710082_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

F/
'J I
Type of Visit (3 C mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation () Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: ► I Arrival Time: / 0 6 Departure Time: County: f EJ9Q11 Region:
Farm Name: AaimoS__ff. C • Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: y� Title: _
Onsite Representative: 9" �. j,� AlAtP!
Certified Operator: D
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Phone:
MylPhoneN�o}:,/
Integrator: erp/y I
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: = o = 1 = Longitude: = e = 6 = H
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
r5kyeeder to Finish
2Gg
b G
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkevs
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream imRacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: F—� I
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 Nvaste 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 rJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ o
❑ Yes L� N
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElYes L 0
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

r.�
Facility Number: —
Date of Inspection 5 a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
2/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. CAUm►f l
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 9
Observed Freeboard (in): 3
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
2 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
2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
INO ❑ 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 WindowEl Evidence of Wind Drifl ElApplication Outside of Area
&/I'mt/07A L N S�-4
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [TNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes IJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination%❑ Yes LYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [�10 ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes L34� ❑ NA ❑ NE
UP E �CA-4 Y�fEt_n FaM
Ar" L'o-"1(5 G C)0.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: `3 d
12128104 Continued

❑ Yes 66N o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Facility Number: 7 j — 2 Date of Inspection eJ o
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 approprrate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other —,/
LJ'
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I"
Rain Inspections ❑
Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
U,*` o
El NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
o
ElNA
ElNE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
ElYes
,LJ
Ld No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E�N/E
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes YNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
2 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
_,�
l� 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
ErNo ❑ 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
( }o ❑ NA
El NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Facility Number
Date of Visit: I Time:
� Z/
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted 0 Certified Q Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated o!4kboye Threshold:
e-
Farm Name: T7t)!�yn �}� r County: lye- _
Owner Name: Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: 6 I Title:
/��
Onsite Representative: /1&ia b /C�t�1tiek,/
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator: — 1✓�.a+K it
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 0 ' " Longitude 0 4 0
Design .'. C►►urrrent
Design Current
Design current
Swine
Ca acitvf
Po ulation
Poultry
Ca achy P,o ulat'on cattle s Ca achy P,o ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ La er
El
Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -La er
❑ Non-Dai
❑ Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design C_ opacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons 0
❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area
IEJ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 15oGd Traps
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b, if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: /
�1
Freeboard (inches): j
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
05103101
Continued

Facility Dumber: 7/ — $L bate of inspection SF
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? El Yes El 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 ❑ 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
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste_ Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding [I PAN El Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
El No
'I
12. Crop type O�!'R u 4 — f± � Sm
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAII'MP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reouired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage &- General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/'WUP, checklists. design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ❑ No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ❑ No
22_ Tail to notify regional D'IVQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge. freeboard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Did ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
113
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this
visit.
._Y.� ,-..: "t i .. «. ♦M _� .-�_ � � ...+_..^ ��-�� -_.Y..i.�:�+.t....-:'..M•r.lA'.'::;:. w.. . .u. - -�-✓.......<.•rA^�1�±i^'_`.'`�.^g'°"witi ....,. x .. Y--
�'
use
ever 45 ,r li#'At hof i
Reviewer/Inspector Name -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
as (rise add,tioalnpages as necessary) p. ❑Field Copy ❑Final Notes
W ,.._
Date: /•/ L
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 7/ —48Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27_ Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i_c. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biade(s). inoperable shutters. etc-)
;1. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? .
Comments and/or
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Dateorvisit:^V� Time:
Facility Number a--
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
© Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or
Above Threshold -
Farm Crarm Name: + FO-/-.f -0 ,/�
, Oric County:
Owner Name: G ` Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ $wine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �� �6 LL Longitude C�• 4
Design
wine Ca achy
Current Design 'Current Design Current
i?o ulation poultry Ca acity P,o ulation Cattle Ca aci P,o ulation
❑ Layer `- ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -La er ❑ Non -Dairy
Tot
Total SSL\?V
Wean to Feeder
eeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
JEI
Farrow to FeederOther
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present HEILazoonArea ❑ S ray Field Area
Holding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑Liquid Waste -Management System
Discharees & Stream Iwacts
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?
❑ Yes B`No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 8-mr
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes G-Ni5'
Waste Collection & Treatment �.N�
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? El Spillway El Yes I__I o
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _;tL I
�r
Freeboard (inches): QLS— LD
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: — a
Date of Inspection T- D -75
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 A lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12, Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18,
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(icl WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19,
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25,
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Commie iti(refer,to'questioh�#) Explamianv YE ansv ers and/or<any+recommendaffifi -or.auy-other comments. ,
Use drawings 6F.facihty to better ezplam situations (usetadiitdonal;pages as nec s )
> ¢� ❑ Field Copy ❑Final Notes
�"-
rT a
�}-7[Q��povtc� - -
Reviewer/Inspector Name S
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: - ZL) _0 Z
05103101 Continued

