300010_INSPECTIONS_20171231

+• Di% ision.of'Water-Resource-`
Facility'Number [ - Division of Soil and Water �crvation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: �rt�� Arrival Time: Departure Time: p County: ti Region:
Farm Name: `I un[k eW �T_ky-fy Owner Email:
Owner Name: v�(y y} e, Whz- Phone: 'b2jL- A ()Cl - 131
Mailing Address: -t 00 1A)h7, k/aV1_b A06CPS—Vi k N V rLlo -1-1 -
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: \ 1LAN Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: V
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: �jCJ� G,>� ty� Longitude: 0b-1�
i �-{a w 7 Rtw� col N 7 L✓ �'GIY1A Lv_�2 Ln
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharp_es and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (lfyes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
jDairy Cow
jDairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes k No ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes xNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: - tb Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
0 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: WS P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 11
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees. severe erosion. seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
�&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required butlers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
NA
Y "4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): I em., QLUt'L
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable [] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
2 l . Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard VQ Waste Analysis Soil Analysis
❑"'~orsWeather
Code
Rainfall W Stocking rl C-ror vgwd, E t 2�] Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? I�
❑ Yes
F�(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�kNA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: 11
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 0 No DONA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawinp-s of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
2 MCA, Y) Jau.1 tns4a 1 led ? �,65 I A-V)-Gwvr—y6v
.l J
�- CyrI bYiA�+bl'� �ub +tA s I ecAy--Ccj(,hra_�r,.Zk Use,
Cq) C�
/,5� yw"CA VW+r_ rs V_ yl 60 "019(-Vr)
ckua�" Y
0)4�7
Reviewer/inspector N
Reviewer/Inspector S
Page 3 of 3
V\. k.feY5 3o bP. CaA t-(b
Phone: 4j�j�j`�
Date: l �1
21412015

Division of Water Resour
Facility Number 0 Division of Soil and V4'ater nservation ¢ �Q Pm
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: 9D Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 9 Routine () Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency Q Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Lill Zb Arrival Time: Departure Time: 4Q County: b. ouyie Region: w5RO
Farm Name: �P�CV1eV�j ,]2�-S�VS Owner Email: (e,2.V'Vi�.UJ�Pir5y5�_�U'T�d
77 co m
Owner fame: w" n e_ L U+ Z Phone:
Mailing Address: 0Q L, L) rl 'p— Nc �Z _160_2r_
Physical Address: Facility Contact: wa-A4 >ne__ + Title: Phone: �� f q 3 -71^7
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: asp S� 1 �i5�! Longitude: j QC' 3q t 001,
_- o v 1 n 1 1 L U+-z
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
I E]ILa er
Non -La erI I Ed
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
-,—
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
[] Yes WNo [] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes tNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

FacilityNumber: - Date of Ins ection: 6 i7
Waste Collection & Treatment wr
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ZNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
i n
Identifier:a01�
Spillway?: e 5
Designed Freeboard (in): 1 2 01 7
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0< No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc_) pi
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a es Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
Y40
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
5�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
Cg<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
XV,
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
DExcessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
a
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
;9/No
TTX"
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes [� o ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑..Maps ❑ Lease Agr ements ❑Other:
i
21. oes record keeping need i movement? re}ieki Ye No �Zather
❑ NE
aste Applic on eekly Freeboar aste Analysis oil Analysis II "'- '� T`s� Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield0 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? XYes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? _ 1�Y ❑ Yes [] No ��VA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 f 3l�lp — ;Z- 4 7 1 6 5 • �/ t 000 �'�(21412015 Continued
S�aS`/16 - 3•57& lbS. L Toj fJJJ 9141t6 = 41-7.5755�

r
Facili Number: '3Q - Date of Inspection: j j d C 7
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste4aption equipment as required by the permit? Yes 4No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No PTNA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below,
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes Dj No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
eo,l (e W-P d.o-4 ? Le-b" - �l
®C iL +roL'i 1 rf-Pa:, re- d ? 6 u t I `1 be, h i tri P u ay
5ol L i-e-sfs A ue_. -7 e
C v im mew E �� 1 n -,r-os 2.tn OLA 4 e a -i-b r",01-as 7 N&w
ri A IC- r In d.W pa.s tts rt- re+aI-e-3-
w as- e, i o .. Ue d o_+. A �6 �r VIP, z �e y- / �j OOrd� I v�� ,yo p � &LA-i rl
A'S - 0 U iR.'�'11 V b1j c;le_L Je_ ci8 , 400 w�i�� o P1(5GeQc o
one r _p
L')
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
coc-x
Phone ��j� to —q6 q
Date: 1 Z� -7
Page 3 of 3 21412015

{Division of Water Resource,.
Facility Number 3 d - yl Q O Division of Soil and Water Conservation l ; 30 �9m
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co
pliance Inspection Operation Review p Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Timer County:, V J Qi Region: �C)
Farm Name: Owner Entail: d P�y leu) i e r 0_IJllop K-e
G _ •_
Owner Name: rN e, L L)Phone: /J�/�, /•/I�/1
Mailing Address: 300 L UJ- Z L4t..V1 2 , oG �Lrj
Physical Address: N /
Facility Contact: e L U Zr Title: Phone: 0, gQq — 1 -37 7
Onsite Representative: Integrator: 1)
10
Certified Operator: Certification Number: �A�.
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
0 Q1 `l 11
Latitude: 35 5 ! TS Longitude:
L4 0 \#z Awl Ra
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
TN'on-Layer
a er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
So" 3 q '
no H
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
'Dairy
Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
D�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page I of 3
21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: V oZdl
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
{ Identifier: 5 P
tL
Spillway?:'
Designed Freeboard (in): { y
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses 'm e ' e public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
�7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? � Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permi . ❑Yes
[� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) 7�`
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require � Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Frozen Ground ❑Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc..)
❑ PAN ❑PAN > 10%or 10 lbs. ❑Total Phosphorus ❑Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑Evidence of Wind Drift ❑Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 'AW V
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Re uired Records & Documents
14. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes , 6No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 14 No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Other:
21. oes record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste Application re, eekly Freeboard. aste Analysis oil Analysis s [Keather Code
[RainfallStocking [W
op Yield a 120 Minute Inspections [Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections y
❑ Yes �EfNo
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes [-]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[� NA ❑ NE
21412014 Continued
[� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) 7�`
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require � Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Frozen Ground ❑Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc..)
❑ PAN ❑PAN > 10%or 10 lbs. ❑Total Phosphorus ❑Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑Evidence of Wind Drift ❑Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): 'AW V
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Re uired Records & Documents
14. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes , 6No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 14 No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ Other:
21. oes record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste Application re, eekly Freeboard. aste Analysis oil Analysis s [Keather Code
[RainfallStocking [W
op Yield a 120 Minute Inspections [Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections y
❑ Yes �EfNo
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Page 2 of 3
❑ Yes [-]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[� NA ❑ NE
21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection: 02, ��
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
WA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge
levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
'
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes P<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the ReviewerAnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
;<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
9No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[No
❑ NA
❑ NE
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments
Use dr-awin2s of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
a`i. =rri a+or\* solid 3prea-dow-&aIi ueTW
-
;2
Nla.� ao is &f p 1 i ca*on re -co c4 S wt W_41'6ct1
'50 l e d ue- 0 r' 7
� ;y �
1 r 4 1 G;l._4'k, 1'7
OL tUT L on tey,:�
P �e. le_ot`�, �
q
PA t,�o r tc-- o h r U-� j �:; t� •� IQe., � i � � � �� �s `��C
A=A4-
t tea- c�
� - Lo
5 15'. 660 .s C,.-1 shsjrs s D 13.1
9 1.01 4b5.NMOO SS_h=10 161.N/TeN
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: -]�
Date: a- Aar oZU
21412014

