
O.Other Agency - Operation Review j
10,Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWO inspection 0 Follow-up of DSNVC review 0 Other 1
Facility Number f Da cc of' Inspection 's
Time of inspection Q 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted OCertified Q Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ....... Qa- � \ �... Countv: ' Q.......... QI—
.................................... ....................
Owner Name: c. y�.til7.L�................................ Plzrane No:
Facility Contact:
..............Title:................................................................ Phone No:...............................-...................
MailingAddress:.................................................................................................
Onsite Representative: ,. ..........,l.,O�']
��11TT
CertifiedOperator: ...................................................... ...........................
Location of Farm: . _ I I
......I.................................................................................
........ Integrator: .....
....... Operator Certification Number: ....................
vy
................................. ......................... ........................:
r...—......... ....... ------------ - ....... ........ .................. ...................................... ........... ............................. ........ ............................................. -............................... ,
Latitude Longitude
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
CgLFeeder to Finish
G
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
E�l
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 JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)?
Discharge originated al: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. li'discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'!
h. If discharge. is observed, did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated Ilow in gal/min'!
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system?
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ..........3.
Structure 2
Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes (I No
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes N No
Structure 6
1/6199 Continued on back

Facility Number: 9i — Date of Inspection
-5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes [X 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 " No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes j( No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?. ❑ Yes VM No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/irprovement? ❑ Yes MNo
11. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Pondin, ❑ Nitrogen ❑ Yes [%No
12. Crop type CL t v........ W� ........................ ...................... ................................................................................................
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes t6 No
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application? (footprint)
❑ Yes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
VX No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
(N 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
ONo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement'? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes]
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
UNo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
rv(No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
NJ No
0. Wvi a'doRs or. deficiencies .were noted. during Ais:visit:. Y.oti 4 ili.re' uAve nu furth,er .:.
iad respandeitee:abiD(it:this:visit.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.: _.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.
.......................................................
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or'ariy,recommendations or any other comments °
Use drawings of facility to -better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
cam. ��►-�� ,See_ r1 3d C��e� ..- i
�(
,S'r~�
c��-e� Cam► �1 s-
w
Reviewe.r/Inspector Name Q
Reviewerfinspector Signature: _ d Date:
1 /6199

'x4 ��z�„z.�;��.�'���������:axe;�r...a:•.�«�.;w;>w•�,�'�:���m.zs�:u�,,:W,.��,«,,.._ � ��
z ❑ `vision of Soil and Water Conservation ❑ Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
tis
10rRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up of DW inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number 1.Time of Inspection 2 O10 24 hr. {hh:mm)
E3 Registered Certified Applied for Permit [3 Permitted ❑ Not O erational Dt!Late Last Operated:..
20
FarmName:........... ...�3✓0_$...*.J...................................... County:..................^...�.............................. .......................
OwnerName: i�a�rleh �e he - Z 52-�. ................................................................I.............................................................. Phone No:.............� � ..............................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title Phone No:
Mailing Address: dC7 L, r � �C7 d z S-...........
................................ ............... I...l............................................y.
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:._... M.. v. r.................................................
Certified Operator..........UL1 "4' .!i..... ^.h.P!............................................. Operator Certification Number, ....... 1.6.. F4.q.........
Location of Farm:
Latitude
Design Current
Swine Capacity 'Population
❑ ean to Feeder
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Longitude 0 6 49
Poultry
❑ Other
Mc
C
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes NNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes WNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. lf_discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes WNo
Cl Yes 1 60
❑ Yes �N0
❑ Yes K-No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes PrNo
❑ Yes KN
o
❑ Yes N0

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lap-oonsjlolding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
.......................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): .........'7, f ...r
.............................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
l 1. 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?
❑ Yes - KNO
❑ Yes FNo
Structure 5 Structure 6
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WNW, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop typed.r#..jt/"? 5ev..........................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management flan (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.violationsor. deficiencies.werenoted-during this:visit.-You.will receive•ntrfurther :"
. correspondehiIc d oht this:visit. " ..
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes P-No
0-Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes (No
❑ Yes 19No
❑ Yes W No
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes `(No
❑ Yes fNo
❑ Yes �NO
❑ Yes 6fNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
7/25/97

..........
V
-Ahftfid1F�ed16f--0'0efafion Re"
DSWC, yie
`z
[55D,WQ'.-Ai"a'ifxial:.Feedlot.0petation Sue
Inspection
..'�.%Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DNVQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection L.lSJ30� Use 24 hr. time
Farm Status: Total Time (in hours) Spent onReview
or Inspection (includes travel and processing
Farm Nanie: county. . ... . ........
Owner Narne:.-.—VC3CLr-,j.l- L ..... . Phone . .....
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative: x . ..... -Ez.,7.0 .... . .... In tearator: ... . .... . ..
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
. . .. ..............
Latitude Longitude
10 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
type of Operation and Design Capacity
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
a. If discharge is observed, Nvas the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it mach Surface Watcr? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
A. Was 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?
El Yes
[A NO
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
El Yes
10 No
h2A
El Yes
12 No
0 Yes
IN No
El Yes
IN No
N Yes
0 No
Continued on ba.,