`r
Type of Visit 10'tornpliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit yu Routine O Complaint O Fdlow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Late of Visit:I O ? Q Time: rO
Facility Number
Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted ©Cerdfiped 13Conditionally Certified ©Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: _ [ 1 G �o!'.'s l -T _ County
n p e) r1
Owner Name: i� f � '# Phone No:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: SO ^ R A Sete, e, bey -integrator. m u r
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑Horse Latitude Longitude
n„
=` =Design , Current Design _Current W Destgn :.< Current
M
�. Swtne_- =Ca acity` .Pu ulatton
Poultry ._Ca `iictty
PoWitiatioiiE Cattle ._ = ..._wCa` artty Po' elation
❑Wean to Feeder -
W [] La er
❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
`: ❑ Non -La er
W ❑Non -Dairy
[] Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design CapaClty:
❑ Gilts
'
❑ Boars
m Total#SSLW _ -
,'�
-
Number of Lagoons
. ❑Subsurface Drains Present L ooa Area ❑ S rsv Field Area F .
Holdeng Ponds % Sohd TrapsManagement_
�,
x=
��-, ❑ No Li uid Waste System
Diseharses & 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 gatimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ves, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: 1
❑ Yes�No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes "ErNo
❑ Yes _ZNo
❑ Yes �No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 35
05103101 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,
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?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ZNo
❑ Yes O-No
❑ Yes ONO
❑ Yes O'No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes fNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ;2 No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload El Yes ONo
12. Crop type $erAAVAI ,S G+^�ln �v¢rSccs
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ;ENO
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes gNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? El Yes 'IiNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes 00
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes ZNo
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 11"No
Reauired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes ,Fe!TNO
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ ONO
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
Yes
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
El Yes 01
20.
1s 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 XJ No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes ;RT40
23,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes YNo
24,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes La'%
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes _M"N0
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit ' You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Commentsf( vfer.to:question #) : EicpWn aiiv YEg attstrrers andior_any recommendations_ar any -other cgm�ents:
Use drawkg s of facility to<better explain sitoaboi s:;(ose additional pages.as necessary) -" Field Copv ❑ Final Notes
T 6,; s �a► ►^". j j( Well Ntq r.-{c,;►red . `rC,e sw in e Lto u s e q /'cc, 'i
well vde; c/,,r is C>Xccllen�-.
�-,_r_afd s ot re te�G -•a;'� a �4 r r•-,
i�l Gjaad pr�er a+�e ¢�/,=plani
Reviewer/Inspector Name 1 =
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: r7l —� �� Date of Inspection /1 L
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 4
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Additional Comments and/or Drawings*..
O5103101
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes -P'\o
❑ Yes ZRTNo
❑ Yes 1ZNo
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No