AWL
Now 40 Division of Water Resources
Facility Number L 1 - �� 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: - Le/s Arrival Time: lO: p 4 w` Departure Time: County: UaV I L Region:
Farm Name: 0e'e'('V1'tL'j J-P_r$fy rclr M- Owner Email: �0(1/!C G,r$� Ok�adk.(dr7l
Owner Name: I Ala fle_ L CA 11 '�j / Phone:
Mailing Address: L et� L--. - ✓ e- / � loGff S V� Ile ,elC
Physical Address: Sa' pw e,
Facility Contact:
f j( 41t Z }'Z Title:
� j
Onsite Representative: L.
Certified Operator: ay/1G Lu f'z
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
s- 41V W —µto r $ol -- 0 C.,1. zx - 0 L u �_z L.v
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Other
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
Phone: tdl I -?�- qaI-/37
Integrator:
Certification Number: Am 1,56 3 3
Certification Number:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Non-L
Pullets
Turkey
Other
Poults
Design Current
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
p 3
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dai
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes CE�j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes []No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes „M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: p IDate of Inspec—t—ion-7T 2�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Z 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
W S
Identifier: r
Spillway?: s
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate puhlic health
or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
.0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q 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
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes .Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): G ��n , A -r'
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
CKNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
F�q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
g] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
t9. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
L2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
" No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑Yes JkNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application ,Eg-weekly Freeboard Kwaste Analysis IRISoil Analysis ® Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking LE�C_rop Yield JR120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes JE§.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No JZ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: 3Q - ? a . Date of Inspection: Z -
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
'fig -No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
fK No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
jD-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
2�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
JgLNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
r� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
fNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
& No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
NjNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). I
�. Si / p44e. i A L01 Y J o ✓) e ? D,r,n t, �,. i 1 Z a I q +1t4c +—
�%r�k`,-, � I d• y apds�u rr s �►// /{.� k-�� . 1 if-5 ! _ .}-
f La o � jQ } j � r� +'fir r�.� L3 � !� � e`KKa {/ n �/ I t S� W T� - 1 �.../51 " 1 }�l q 6~ Z. `� C
vV f r) • l` L ZOi�s J
�f w 10'J 5.61,) � 'l L li `1�w.f"'�� 1�� Gjy ✓iCx"T
zyTf y dr P
2 t Alk� 2 V 1.5 V �P r' c per r 4p'J'
54`rf� Xo r `f 5� Al_
�. t.r7 k-�.ss k-lyre
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: �3� 776
Date:
21412014

V" Division of Water Resour
11 Facility Number - 0 Division of Soil and Water o.nservation
0 Other Agency 11
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Ins ction V Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
�3 'WA .—
Date of Visit: 2 Z • � Arrival Time: '. 1 Departure Time: , JA County: \f� Region: wS Q.cD
Farm Name: , t�„� .r^in,, Owner Email: CLeja­r-r, t•4]1W C_LSfj L, tsar
Owner Name: L,, Phone: al9 • (p 1 b 1
Mailing Address: .7,pp
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: , Lu4-7, Title: okNG'— Phone: CM�
Onsite Representative: W .L-Ila Integrator:
Certified Operator: !JJ , L j4e Certification Number: AWR 25&35
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
1-4001 — owy em ­ 8 r L Cdwc. LA — t— 0 -Ii-2=7 LK.
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
250
1p
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dairy�r4s
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made? []Yes [—]No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No h NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA [] NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: p - �,> Date of Inspection; --T-
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No EdNA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
1,11
Spillway?: NU
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): % `-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion; seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
[:]Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[RrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[2/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
[0/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E, No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [27 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Co rn
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
Q Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[v]�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
;n17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[2No
❑ NA
❑
1>' 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Ej/NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
2/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
` ❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
w
Q21, Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
aste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
g3
Rainfall BV'Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
-o
V"22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continuer)
I

[Facility Number: - ,> Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E3,�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
✓❑(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
,
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
E"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
[;3"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[:]Yes allo DNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [RIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[�/No
❑ Yes
dyes
gNo
-EIdo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations o other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
t -So;�s it lot ? w.� rZlI"J'# F (0- Kdzx
F;e U #Z — Vtov+-rr...lawc�-Mypej Z Su,-� c_ r. f 3 rc• ��
FL
Ke Ijs Z 0, — Iorh
'w e1,
t� 4o v' � :�w (s�o �.��`�� `� 4 PAS
�T�vls;
nitj +5 vart -�Aa I Not.,
W13 03 j_—VL'0 la'u IM14 (0"4 0-� W UP)
Dr��ice►• fn ate, s
!"
IOrJ Tiitl G
Reviewer/Inspector Name.-
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Q...MM
w'edvrLu
,).j
i9 _r
Av4—Ae
F-4-I I Ap(o
Phone: JO
Date: 2-2_ l
21412011

Facility Number a ,k
O 'Division of Water Quality.12111
O Division of Soil and Water rservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: O' Compliance Inspection C5 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: G Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: l Ll 161 13 Arrival Time: Departure Time:—2 ;2 V County• 'i AVt t, Region:
Farm Name: � ti/IG{/3��Y -1 �H^ Owner Email: jae,44ry"'dP iMbekty if[•(vwt•+
Owner Name: Il�,.,,o �. ; ,� R Phone:
Mailing Address: 3bo LA-L Lame. — Ma,4<t L le J G
Physical Address: —f
Facility Contact: , �v� $ Title: �jaly�ei" Phone: A4 q01 •1 3 1
Onsite Representative: w , Lv-]y, Integrator:
Certified Operator: i!V . L 4t Certification Number: +WQj 2 S'L 33
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turke Puults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
- . 1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
2 o
1 a4
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer vAU
Dry Cow
—4
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
i
[—]Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
1 NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
k
I❑ NA
❑ NE
• c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑% o
t
❑1 NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
. Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued z
='_

µ3 t....S.� `- r,+ h.^ � �✓�--�*.' -n w .. - .•y 1-war `. .. . i' . -... .- ,— ,..,-.. .. ,
...,. . -.. _
. . _.
ti. � � .
.. .,. �
Facili Number: 30 - 10 Date of Inspection: 1�
3
Waste Collection & Treatment
4, Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[—]No
f
[DNA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: �,sP
' Spillway?: 7G 5
Designed Freeboard (in): 0-�
Observed Freeboard (in): % a
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
2] No
[DNA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
[:]Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑✓ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
i
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
,
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
' 11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0 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 ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
LL ``Drift
12. Crop Type(s): �IA (. C'1/m� 416, 7,
---
t
g�o�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
i
[H] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
i
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑J No
❑ NA
❑ NE -
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[Z o
❑ NA
❑ NE
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ENE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
❑ No
2"NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

•
Facili Number: x o - j D Date of inspection: 1 24ftqW
I
24. Did the facility fait to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑J No
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
r
Q No
❑DNA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ LagoonlStorage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑v No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes J❑ No
❑NA ❑NE
D NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Sall,s &y Zo,q
NGw S rf�c� CF11�r'T,Or` 1�jArr�,13'.�
J
— Cary SIN h�� j 1 �11 II -
�Y9r" ZO¢�^��L 7✓ J7 (01. 1-0 /Air/ 14� rr AnAo�Ir'�! �v.l�f�
i r
—@ (tag �� /s � �� I I -� cp►�s,,�,� sue; I g� � rc,: �� f
Key., tv I sifntj (cam( i-'tAd , 0s,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: LI j o) I
'. 1
21412011