6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria? ❑ Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge (if inspection after 1/l/97)? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑Yes ®No
Structures (Laeoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is structural freeboard less than adequate? - ❑ Yes ®1\To
Freeboard (h): Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 Lagoon 3 Lagoon 4
z-%
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes H1 No
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 9-1.2 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do anj+ of the structures lack adquate markers to identify start and stop pumping levels?
'% aste 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
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 improverrient?
19. Is there a lack of available irrigation equipment?
For Certified Facilities Oniv- - -
20. Does the facility fail to havea 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/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with owner or operator in charge?
❑ Yes ® No
19 Yes ❑ 'No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
®No
_ ❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Yes- No
❑ Yes f,� No
❑ Yes ❑ No
S. lrric�a on liras .C-rc'Ssir% �� 5 s6olJ be "-?.`)ec� 4-o r,-%A4 da�,,ruje.
��.��r}_rl��
IL- Lax wm Wodls s6u0 6e. woad•
zz. S arm . vx"�s w�� leaf avai (A � a f -l'mc. of fL , vts cfi'a1.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviwer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Division of Water Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 1 1/14/t

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
i Facility No. V
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIN SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: , 1995
' • Time: U'�Y/Lph 7 V e'rr
Farm Name/Owner- Aa t, { fie ll.&S- Ira. rml6tl &/?, i e A/
Mailing Address: 0 L e .e&
County:
Integrator: "_a r✓"�� - Phone:
On Site Representative: 9 Phone:
4 Lld_ �Q 4 Wi_OX 3� Wetill—
Physical Address/Loca 'f on:
! • V rL wr-%- I L &I r I-Lr IC./ F
Type of Operation: Swine oultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
.Latitude: Longitude: ' Elevation: Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does'the Animal Waste Lagoon hav ufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) e or No A al Freeboard: 2_FL T Inche
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes o oWas any erosion observed? Yes o 0
Is adequate land available for sp ? Yes or No I e cover crop adequate? Yes or No
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS um setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellin s? or No
100 Feet from Wells? es o
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes o
Is animal waste Iand applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or�
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by,man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes or +lo 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 No
Additional Comments:
Inspector Name Si a
cc: Facility Assessment Unit - Use Attachments if Needed.

OPERATIONS BRANCH - WQ Fax:[phone]
Jul 20 '95 8:56 F.O�/18
•
•
•
Site Requires Immcdiate Attention
FacIty Number: —7( �
SrM VISITATION RECORD
DATE: July 17 11995
Owner: Vernon Fennell ti Farm Name: F'N1
County: �.. wdar
Agent Visiting $1te: M1 4 M. CES Phone: [phone]
Operator. Vernon Fennell Phone: _ (91 n 1 25g_5230 _ On Site Representative: * Not available Phone:
Physical Address: Off Highway-210 - -miies teen the intersect on SR 4
and INC 210. Facet road is on the right.
Mailing Address: _ 79,1 Little Kellp Read
Burgaw, N.C. 28425
Type of Operation: `Swine -x - Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 400 finie�mber of Animals on Site: 404 finishing
Latitude' a _- ' " Longitude:• T"
Type of Inspection: Ground x Aerial
Circle Ycs or No
Does the Ahi.rnal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately l Foot + 7 inches) Tc or No Actual Freeboard: ? Fret Inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon, please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
eonurlents section.
Was any seepage observed from the iagoon(s)? Yes oreo Was there erosion of the dam?: Yes o:
Is adequate land available for laud application? & or No Is the cover crop adequate? or No
Additional Comments: No
storage full -- water
erosion found -
level within 1"
2'
of
actual freeboard. Ter=rary
top of pipe.
Fax to (919) ? 15-3559
Signature of.Agent

rr -__ LU
•
•
•
Site Requires Immediate Attention
Facility Number: 3
Owner: Vernon Fennell
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE:. _ Daly 17 .1995
Farm Name: _ FN1
County: FRnanr, _ --
Agent Visiting Site: 9f & BS CES _ Phone: [phone] _ , -
Operator. Vernon Fennell phone, -5230
On Site Representative: Not available Phone:
Physical Address: Off Highway 210 - .1 miles from the intersection of SR 1400
and NC.210. Farm road is on the right.
Mailing Address: 791 Little Kelly Road
Burgaw, N.C. 28425
Type of Operation: `Swine _x— Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 400 finis grnber of Animals on Site: 400 finishing
Latitude: a _ Longitude: O "
Type of Inspection: Ground x Aerial
Cixcle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) Ce or No Actual Freeboard: 2 Feet � __ 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 eWas there erosion of the dam?: Yes oe
Is adequate land available for land application? (& or No Is the cover crop adequate? (9or No
Additional Comments:
_ No
erosion found -
21
actual_
freeboard. TeM22ra�r r
storage full -
water
level within 1"
of
top of
pipe.
Fax to [phone] Signature of Agent