Q (1�luer=p�C�=r.
o
Type of Visit oCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit f rRoutine O Complaint. O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Dale of Visit: 10 ! A I Time:
Facility Number Z
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
U Permitted 0 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................. ....
FarmName: ...... .....'.+...G......Yi 5....�. + G............................................ County:.. I....C'.LL?� @ r ... ............. • ..... _.
OwnerName: ................. iz..l.i...An r-T.9 h....................................................... ............. Phone No:........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
MailingAddress:.....................................................................................................
OnsiteRepresentative: �e .�. 6�arb'r .... Integrator:.. g✓'bt, .nf_0 eC�1✓`v �'
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' �� �« Longitude ' 4
Design Current
one :Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
❑ Boars
Design .Current- _ Design Curs
Poultry - -Ca aci —Po ulation
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Cattle— C apaCityT Pa 'elation ,
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
-
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
._ TotaI.SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area I[] Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Saud Traps;:, R ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b, if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3- Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ................`...................................................... ...................................
Freeboard (inches): L 4
5/00
❑ Yes ONo
❑ Yes �TNo
❑ Yes (Z'No
V1 [ a
❑ Yes Ef No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes k§No
❑ Yes 9No
Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: rf — L Date of Inspection i Z
'-)5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ YesNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure: plan? ❑ Yes Yl 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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ONo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 9No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes P(No
Waste_ Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes �No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ONo
12. Crop type L�e+^-­1dc, HAV , nAl i _ hrm`'t
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes )dNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ANo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes �(No
c) This facility is pended fora wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes XNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes JZ(No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑`No
Reauired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ONo
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 EfNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes „ZfNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes JZNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes XNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes -M No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ONo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes 0No
T . yi.... nls;e d$fc�en�ies wire nQte� fitt ing �hjs;visitt Yoh wii� ><et:�iyt flo u>�th�r
• . • correspondence. .
CO' mmie—m s_(re%r to question #):-:Explain any_YES answers;and/or any recomiaeodations or.:a
Use dra,aviings of facility to.better.ezplaw situations:(use additional; pages as necessary)
�� e �`�e;1►-�7 ,Graf cAvxA r'eco�d of e raeA}Gy ke�B- %�e2oi �v ��
e"e res(on S; b►e ox4 o;i - o keve�P l ag ooh level lcp"I f/114A4 Arvt'vtl
46,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: P-�714XAa Date: 1 C i s 5/00

Facility Number: 171 -- Z Date of Inspection / * / z 6
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 XNo
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 XNo
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 permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional:Comments ,an -.:orDrawings:.
5100

vrs>ion�of Water Quality
O.Division of Soil and Water Conservation
= O Oiher Agency
----------------
Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
F_ Z
Facility Number Date of Visit:
Permitted © Certified [3 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered
Farm Name: ...........*`1 .. .,,.ra P-NI 71/1G.
_'.............t.....................................................................
Owner Name: o r .o �
f 3 DD Time: 15 Printed on: 7/21/2000
O Not O erational O Below Threshold
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
County: ,,,10e ACV,
PhoneNo:........ ..............................................
Facility Contact:..................................................... ...Title Phone No:
MailingAddress: ............�.....6..........Tr...................�................................................�........................................................................................................�............................ ..........................
"fi^Ol)'rLOnsite Representative: ........ Integrator: .... �.._.............`....
Certified Operator:
Location 'of Farm:
Operator Certification Number:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 6 " Longitude =• 6 0.d
y Design Current
Design Current Desrgo Cilwiient' .
Ca aci Po elation
Poultry
Ca aci Po ulation Cattle ;;Ca` ci _:Pa alation
Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
Dairy
eerier to Finish 3200
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean
;
Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Ca CI
Gilts
Boars
Total SSLW
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ONo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon [I Spray Field El Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes A No
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. [f 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?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ..................(............. ...................................... ................ I...........
Freeboard (inches): 3 r
5/00
❑ Yes 1A No
❑ Yes J@ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Spillway ❑ Yes j3No
Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Continued on back

Facility Number: '71—eZ_ Date of Inspection /1 Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, [l 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? El 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
iffNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
A No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes 'JT No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
JN No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pondin1g ❑+PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
ElYes
V No
12. Crop type 8G f'"'t-✓/�ti 1L� S-r"14.!
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
VrNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
13fNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
A No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes KNo
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
J'No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
VNo
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
�6No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) []Yes J'No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ;•No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes P No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes ONo
olattons.or- &f ciendt,s -.:sere noted during th js'visit; • :Y:oO ;Will •reeeive iio further • : -
• corres o deuce: about, this visit
.Comments.(t*r'W'cjuestioa #): Explainany YES answers and/or any recommendations or any 6tber. comineats ,
Use dravnngs of facility tv better.ezplairi situations. (use additional pages as necessary) --
ski e yS
=�� vse �,a she q nc,1 ; s a-
��-eQ1 w,
ap,p/;c.v 1a4;oh.r' o�► ��Pr2 Z�r,
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
,_<4a rtet.,, 4 !7 A% 41,E
Date:
5/00

Facility PJumber: m- 'L Date of Inspection ll j 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 hPlow []Yes J[ 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 15 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes JRNo
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 19No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes UNo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pei-manent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ;J No
rtionalAdd:_ornments'anor, _ rawrngs.
►71
J
5100