W Division of Water Quality
Facility`Number 3 D -EIP
Division of Soil and Water Con rvation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Com fiance Inspection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: 1 1a 3 Arrival Time: :0 3 Departure Time: Z', {' County: J)AVi t: Region: {�C�
Farm Name: �I�-V"yVq Owner Email: �94WVI&,J i@ IMo y Sri Ct rs^
Owner Name: ��,,;Phone:
Mailing Address: 3 bo L-14 1 Ll.yt4C,, — � Dc ll�� �, �lZ „� C'
Physical Address: 4.
Facility Contact: Lv'} Ir Title: 0 WV%1^' Phone: LMi .1311-
Onsite Representative: LV If, Integrator:
Certified Operator: • �. J�� _ Certification Number: Qj -Z 7j3
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
1.0vi — l iv y 43010 Ca vtu P.J R 1✓ tz Ln
L
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
�A F;LayerNon-Layer
vey rounry
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Design Current
Discharp-es and Stream. Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop:..
Dairy Cow
2S0
�}
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer vr,
mot_,.
',—
D Cow
Non-Dairyl
O
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes [Z(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ No
E�o
❑ Yes
E2�No
`PNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 30 - i G = is Date of Inspection: j
Waste Collection & Treatment dNo
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No 6"NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:^
Spillway?: G S
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes [;j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes [t f No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes [Ef No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes M/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > l 0% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): ( 4 L C Vtlt 5:) , -tv,' '. &'t i 1 t716i — 2-1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16_ Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes E/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? C] Yes [/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes FZ/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑ Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [21"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No [.]NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: ^ v - Date of Inspection: 12,11
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes 1;dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Q No ❑ A ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No dNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [7�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes E7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
❑ Yes rdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [ /No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes
34. Does the facility require a follow --up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes
'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
- (J�va g�rcstic�.- Ct.irbr�hdr ri3 �) J i
.� —q,,j/ it o� Rtl�s i+i� (te�s ��+i �tcL �;� I��� [s�
—�Iu� �•1rs vas �� �� — tv�s�j� 5;,, �SI�NK.v rY;� P� ,�
— key" I &. rcc. i <�kv_ 'S (GA,.( i - hzt Q,, i-)s r )4�•c �
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date: l7 3
21412011

^1� -: '';r-.:: �.•r+•1 j..i-1 -•-�S t-� 'ti•-^`tr . r.: ".1 y ,r,. r p-.,•.C� n.. wh . _ . y . }
Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ?S [] - .i �O Division of Soil and Water Co ervatio
O Other Agency
is -A—
Type of Visit: Q) Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review p Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral C) Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
. Date of Visit: /p, ,�S Arrival Time Departure Time: Q iAO County: Region:
t
Farm Name: Q 0 A a �{Q�,� Owner Email:
l
Owner Name: . Uzi!Phone: q q br/ ' (6 fj I
d -
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: qq� ��A� Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedei
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Latitude:
Phone: 40 7 -13 % 1
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
I JNon-Laycr I E]
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canacitv Pon.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
�1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. , What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 1
Longitude: f >
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
�2 e
/, 2 n
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
d l-
; ; 1k
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
I
❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a -
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes \ �No
r
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued
_70

Facili Number: - • Date of Inspection: 16 f n 1 d
i�
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes Q No
.11 a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1,05 P
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) I
f
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes [ 16c
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes WNo
❑ 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?
y
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
0F
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ®"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload 0 Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 1bs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure
to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes}
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
rV No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
N
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
r
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
. 20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
®No
❑ NA
❑ NE
' the appropriate box.
I y
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design [—]maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
2�oea record•kegping need improvement? If_yes,.check-the,appropriate-box below;. —
Waste Application ®Weekly Freeboard Q�Waste Analysis ® Soil Analysis
_ I
® Yes ❑ No
Q Waste..Transfers
❑ NA ❑ NE
,Q''Weather Code
0 Rainfall 0Stocking, :] Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections ]Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspection
QSludge.Survey�
�®
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q NA
❑ NE
- Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

�' /,T'+.. , +,-T+frr"+..rv�fi,".1. „a' '^.r,:n..-.f%"".-.K{i^.iv Yn� "/G�.s�..- ..•vtiin. �-I"'F. °r:;.%..'td'1-s. Pv..-.�..�...-:.da,.�F��:..,nr 'M_--N^:':.. n r R"
„ yr
Facility Number: jDate of Inspection: I ~�
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? + �®-Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No ®<A ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
:? ❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ��No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes (B No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
N
� o
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30, Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
I kf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[] Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑Yes
` No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
Q'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
g1gg1 ao ia_--
3. 73 1bs.�l�j lo�lara ate= q,
A n A A ! 1 V
r. s,�. Reviewer/inspector Name: 1AA0 )
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: \-f f l A a Pig d A-i V M-P I
Page 3 of 3 " 1
MWIM
Phone: -] 7 1 — Sa g�
Date: lO' �/ a 01
2/4/2011 f t

(1 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number ©- 0 Division of Soil and Water Arvation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: (J z3 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: A%Ldt Region:
� 11jj
Farm Name: _ yj; �y,1y '}`A�Nti Owner Email: ;e�J®MO�kSJ+`r�. CaM
Owner Name: WA,18fL w�Z Phone: Ci gq �� 61 j
Mailing Address: -3Oo L_ut. F7_ Ln , Y AAo,kfll 11 e G Z 02-,q
Physical Address: 5kKi57 Q cy
Facility Contact: 0,kti ner L­K�7_- Title: Phone: /37�
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
a
Location of Farm: Latitude: 35- o 5 /y j i/ Longitude: eo "3 -/ 00
If,,y jZ)! ., 1_ Gar, R ,a Lie tz L ✓t .
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity, Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Non -La
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
ZSO
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
I
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No [DNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[—]Yes [:]No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 30 - Date of Inspection: 2-3idw i
Waste Collection & Treatment qW
X
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ YesNo ❑ 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: W Df S
Spillway?: �eS
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): gQ
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any f the structures observed? ❑ Yes I� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) Tk
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
�(No
❑ NA
C] NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): Gof rt 5, 411.G gr-�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?J�C
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
t8. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil At eather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield E120 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