Name of Farm/Facility
Location of FanwTacility
Owner's Name, Address
and Telephone Numbe
Date of Inspection
Structural Height, Feet
Lagoon Surface Area, Acres
Upstream Slope,xH: I V
Embankment Sliding?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Seepage?
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Lagoon Dike Inspection Report
cib:7 / 4 Names of Inspectors
f 1—f4 Freeboard, Feet
Top Width, Feet
kqm
It
0
. 1 Downstream Slope, xH:1 V
Yes_ No
Yes No
Erosion? Yes No
(Check One, Describe if Yes)
Condition of J
V =tative Cover
E5Trees)
Did Dike Overtop? Yes No If Yes, Depth of Overtoppirig, Feet
-. J
Follow -Up Inspection Needed? Yes No
Engineering Study Needed? Yes No
�J
Is Dam Jurisdictional to the Dam Safety Law o€1967 . Yes X No
J
Other Comments J
J

Revised January 22, 1999
JUSTIFICATION & DOCUMENTATION FOR MANDATORY WA DETERMINATION
Facility Number �_ --72 _ `L.I�Operation is'flagged for a wettable
Farm Name: r - acre determination due to failurtF3
On -Site Representative: ' s Part If eligibility item(s) F1 F2 4
Inspector/Reviewer's Name:
Date of site visit: Al(115
Date of most recent WUP:
Operation not required to secure WA
determination at this time based on
exemption E1 E2 E3 E4
Annual farm PAN deficit: _ — 1, o pounds
Irrigation System(s) - circle #: 1. hard -hose traveler, 2. center -pivot system; 3. linear -move system;
4. stationary sprinkler system wlpermanent pipe; 5. stationary sprinkler system wlportable pipe;
6. stationary gun system w/permanent pipe; 7. stationary gun system wlportable pipe
PART 1. 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 III. (NOTE: 75 % exemption cannot be
applied to farms that fail the eligibility checklist in Part If. Complete eligibility
checklist, Part II - F1 F2 F3, before completing computational table in Part III).
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 field 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.

Revised January 22, 1999
Facility Number -It _-y�
Part III. Field by Field Determination of 75% Exemption Rule for WA Determination
TRACT
NUMBER
FIELD
NUMBER'.2
TYPE OF
IRRIGATION
SYSTEM
TOTAL
ACRES
CAWMP
ACRES
FIELD
%
COMMENTS3
2S
NIL
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, inspector/reviewer 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 PAN 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.

O'DiviSion of Soil.and Water Conservation = Opei anon Re'vrew
© Division of Soil and Water Conservation - Co>rripliance Inspection.
j Division .of Water Quality-- Compliance Inspection _
s q 3 Other Agency - Operation Review'-.'".:
Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSi'4C review Q Other
' Date o#' inspccli[sn 9g
Facility Number ?�
lime of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 01 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [Q Registered JE3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: ' .... .. � f!`..._ Corrnty:...` C i...."....)-1hk.........................................
/................i
Owner?\'ame:.........t 7 �• .....i r.!n............................................................................... Phone No:_................................................................................
Facility Contact: ................. Title: ................................ Phone No:......................................_......._.._.
Mailing Andress:......... K.`....... S ..... N'lS. ..b1A...... .....wilk7i�f.........
Onsite Representative:...........QX►..S.......(/1.7............Jk1bA��...!1Ct`�6(] Irate#;rator:........tGPfr.s..........
Certified Operator:.... t ............... Operator Certification Number:.................
Location of Farm:
................0 ......W.L5........5" 5....... ..........._�
Latitude C�•�` 0°�
Design
niwme Capacity Fop
❑ Wean to Feeder
EA Feeder to Finish Z.
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
.....?.4.L...............
Longitude C�• C ° 46
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other I I j
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation (If yes, notify DWQ)? ❑ Yes MNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance ratan -made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach: ❑ Surface Waters ❑ Waters of the State
c. if discharoe is observed. what is the estimated flow 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?
Identifier:.
Freeboard (inches):
i\ I /6/99
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Structure 4 Structure 5,_
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes
W No
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
A No
❑ Yes gj No
Structure 6
Continued on back

cilfitpNuniber: �� — �Z 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?
S. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required top of dike, maximum and minimum
liquid level elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
9 No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
to No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Ponding O,Nitrogcn
12. Crop type .............. �6v_. .V.6........ L.At ..................... ...... �0iV\....... ............. ..........
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. Does the facility lack wettable acreage for land application'? (footprint)
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement'? (ic/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
U No.violations;or. deficiencies .were noaed during ttiis.visiE You wi1fre�eive nCir further .: .
cofresporitieitce'a;bb"this visit.; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;.;.;.;.;.:.;.;.;.;.;.
..........................................................
X] Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ,j No
50 Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes W1 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes CYNo
❑ Yes O No
❑ Yes [3 No
❑ Yes 55 No
❑ Yes ®No
gYes ❑ No
Comtnents (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers arid/or any. recommendations or any,_other comments. ; ` :
Use -drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary)W
��. 55G.rn, w'�{l be Tja.ie r beca.-tAe c4 1yrtr V(O_wly 5 _ CI ,
lI- 0Vtr OitIIf61. i0r 454 Ai4_9,Gyl- i n Nits � � I z.c, -e 39 (►slaC s 11q 1� ,c 4—
i.�`{ bSlce I-tS7'st"�wt 6r %r kk ��rrxir\ tv\ A Kjo4,e- of befwe,-cy coim
S� �pr GJex a��1�G��-iDt'1,
Reviewer/Inspector Name R,,�6 L,
Reviewer/InspectorSignature: �� �[ Date: )Lr14q
1 /6/99

Routine
[] Division of Soil and Water Conservation (3 Other Agency
6Division of Water Quality
Follow-up of
I Facility Number Z I
Registered Certified Applied for Permit ' © Permitted
Farm Name: rr-U✓t r
�.�...... ..................�.....................................
Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Date of Inspection - (- -
510
Time of Inspection L__t1 .� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Not O eratianal Date Last Operated:
County:.............................................?.�.zo...
Owner Name: ......... ......V...iA...--.r.V. r.. �M.................................................................. Phone No. -
FacilityContact: ............................................................................. Title:..........................
Mailing Address:
Onsite Representative: ......................................... .................................................................
f-Y.3',n
Certified Operator .................. ......................... ...... ...............................................
...
Location of Farm:
.................................... Phone No:...................................................
.`.:''...1./......�...........2:. g.��3.....................................
Integrator: ............!'Qsr!.,5.....u/..vf:~ 1C.—
Operator Certification Number;.-)..-7. .. .. ..............
Latitude Longitude �• ��' �"
,; Destgn ` ' .Current i Design °Current: "$ Destgn "Current
Swore, Capacity Population Poult y Capacity_ ' Population Cattle Capactty PopulationC',,
❑ Wean to Feeder
;=, ❑ Layer ❑Dairy
Feeder to Finish Z.00
❑ Non -Layer JEI Non -Dairy
ElFarrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other Y
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacjty
❑ Gilts
s..
❑ Boars"
Totai'SSLW
_ Fr•
x Nuttnlier o€La3pgaaos 1 Holding Pond
Subsurface Drains Present
❑Lagoon Area
10 Spray Field Area
17
.... ... .....
No Liquid Waste Management System
WE , .
;<
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
2. 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 Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes VN////off
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin? (/`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 1.1 No
5_ Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes No
maintenance/improvement? [[[[[[
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
7. Did,the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes No
7125/97

acility Number:-
=- .. _.
8.- Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.1-tolding Ponds Flush Pits etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
is
Structure l Structure 2
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft):..........I....1........................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
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 ....�'''*-....r� ...........dti
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?
❑- No.violations-or deficiencieswe're-itoted-duxing this.visit.- Yoa.W'iH iecei�e-iroAirther : -
: corr�spQndehce abobt this: visit: :: :..:::::..: ': : : .: ' ::::., : _ , : .
❑ Yes [(No
❑ Yes KNO
Structure 6
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �fNo
❑ Yes 9No
'Yes A(NO
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes t2 No
❑ Yes �No
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes _�fNo
❑ Yes [kNo
❑ Yes e No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes kI No
❑ Yes �NO
■ 1CL[.Q F; GWi ✓►+0-1 do,, -f-v P''C..e..,7F' .J i.F J.-e, w ,/ C, [re S Sd 5 r
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: 9 - 30 - 5
7/25/97