'Facility Number: 10 - 162 _j Date of Inspection: 0 Z3
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste apph ion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
20. J_fT�'a-[an CG3�r�rgv. d� ��'Z'1O? GOt/d dCM16r �-7/0, ,tA
dex 201.2-1
s 1� cn�l s(7 le�t� `E r 2obtiVwio), X- Sum
Zl. j
f 2011
014I10: 5 INN/-bn
0��1'f�ly 3$ I6>f�oa0 �jal.
Reviewer/Inspector Name: DI ' r (I l I W"al I f Phone: Oye) T] 1— 3 ZF.�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ��� Date: (% Z f 2,�V
Page 3 of 3 21412011

ivision of Water Quality
Facility Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Other Ag9y�ency I �' [
Type of Visit 01
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
� Routine 0 Complaint
0 Fallow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of visit: a 4 0 Arrival Time: Q Departure Time: County: _ Zlai l e- Region: j d
Farm Name: ��Q.e U 1+° U, 7 ��►r-5 u �[3 r fh Owner Ema46 �f Vl eA.r-1 c#3 i� DC.L� V d l e -
Owner Name: W QU n e _ _ U LA Z_ Phone:
Mailing Address: ��� L V 1 Z Lun e- RAP
(lam (JL,5 y Ile t)�
Physical Address: __ , - } S�M L
Facility Contact:yy�4 vie- Title: �tPhone No:
Onsite Representative: No-A 4 Yi -e-
Certified Operator: L . W 2= l Y\e< Lutz- Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ®A By �u Longitude: �d o Q0
T - 46 west 1-6 vx Mo+r (,e f onto Inca d • 1Je �� an+o
L L)i Z LO-+n �-
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Pouets
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dai Cow
2 2-
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifej
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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?
W ti, t4 -It Aloe 4 4
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: b— is Date of Inspection a !,7111 0 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: Vona
Spillway?: L'
Designed Freeboard (in): 2
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 7
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5
El NA El NE
❑NA El NE
Structure 6
❑ NE
❑ Yes
% No
❑ NA
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 19No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) 0
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
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
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.) I `
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) / ��.�,((
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes Z No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes 56 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES -answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone:
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: 0
.12128104 Continued

0 0
Facility Number: 35 10 Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? l ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
VRainfall
W,aste ApYstocking
tion [W�eeekly Freeboard�,�aste Analysis ,oil AAnalysis,�,% L21 Crop Yield [y'120 Minute Inspections E9`Monthly and I" Rain Inspections L!e}'/veather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes IX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge sun ey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
I(NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
CXNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes,
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
El 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
bdNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
E/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
a� Cal-i brad on Aue- ocA obier ab I0
o A-& 100 �)a-T V e 5+,e d 7 .
T
al aob9 ot� -�eSf re-SUl+S 7
3. J. 1 -5 . NI / cc c ra4.
Page 3 of 3
12128104

0
0� `%JAT�'? Incident Report
Report Number.
201001685 N b ab to — C- Q:,gq
`�
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First/Mid/Last Name:
Incident Started: 01/20/2010
Company Name:
County: Davie
Phone:
City: Mocksville
Pager/Mobile Phone: !
Farm #: 030-0010
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit:] AWC300010
Company Name:
Facility: Deerview Jersey Farm
Address:
First Name: C
Middle Name: Wayne
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Lutz
Phone:
Address 300 Lutz Ln
Pager/Mobile Phone: I
CitylStatelZip: Mocksville NC 27028
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM
Chemical Name Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal Position
Method:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Location of Incident: Lutz Lane
Address:
CitylStatelZip
Report Created 05/14/10 12:50 PM
Position Accuracy:
Position Datum:
Page 1

•
•
Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance:
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown Estimated Number of fish?
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type. (Above Ground or Under Ground)
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Access to Farm
Structure Questions
0 Animal Population
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
E Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14/10 12:50 PM Page 2

1
•M
•
Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
Animal Population
Confined?
Depop?
Feed Available?
Mortality?
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
Available Fields?
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches
Waste Pond WASTE POND 18,00
Event Type
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered
Incident Start
Event Date
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [--]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[)No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Due Date Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
10-01-21 08:00:00
2010-05-13 02:03:16
2010-01-20 08:00:00
Due Date Comment
Report Created 05/14/10 12:50 PM Page 3

Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
DWQ Information:
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
Date/Time: 2010-05-13 02:03:16 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 12:50 PM Page 4

I
Division of Water Quality
Facility Number 30 O Division of Soil and Water Conservation 1 O A N
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: "`t t Arrival Time: Departure Time: `, V D County: 1� Region:WSW
Farm Name: • le w - 1 r Owner).E7iI d
Owner Name: c i? LU} PhotTe: t3
Mailing Address: U+L 10-ne- 6 Lu-SV i [ r e- NC, 2 7 da $
Physical Address: �Q iN1(
Facility Contact: [A)�-I h Q Title: Phone No:(e a6q— I3
Onsite Representative: )rk1.arLe Integrator:
Certified Operator: use Lu+z—
Certi� � Operator Certification Number: O
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Z - y d w es-t
Swine
Back-up Certification Number:
o �' - o «
Latitude: 'iS Longitude: 0
L� F + o v_\+G C. �+1 r� Le + a n+o
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
' O
Lj
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cowl
I
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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 C�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

1
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection ( b ] •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes iNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
r-
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
b Identifier: Vy (J�rj
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): (00
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
[X No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
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 > l0% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drifl ElApplication Outside of Area
� MA12. Crop type(s) hl A Alj J / i AAAJ
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
19 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ yes
[<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
�dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
kc,
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
A-%--
Reviewerlinspector Name ffle'fis5a,WOSA rQ Phone: a $
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: Date: 313d
12128104 eontinued

1
Facility Number: 30 —
�e of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [40 ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other ,�,�
21. Does record keeping need imp ement? ❑ Yes EK0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste A lic 'on Weekl Freeboard aste Analysis oil Analysis r3-wmit_ T___..�
pP Y Y ,_,,,` Y
CainfalI Stocking C` Crop Yield 20 Minute Inspections Ermonthly and V Rain Inspections Bather Code
1) q--I:::
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No WNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No (WNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 06No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes 06 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes �6 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 I<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Revi ewer/] nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes to No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes tgo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
N6
%-�r
n

Y Dnisiornof:Water'Quaht
,FaCtltty Number D D Division of Soil ana-Water conservation i AM
0,Other'Agency
Type of Visit N1 �C(ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
I I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0 rrival Time: Departure Time:County: DCLVle, Region:
Farm Name: e-AA3 zac5eA.4 Ea r M Owner Email: �� � / -
Owner Name: W&..0 n � L l] } zJ Phone: 4) ! v 6
Mailing Address: C AJ C, R -7 6_4�
Physical Address:
2 _ 1,3 T
Facility Contact: � �o-•�•i n 2 L U `1 ZTitle: Phone ��
Onsite Representative: iX L he LU + Integrator:
Certified Operator: U 1 7 Operator Certification ,Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: � I `T Longitude:
T- q6 W,2 5t� tb � g01 Nor` i d lnta CO- n cL_ le on to
�.�+z- Lary e_ Le
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
USDairy Cow
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: U
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: D— Date of Inspection 0 �(
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ��V Q,S P
pona
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): I 1
jg
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
ElNA
ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
ElYes
XNo
❑ 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?
1
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
]I _ Is there evidence of incorrect application9 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) (y
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
[--]Yes
VjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA.
ElNE
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination'
❑ Yes
No
El NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
El
No
❑ NA
El NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
ffT, o
ElNA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name M
Phone: 51
Reviewerllnspector Signature:
Date: Ia a j 0
Li
I-. A V 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Q 0-1te of Inspection
Required: Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ElWUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does `cord keeping need �WVec
vement? Ff-yes, elf ee ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application y Freeboard `L,' Waste Analysis oil Analysis ers
�(Rainfall N tockineop Yield & r2O Minute Inspections a onthly and 1" Rain Inspections R eatherCode
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes KNo ElNA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑Yes ❑ No] NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No
1XNA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes � No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes X
No ❑NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ElYes ElNA ElNE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern`? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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 X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: 10
d1.01 Do ? So f eSf F-eS u f 5 c .- • wo /l 2.1.E 4 S2
put15 P;>No, W %jt���.
I �rri q 0.i10 rl Q i p2 d r-o.-, ?
R.
,qq 16 /6cc
12128104