❑DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Re_ view
�� � � ®DWQ- Animal Feedlot Operation Site InspeCtlon � �� �'�
O Routine O Complaint O Forlow-up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Date of Inspection -52-
Facility Number Z
------ ---- - iTime of inspection jti 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status: El Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for i hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
B Certified ❑ Permitted I or Inspection includes travel and processing)
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: .... . .............. _ ...... .
Farm Name: .... ......... —-_.............. County:. pc�n.e ...... ...... ..., 11i1 L.�.4 .
Land Owner Name: ..... Phone No• 1 — S S
Facility Conctact:... _.... .... _...... _..... .......... _.. Title: Phone No:
Mailing Address; .._....... ....
�Q,�.t
Onsite Representative:
1�
.... .ti..._...... �rC.x... ✓`...................... .�.............. ......... Integrator:. z.rt.u,.t..�..L
Certified Operator: .,...t_ .1t� �aa .....:.. .....'Y�. ,... _.... _ .. Operator Certification Number.
iT
Location of Farm:
.. ........_..................
4
.................... ...........
......... ..._ ..... , ...._
--
Latitude •®�u Longitude �• �� ©��
Type of Operation and Design Capacity
Design Current Design C entMVDesign �Carrent
Srnne Ca aci Po ulatian P°plhy, _ Ca acEty Po Mahon r f Cattle Ca aci PPo itlation`e
❑ Wean to Feeder❑ La ❑ Da-
Feeder to Finish ❑Nan La er ❑ Non Da
Farrow to Wean *" H -
;M K"
Farrow to Feeder Total Design Capacity Zav>
dEl Farrow to Finish
�- -
x Totall SSLW" Y 2 n
❑ Others Fri
......
r Number of Lagoons l Haldtag Ponds ❑ Subsurface Drains Present
v
� ea ❑ Spray Field A❑ Lagoon As
1� Q
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
2. 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 $j 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?
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 10 No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/hoIding ponds) require E3 Yes ❑ No
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement? Continued on back
4
7

Facility Number:...? �.... —....
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes KNo
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes B No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Sttrructargs (Lagoons and/or Holding Pond.0
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes R1 No
Freeboard (ft): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
.:.� ............................ .... .........
__.... _...._ ....__.. .. ..
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
KNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
EffNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
&No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
® Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ..... ..... _.... ...... ........................... a a-M ......... Y3 a !^...... ........ __....._ ....
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0 No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?'
❑ Yes
O No
For
Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
JR1No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
RYes
❑ No
Comments {refer to question _ Explain any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other commentsf
Use drawings of facility to,better explamn situations (use addriional pages as necessary) N FN `: W
Sfu m ; l e s 5 fi e.l d v. ere d to 6 e r-e.rV v
a. v +-0 tr i vL S f-a-
S e S f e.F S h e-e4 "0 b e � Le- k &0 " v ,r-e-t-t w e e_A
t+1 .S p S -1. v. o t) cL ti L't t j ) ct C�1 V w S � e" 6
b£ IC-e.,,� �v of 4� e r v r�L c.o -j ;_ r 6 1; S k e
• Lur,re.... wvSt OLhriL` ��d hee4.t Leo �7e Pir€cifrw.e4,
hl a { t �,, b aft S s i a •1 + o-c w a C I—
V � i-e + e e s s o-1 . IZ . ,., o ,� a L [ e..., `E-�^ e e� f net r- 1 ca o „�
L1. I a
AMEX
g: Reviewer/inspector Name " n�
'
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: a� ,� n w Date: �s Z 9 y
cc: Division of Wafer Quality, Water Quality Section, Facility Assessment Unit 4/30/97

Site Requires Tsnmediate Attentioa
Facility Numen
SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE; July 2Q . 1995
Owner: _PAJ Horton Farm Name: # 279
County.
Agent Visiting Site: K=eth _ cook Fender SWCD ,w Phone: (2 Q22S9-005
V V�L MTV 1.
♦ S::r F .ems:.:. vy: e=ne:
PhvSICBl Address: 2 miles north of the in v--mew-+jof urr 91 r1 WNA cn 1-Asv-A Fo� ZU
on t _ _ left Qff__,SR
Mailing Address: 819 Forest Hills Drive
Wilmington, NC 28403 c
Type of Operation: 'Swine X Poultry Carrie
Design Capacity: 1200- inishing - Number of Animals on Site: 0
Latitude: c Longitude:
Type of Inspeccrion: Ground x Aerial
• Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Friboard: �,,, � Fcci -Inches
For facilities with more than one lagoon please address the other lagoons' freeboard under the
comments section.
Was any seepage observed fmm the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was there ezosion of the dam?: Yes or No
Is adequate land available for land analicaaon? Yes nr Nn Tc rho• r.nv,-, ��._•�.,���� v~ o• uo
- - --r �--.,.. . .
Additional Comments: Farnr J.-, eirxent1Yunder, a�ruc. Lion ter
Browns of Carolina 7/20/95.
Fax to [phone] Signatnre of Agent
r