Facility Number: 0 — O Date of Inspection 141.2116
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _ S
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
Zo
❑ 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
[)(No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require [] Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
I. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
, Flo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop W' ow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
•-Aa .
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?Diryes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
;R o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[''Yes
�No
❑ NA
El NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
!!❑Yes
O(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
0 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
I ReviewerAnsvector Name I VIP I helao
v Phone: a I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 6 _ �.�A�L �� a� � ate: (p I �j 1 Q
12128104 Continued

W
s
Facility Number: lRate of Inspection a !
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes D�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps El Other
21. Does cord keeping neeWw;e�ek'y
rovement? If yes, chec the appropriate box b ow. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Freeboar�9120
Waste Analysis SoilAnalysis❑ Rainfall StockingCrop Yield Minute Inspections 0 Monthly and V Rain Inspections 9 Bather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No bdNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? I j — Poo (U Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No VNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes P(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ElYes ❑ No [YNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes A 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 P,] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ieI discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes J%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
�0�o_ 1 V r a.. +� 0.�1C� 2L� U P �Co Cd I re�L
y L� ste� P e Id,s 1� u1�5 ? noi4U�
a�
-
L9-4-�- a - Z? 0 0-? ) a-xp-
J00-
�. _ elf_ .. �%. • /i � / r /I . r1. .• n
li �J o/NF
• I Ir i i
��U 12,128104 a • 5-4-
a3 joy 3 a 1 �s .N�1000 rr/a(PIoG &2P4,10Z) 3.4

0
•
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 300010 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC30001P ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance -Inspection _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Davie Region: Wit ston-Salem _
Date of Visit: 01/18/2006 _ Entry Time:01:20 PM Exit Time: 02A5 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Deerview Jersey Farm _ Owner Email:
Owner: C Wayne Lutz
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 300 LWtz Ln Mocksvilte SIC 27026
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Latitude: 35°59'45"
1-40 west onto Hwy 801 north. Right onto Cana Road. Right onto Lutz Lane.
Longitude:80°34'00"
Question Areas:
Discharges & stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents JJ Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles Wayne Lutz
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 25633
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Wayne Lutz Phone:
24 hour contact name Wayne Lutz Phone:
Primary Inspector: Melissa Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
28. Tract -1413 needs to be added to WUP.
28. May want to add small grain as a harvested crop to the WUP. Suggest listing fields as irrigation pulls in the WUP.
Good job Wayne!
10/26/05 waste analysis=3.4 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 01/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Q Cattle - Milk Cow 250 174
Total Design Capacity: 250
Total SSLW: 350,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Laste Pond
WSP
32.00
48.00
Page: 2

• •
Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility
Number:
300010
inspection Late: 01/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Yes
No
NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
■
❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
■
❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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 Waters of the State other than from a
❑
■
❑ Cl
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑ ❑
1f yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑ ❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑ ❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑ ❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (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 maintenance or
❑
■
Cl ❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
Cl
■
❑ ❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 01/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application Yes No NA NE
PAN? ❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.? Q
Total P205? Cl
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil? ❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Evidence of wind drift? ❑
Application outside of application area? ❑
Crop Type 1 Soybeans
Crop Type 2 Small Grain Cover
Crop Type 3 Small Grain Overseed
Crop Type 4 Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
Q
■
❑
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
Cl
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
In
Cl
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
Q
Page: 4

Permit: AWC300010 Owner- Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 01/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yes No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
■
Cl
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 01/18/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ Q
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ Q ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
n■Q❑
Page: 6

Facility: Number 3 t
I
--
Division
of Water Quality .
O Division of Soil and Water Col rvation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit W mpHance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: U I ►rrivalTime: o Departure Time: ounh': VJ C Region: —50-0
Farm (Same: Q e,.'. y'iet j T2g`Sgm Faxm Owner E il: �( j
Owner dame: � � 1a to ? _ L u f Z_ Phone:
Mailing Address: ��% Z._ L ,�__; oC_k_6 V Ile 1 +y
Physical Address: 4m
Facility Contact: ! Lt��v vt_ LU'Z Title: Phone No. "1,3-7 7
Onsite Representative: L��Q+L iQ— L L) Integrator:
Certified Operator. lLe-�� ��� Operator Certification number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: L?'� j Nr Longitude: M o .q V ty p
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Laver
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
DischaMes & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated ac ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
DairvCow
o7�0
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heite
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: El
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
$ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: `, (} ® Date of Inspection 1 00
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: )L"JQ5+e___ 'n
Spillway?: 1 j
Designed Freeboard (in):
0 Observed Freeboard (in): r�9
❑ Yes �J No
❑ Yes /❑ No
Structure 4 Structure 5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes
IgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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 pl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes vTo ❑ 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? II
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window El Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) ��n/( 1 11 l ro,i tl -�nr j A A to i'1. fe_,"V',00 a [VS'7�
13.
Soil type(s) J
"✓
14,
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
El
ElNE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination;❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
FF� Q ra6 5 V re— C3w ?
)K
s
Reviewer/Inspector Name r 1 M!S � �" Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Sign atu ' Date: O Q
17/7N//1d C'niltipt d

Facility Number: — D-O Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available'? If yes. check -
the El Yes No El NA El NE
appropirate box. ElWUP El Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Do's record keeping need improvement? If yes, checkthe appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No El NA El NE
Waste Application M/Weekly Freeboard ID/Waste Analysis Soil Analysis S-Waste-Transforc� -E] An
Rainfall E Stocking 9/crop Yield d120 Minute Inspections IJ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections Ltd Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Y No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected. did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
Cl Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? i ,
�❑ Yes
'X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
70(NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
tirNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: 1
j°l��l°S_ 3.�f s.N/r000
k� aid *y W U 0,
4- ik) UL,/I,I,4_�l U&P
�VvJ r'vv P —�! �- �'a
I L/Ld/U4

• •
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 300010 — Facility Facility Status. Agjive Permit: AWC3_00Q10 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection _ _ Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine _ County: Davie Region: Winston-Salem__
Date of Visit: 08/10/2005 Entry Time: 09:00 AM Exit Time: 10:00 AM __ Incident #:
Farm Name. Deenriew ,jersey Farm _ Owner Email:
Owner: C Wayne Lutz Phone: 336-99U161
Mailing Address: 300 Lutz Ln MocksAfie NC 27028
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude: 80°34'00"
1-40 west onto Hwy 801 north. Right onto Cana Road. Right onto Lutz Lane.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts Q Waste Collection & Treatment Q Waste Application
Q Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Charles Wayne Lutz Operator Certification Number: 25633
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Wayne Lutz Phone:
24 hour contact name Wayne Lutz Phone:
Primary Inspector: WMis a M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
- Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Date: g U
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
3. Newly established stocktrails, grassed waterway, buffers, etc. look great! Pastures are beautiful! Goodjob.
7. Ruts on embankment of WSP look better.
18. Will need pressure gauge for irrigation gun to calibrate.
21. 2005 soil test results look good.
7/19/05 Waste analysis = 4.3 lbs. N11000 gal.
Page: 1

•
•
Permit: AWC300010 Owner- Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 08/1012005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
0 Cattle - Milk Cow 250 150
Total Design Capacity: 250
Total SSLW: 350,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond I WSP 32.00 46.00
Page: 2