Site Requires 1=, ed-,ate P.ttenuon:
Fac 1; ry No. :I-
DNISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL 1V A-NL AGEiZN4T
P NZYLAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS S= VISITATION RECORD �•c (,�„f
DATE. Z a , 1995
Time: 3 • o q
Farm Narne/Owner: CAI '�`#Dt �o cyvi 2 I
Mailing Address: SS t� - � + � lI5 "• -(,fit w +••�_ i1.�Z g`iO3
County: _ &2 7 C-Z _ -
Inte?7-ator- w i + rt Phone:
On Site Representative: ez; { 4i`/`im - - - Phone: 219't - ? 62 zSy- 7A
Physical Address/Location:0 }►..lt-5 Aloy*y _ % Ll6 _pY, _&ze5� S���Y�^
Type of Operarion: Swine �C_ Poultry Cattle
Desi Cataacirv: Number of Animals an Site: _7.yt7_
DE_-M Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude:2,1' 21 " Longitude:_' s�" E:eva:�on: Fee:
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient f eeboard of 1 Foot _ 25 ye- 241 hour storm event
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches or No Actual Freeboard:_FtInches
Was anv seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes ogo Was any erosion observed?(Vs or No
Is adequate land available for spray?/ or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes orc)
Crops) being ud.iized: _jv rrwy / _ _ a C��
Does the facility me= SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet frorn Dwe?linGs? or No'
100 Feet from We=.ls? es r No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Scream. ? Yes o>�w
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Fee,, of a USGS NMap Blue Line? �r No
Is animal waste discharged into waters ofjhe state by roan -made ditch, flusihirg sv_ stern, or other
similar man -trade devices? Yes If Yes, Please ExplaL`1-
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on spep-mc acreage with cover crop) or No
Additional Comments: ( 5,
V F r I \
� ` �+ i ate.. v-,a •
C
6\ ) %A4,t
Insucc:or Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use A::-c::rnents if Needed.

Faci .;[v No-
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL1A�:�.GE�JIEN�T
Pti �L FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD 4ttwl%
DATE: _ Z a 1995
Time:
Farm Nalne/Owner: fo wn
MailinaAddress: h ltEk-k441's, �1Lzf��fo3
County: _ p r-- IQ 17 C
' r
Intel-ator- -E,O w L 6+ Cr Phone:
On Site Represe;rtative:',� -a f '1Y1 _ _ - Phone: 2'�-T -7
Physical Address/Location:5 � w /�I�vN �! _ _ 1�1� Si
r a .
Type of Operation: Swine -L� Poultry Cattle
Desis n Capacity: S �e�z� Numbe'l of Anln3al5 on Site: 3 Zcny
DE11 Ct-.—d cation ! 'um.ber: ACE DEM Ce: t 'rc don Nu --mbar : ACNEW
Latitude: -1' � Lonsimde: �° _' �- Eievadon: Fee;
Circle Yes or No
Does tine A-nimLl Waste Lagoon have sufficient ueeboard of 1 Foot - 2f, yen-- 2A hoar scorn even[
(art}roxiya=_ely 1 Foot 7 inches or No Factual Freeboard:_Ft. Inches
Was an seeoaQe observed --Flom the lagoon(s)? Yes oR�p'V as wr,: eroson obse.Yeti? s or No
Is adequate land ava��able for sorav?/ or No Is the cove_ c, o ade-��_te? Yes o�
Crop(s) being a iized: 116y r-v w . / 5� AC
Does the facdiry me--. SCS minimum setback mmeria? 200 Feet ffom, DwE hnzs? 6par NO
100 Feet fzom �4 eds? �s r�No
Is Lhe animal waste stockailed within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Si e=? Yes oilw
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a LzSGS 1\113o Blue Line? <5zzr No
Is animal waste discharged into waters of he state by man-made ditch, syste:n, or other,
- sim.iiar than-aldevices? Yes
o If Yes, Please Expl Jn. V
Does the faciiiuv maintain adequate waste management records (volu_ues o_ u:a=luxe, land applied,
si}rav irrigated on sperinc acreage with cover crop)y,�Vor No
Additional Commencs: f q
c _
--b\
Insuey,or Name -natuie .
cc: Fsciuty Assessment Unit if Needed-