•
•
Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz
Facility Number: 300010
Inspection Date: 08/10/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes_ No NA NE
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ M ❑ ❑
C. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
■
❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yes
■
No
❑
NA
❑
NE
Waste Collertion_ Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
Cl
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e.1 large trees, severe erosion,
❑
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not property addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (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 maintenance or
❑
0
❑
❑
improvement?
Yes
No
NA
NF
Wnqtp Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑
M
❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain (Wheal,
Barley,
Oats)
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWC300010 Owner - Facility: C Wayne Lutz
Inspection Date: 08/10/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 300010
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applicafian
Crop Type 6
YPS
No NA
NE
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? ❑
■ ❑
❑
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■ ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■ ❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment?
■
YPs
❑ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Records and Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
■
❑
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC300010 Owner- Facility: C Wayne Lutz Facility Humber: 300010
Inspection Date: 08/10/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑
No N6
■ ❑
NE
❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality
O
■ ❑
❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the lime of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
❑
■ ❑
❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
■ ❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■ ❑
❑
Page: 5

factl� ty"Numlier'
:�
1r=
_ 0
1 � E
'Dnaston of WFater Quality
Division of Soil and Water C no servahon
,Otheer Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral Q Emergency 0 Other qDenied Access
Date of Visit: $ 0 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Q Region: —1—SIZ-0
Farm Name: b _ex _y( e Q [=ar-rn__ Owner Email:
Owner Fame: _ V�J �tU irle_ _ _LU-�Z Phone:
Mailing Address: .'7d� �-uf Z �c�n�. r Moe��sv_► ll�, N� 70�
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Y� L UT . _ Title: Phone No: 04-a
Onsite Representative: L U integrator:
Certified Operator: (Tl IVIL (-U_�L Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: � �� Longitude: ®o�
- � we_s+ go 1 nor`Nn . V_i 8 R on fo Cana.
Qh­�0n+O Lv+z Ubne—
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feedei
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
❑ Non-Layet I
-
Other
❑ Other - - -
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges R 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow-
Dai Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: EU
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
El NA
El NE
12128104
Continued

* Date of Inspection [ r
Facility Number: 0-
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
DiNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
El Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
'Vja, e POY-A
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 4(o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
'�6o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
,�No
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
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application'? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
ElYes
XElNo
ElNA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
No
Dd NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
D6 Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Ca kt? .
DOS SGc1 test resulfs - et? (-
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Phone: 6 1
Date: SIDI
12128104 Continued
0?7%3
\f

Facility Number: y— 1 Q I0tf Inspection 113110 !�
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ElNE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ g p Other
21. ��aste
cord keeping need im rovement? If yes, the appropriate �ZIA
ow. ❑ Yes�v/o ❑ NA ❑ NE
A ficat' "n Wee - FreeboarX2casteAnalysis n l sis Q�i:�pp yo y
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield ions Monthly and I "Rain [nspections 'eather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No % NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 04 ' M ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes N No 9(NA ElNE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ElYes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No )dNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were anv additional problems noted which cause non-comDliance of the Dermit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern'?
❑ Yes
,<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
�/
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
)(No
❑ NA
El NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
`
32. Did Reviewer/[nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ElNA
[INE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
�Oo
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
L+ 3
4�
12128104

r '` vtstott-of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
6vthe' r- Agency `
Type of Visit OO Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O+ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 30 10 Date of visit: 2/5/2404 "time: t200
Q ,Nut O Perational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: Ikerxiew.Aerst<x.F.ataa.......................................................... Counh•: MA9...................................... . �.R.Q--•--•
Phone No: (33199_$=615L - ---------------- - ---
MailingAddress: 300.L.M.Lanc....................................................................................... MQMsy..111g..1G...................................................... 2.71UR ..............
Facility Contact: ..W..aXne.l PM.......................................'I'itle:............................................... Phone ,No: 33.6,9R9,13.7.L(Ck...........
Onsite Representative: YYaxUt�h�iltx_______._____._____________________-_--- Integrator: --------------•------------------------_-_-•
Certified Operator:Char.1gS..W.4Yng................. LUIZ .................................................... Operator Certification Number: z5.633. ............................
Location of Farm:
-40 west onto Hwy 801 north. Right onto Cana Road. Right onto Lutz Lane. •
❑ Swine El Poultry ® Cattle [I Horse Latitude 35 • 59 45 Longitude1 80 • 34 00
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1 ® Dairy 250 220
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 350,000
Discharg s & 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 Su-ucture 4 Structure 5
Identifier: _.._ astt.Paa:d_.__...--•--•--•--•--•--•--•--'.--•--•--•--•--•-----•--••-----•--•--•--•--•--•--•-------•--•-----•--•--•--•----- ._..
i-reeboard (inches): 66
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 2/5/2004 s
F ]� Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ro. Secre
5. Are any t �liate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?e/ trees, severe erosion, No
North arolina De artme t f Environment and Na tou
�OWu
G see Is.. e�'c1
CO W. Klimek,E, Dire
6. tip -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste manageme �rDivision ottvJa f�ua No
ca�iy of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an Coleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
mediate 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
[:]Yes
® No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12.
Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Smail Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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
Odor Issues
17. 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?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application'? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlar any recommendations o`r. 'a`ny otFier'c`omments: .
`se drawings of facility to better,plain situations. (use addrtronal pages as necessary}: ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
r;
8. New stocktrails and fencing looks great. Still need to establish vegetation in buffer areas in lot near mobile home. Operator has
+
seeded area twice.
2. Ask technical specialist for mortality checklist and keep with records.
N DE
&t c n�v�c W (�, Iw ualit Section 585 Wau ht n tree[ -Salem, North Carolina 27107 W 771-4600 Customer Service
K�vte�Vet n� re lr 51i i�a[f��'eQ g 7la�e:
1 o:P 62748
12112103 yr �� � Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Ool, Inspection 2/5/2004 •
Renuired Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
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 ❑ No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ® No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes ® No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ® No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes ® No
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
® No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
® No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crap Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112103

. • Michael F. Easley, Governor
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
Forth Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P. E. Director
Division of Water Quality
Colleen H. Sullins, Deputy Director
Division of Water Quality
N. C. Division of Water Quality/Water Quality Section 585 Waughtown Street Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27107 [phone]
i EN
Customer Service
1-877-623-6748

Division of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit} Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facilih• Number I IQ Late of Visit: Time:
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted] Certified 0 Condi-t�ianall} Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: 11 �ge-rV i S @ �i �a+� m County: Da V) �o
Owner Name: le V�� Phone No: 1 K
Mailing Address: LV+Z- La 11 pCjL.$ V l i1'C- + ` c- a 7 Q `2`
Facility Contact: .t �Q1 � "— Z„ Title: Phone No: b
Onsite Representative: Lj�&d.4n e— L L)+Z _ Integrator:
Certified Operator:}C1l.t�rQ- �� L1l�L Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
_= 4 o we6+ +o $o I no o n to n a - Lem on -fz Ln. �z
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' • " Longitude ®0 ®�
.Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Cavity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer-
Dairy
0
2. 20
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Laver
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ _Other
-
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
0
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
(j boo
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding. Ponds I Solid Traps
L_I Subsurface Drains Present lLJ Lagoon Area JLJ Spray Field Area
❑ No Li uid 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 ves, notify DW'Q)
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
truct�e l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05/031�
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ Yes
NO
Structure
Continued

Facility lumber: 30- 10 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, El Yes I No
seepage, etc.) `
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Cl Yes o
{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 0;V4o
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? XYes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes Wo
Waste Application
10. .Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑YesfNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? El Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN El Hydraulic Overload El Yes
12. Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops differ witithose designated in the Certified Animal Waste Mana ment Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
o
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
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? n'l Q l
Yes
No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Wi.iP, design, /
'Yes
GGG
El No
(ie/ checklists. maps, etc.) /
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?
(ic/ discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
XNo
2 3.
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
o
0
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain.any YES.answers and/or any:recommendations.or any o er comments. _
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): Field Cony Final Notes v
14
Reviewer/]inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
11 _- //12 //I Y !'.....1.......f

Facility Number- 30 — Date of Inspreflon
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
23. Is there anv 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 permanendtemporary cover?
Additional Comments anti/or DraN►ings:
� ao3 5 O't 15
U V) 0 7 - aeo�
. *4&ta
�' �e ve 2 ;orn
reed v�e�
Barn t �
LJ P
1� �0"te-
�o
L
❑ Yes �\o
❑ 5'es XNI
o
O5/03/Ol ]�� ` --w %�. 1.1 7 % J /I�OXII-`
�
// .. ., n
"5- 7
d 11

Technical Assistance Site Visit
4raivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 30 -
1
Date: 7123103
Time: 1 8:45
Time On Farm: 80 WSRO
Farm Name Deerview Jersey Farm
County Davie
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 300 Lutz Lane Mocksville NC 27028
Onsite
Representative Wayne Lutz Integrator
Type Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated: I
[I Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Purpose Of Visit
OO Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
O Response to complaint/local referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current Design Current
❑ Wean to Feeder
Capacity Population Capacity Population
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
® Dairy 250 250
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
® Dairy 250 250
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached
❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees,
❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding
❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment
❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure?
❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Identifier W SP
Level (Inches) 60
CROP TYPES Fescue -graze 1corn. Silage 113ye grass (Graze) Oats
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES PcB2 EnB GnB2
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

.1 r
Facility Number 30 - 10 Date:
7/23/03
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
[112. Waste structure integrity compromised
❑ 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
El
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
[114. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organizelcomputerization of records
❑
❑
[119. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Re-gulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
El
❑ Referred to NC©A Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
®
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 30 - 10 Date: 1 7123103
MENTS:
Waste analysis: 7-14-03 LSD 2.6 lbs.N11000 gals. I, 2-10-03 LSD 2.1 Ibs.N11000 gals. I
Soil analysis dated 7-11-03
Mr. Lutz is in the process of getting a roof over part of the concrete lot. Gutters and down -spouts look better this time.
The local soil and water office is working on some runoff controls to address sediment and waste runoff from the pasture
t areas.
Records look good. The vegetation on the waste pond looks good.
Did a recheck on the irrigation design and wettable acre determination. Everything appears to be in order.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 7/23/03 Entered By: [Rocky Durham
3 03/10/03

�ivision,.of.Water Quality -
Division of Soil and -Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O-Operation-Revie) O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up ;O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 3� 1Q Mute uT Visit: 05/22/2003 Time! 0900
0 Not O erational tD Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
Farm Name: DUMAlr'.dtKf•sU.k"M............................................................................ County: I)gxle .................................................. WSRQ ........
.
Owner Name: G,.YYaynth .............................. LU'tZ .............................................................. Phone No:(3Ce)..98-Gk6.... k............................... ...
.....................................................
MailingAddress: .. M.Qfkaxxlte-KL ...............................
�OQ.�tttt�.Lau>'.�.................................................................................... ....................... 27.028..............
Facility Contact: Wayne..L.uft.................................................... Title: Phone No:
OnsiteRepresentative: W..atX1[1p..Ltkft......................................................... .. .. .. .................Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Chalk-s.,y,Waylpg.................. LMU............................................ ....... Operator Certification Number:Z5(33......
Location of Farm:
I-40 west onto Hwy 801 north. Right onto Cana Road. Right onto Lutz Lane.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 59 4 45 64 Longitude SO ' 34 4 00 14
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Cavacitv Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ® Dairy 250
❑ Non -Layer I 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 350,000
Number of Lagoons 1 5 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present Irn Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I 1 ❑ 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 discharL*e is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If dischar,-�e is observed, what is the estimated flow in aal/tnin?
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 t Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ...... N. as1.c..Fan d.................................................................................................................................................. .......
Freeboard (inches): 5
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
Structure 6
05/03141 � v� � � A` 'Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 46 Date of Inspection 05/22/2003 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
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 or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. 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?
❑ 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
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comtent(refer to questio,#,Explaui n answeisandl�orany�recmme ndatrio oryany other c mm nts'-°h: :-
Usedrawtngs of facility.to better�explatn stuateons (useaddrt�onal5page5+as necessary,) Field
TV4 ' � F& ❑ Copy ® Final Notes
=
Todays follow-up visit is at the request of the operator and owner, Mr. Wayne Lutz. He requested that DWQ and the Davie
_
WCD/NRCS be present to discuss concerns outlined in the May 2003 DWQ NOV. Mr. Lutz indicated that he would like an opportunity
to address the environmental concerns raied in the NOV. Items left blank are not applicable to today's visit. It was raining during
today's visit as well.
3. and 8. Waste and sediment was observed washing from the stocktrail, lots, and denuded pastures near the WSP and mobile home
pasture and into waters of the state. Davie SWCD/NRCS is to write Mr. Lutz a letter outlining their suggestions for measures designed to
1help Mr. Lutz achieve compliance with the state's water quality regulations and standards.
s
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMelissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector SignaturetJ 1,�/j Date:
05103101 L
Continued

Fagty Number: 30-10 . of lnspeclion 05/22/2003
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?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
and 22. At the request of the operator, this was an announced follow-up visit, conducted with staff from the Davie SWCD/NRCS.
perator stated that since DWQ would be coming out to the farm today, he didn't call in his high waste level since DWQ would see
anyway. I told Mr. Lutz to call the WSRO any time the waste level went above the maximum liquid mark in the future. Operator
ans to apply waste as soon as field conditions are suitable.
Several sections of guttering need to be repaired and/or re-routed. There was a tremendous amount of surface water observed on
lot, and flowing ultimately into the WSP.
J
05103101

deerview jerseys
Wayne and Karen Lutz
300 Lutz Lane
Mocksville, NC 27028
Phone: [phone]; Fax [phone]
May 21, 2003
Steve Mauney
Water Quality Supervisor
NC Division of Water Quality
585 Waughtown St.
Winston-Salem, NC 27107
RE: Notice of Violation — Compliance Inspection
Deerview Jersey Farm, #30-10
Davie County
Dear Mr. Mauney,
RECF IIVED
N.G. Dept. of EHNR
MAY 2 2 2003
Winston --Salem
Regional Office
Please allow this letter to serve are the required 10 day response to your letter of May 1,
2003, received on May 14, 2003.
Following Ms. Rosebrock's inspection, I contacted Davie County SWCD/NRCS. They
inspected the areas mentioned in the third paragraph on April 17, 2003. From their
inspection and subsequent conversation, I was advised that I was in compliance. At that
time, I recommended that Davie Soil and Water contact Ms. Rosebrock to discuss their
varying opinions and the appropriate course of action. To date, I have not received any
further correspondence until your May 1, 2003 letter.
I attempted pull a soil sample in August, but due to the extreme dry conditions was only
able to probe 2 inches of soil. I attempted again in November but the sample was so wet
that I did not consider it a representative sample. I have contacted Ben Knox with NC
Department of Agriculture to secure samples. He is scheduled to pull samples the first
part of next week.
I trust that this clarifies any concerns.
Sincerely,
Wayne Lutz
deerview jerseys

UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE
,��. ►a ! 1 .. Z-CfM Mill '
ostage & Fees Paid
USPS
Permit No. G-10
• Sender: Please print your name, address, and ZIP+4 in this box •
Ot C>rr+
NC DENR
Water Quality Section - m 5 Zzo
585 Waughtown Street Winston Salem
Winston-Salem NC 27107-2241 ylegsonat Ott`ce

■ Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Also complete
item 4 if Restricted Delivery is desired.
■ Print your name and address on the reverse
so that we can return the card to you.
■ Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece,
or on the front if space permits.
1 1. Article Addressed to:
Mr Wayne Lutz
300 Lutz Lane
Mocksville NC 27028
X
B. Rec !fiiJf ( Printed
❑ Agent
❑ Addressee
Date of Delivery
D. I �i1 ery address diffFn
t from ite ❑Yes
enpte`rpdelivery5ybelo t`_�y ❑ No
%_e_ 1•I,, , tJ}
r�00
n
3. Service Usp
P.Gertified Mail -press Mail
❑ Registered Return Receipt for Merchandise
❑ Insured Mail ❑ C.o.D.
4. Restricted Delivery? (Extra Fee) ❑ Yes
I 2. 7001, 2510 ,0001 4778 56`66 I - 01)J
I PS Form 3811, August 2001 Domestic Return Receipt 102595-02-M-083

~ , *,*ion of Water Quality
' QtY, ! ion of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency '.
Type of Visit © Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 30 10 Date of Visit: 02119/2003 lime: 1345
0 Not —operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...................
Farm Name: Aur.yktx.,1.ersca:.;ttna.................................... .. County: Ua�.pie.................................................. WUQ........
OwnerName: C,.'7Y[��..............................Rtz.............................................................. Phone No:(6�.9�8-6116.1........................................................
Mailing Address ........ iv�RC1tSX1lI1e.lY................................ OSi..1,�lAte..�ne.............................................................................. ...................... 2702,8 ..............
Facility Contact: WAYD.UmIz....................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No: 33.6,90.9,2,6J.8.... ....................
Onsite Representative: WAYja r.Latz................................................... ............................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Cjj;jrjvs...W..,ayKtl:.................. LMU ................................................... Operator Certification Number:2.5.6.33 .............................
Location of Farm:
I-40 crest onto Hwy 801 north. t onto Cana Road. Ri onto Lutz Lane. �
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 OF 59 45 Longitude 80 • 34 4 F 00
Design Current
Swine Canaeity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
EGilts
Boars
t Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
FCI I Layer ® Dairy 250Non-Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 350,000
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 ❑ 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 galimin?
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?
W-
aste 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 Wnet and
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
e.p ..................................................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 20
05103101 �� 3 � Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 02/19/2003 1
1,
.
0
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the I'rity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
[] Yes
N 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?
N Yes
❑ No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
N No
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding []PAN []Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12.
Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
I3.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
N Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy N Final Notes
3. Run-off of sediment and waste was observed in wash of melting snow/ice below the waste pond. Must establish vegetation in these
areas and stop the channeling of run-off into waters of the State. Check next visit.
7. Vegetation looks better on the slope of the waste pond dam. Continue efforts on the top of the dam.
19. Soil analysis waste not obtained for those fields receiving waste in 2002 - NOV. Overall, records look better. Operator wants to
have PAN increased for some crops. Suggested that he see technical specialist with his yield records.
19. Need to also record solid waste applications.
Waste analysis: 2/10/03 LSD = 2.1 lbs. N11000 gal,
Reviewer/Inspector Name Meli a Ro ebrock
Reviewer/Inspector SignaturLjyy Date:
05103101 L U ` Continued

I/
Facility Dumber: 30-10 D Inspection 02/19/2003 .
ddor 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?
2T Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ❑ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ❑ No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
i
T
05103101

Division of Water Quality
Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q.Other Agency
Type of VisitCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason far Visit � Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
liate of Y isit: Time:'
IQ Faciliri- Number � --
�( �,( Not Operational Below Threshold
J� Permitted J�j Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Abgve Threshold -
Farm Name: L- e- Fa r County:
Owner Name: U Z Phone No:
Mailing Address: a LL4 Z Lan 4- v C,
Facility Contact: LaA.1T..�'a� L i)+Z Title: Phone No: &J1 4?09e 2-4p18
Onsite Representative: i.UT 2� 1 L,j Integrator:
Certified Operator: e5 w O A .4 j�1e L 1 Z- Operator Certification Dumber:
Location of Farm:
1 L �t z l lxn e. � <3a 1 No IZr cj hf one o Cana • , P-4' one
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' ®' Longitude ®�
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine .: _.1- wW Ca acity Po ulation -Poultry Ca ap city Population Cattle Ca acih
❑ Wean to Feeder ❑Laver Dairy 2,5
_PoPutatio
❑ Feeder to Finish I0 Non -Laver ILI Non-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other -
❑ Farrow to Finish xj Total Design Capacity
Z �a
❑ Gilts — -
❑ Boars Total SSLW
000 .
Number of Lagoons �'w ❑ Subsurface Drains Present jFE1Lag,,nArea ❑ S ray Field Area
Holding Ponds./ Solid Traps 1EJ No Li uid Waste Management System
Dischartres R 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 obsened, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State" (if yes, notify DWQ)
[I Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in sallmin?
V l
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notifv DWQ)
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pan of the operation?
❑Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Yes ❑ No
%Vaste Collection R Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
El Yes No
Struc re Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure d
Structure 6
Identifier: Rrj
�2
Freeboard (inches): 1
05103101 4
Continued

• Facility Number: Date of Inspection-F--�+�
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 ANO
(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 XNo
9. Do any stucrures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes XNo
Waste Application XNo
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ElPAN ElHydraulic Overload ❑ Yes >(No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ wiffthose designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes fN
o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ElYeso
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ElYeso
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ElYeso
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes XNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes TSINO
Required Records & Documents /
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? El 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.) / 1// `/� ❑ Yes .1� No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & 9i ample reports) > Yes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes A'40
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes �KNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes XNo
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 SrNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes��(No
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer-to.question.#):'Explatit aa} is answcrs`and/or_anv recommenuatruns.or anv.o er comments ,
1I _ K P g �)�
Use dravririgs of facility to better.ex lain -situations, (usc addttuona4 'a es as net Field Conv Final Notes
7,
Reviewer/Inspector Name LS (�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: i Ad Date:
eu
U .11 / .GILT /l L,�_ r�I/ •�

0
Facility lumber: �—
Datee of Insprction
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there anv 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 Conimcnt% and/or Drawings-
PAtA���
Np N o V
��J rev rvsP — n,00.��c
�, `�V- -4;�50 0,
LSD
❑ Yes P<1
El Yes x o
l

ision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
FFacility Number 41 10 Date or visit: 11/21/2042 Time: 1300
rO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
.
Farm Name: 5b,�&ts�.0aitry..�'.axlms.................................................................................... County: �rullford ........................................... WSRO........
Owner Name: Un dla. ,................. ....... 1y.cy..................
Mailing Address:IrX.1. d....................................
Facility Contact: Undley..hvy....................................................Title:
Onsite Representative: Llildlcy.Iygy.....................................................
Phone No: (33.613.7.5.:5376.........
GibsQ»AlN..G.....................................................7.2.49.:42..
................................................................ Phone No:
............ ................
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Laud.ley..S.............................. lyfly..................................................... Operator Certification Number: Z13,19 .............................
Location of Farm:
3uffine Mill Rd. east to Apple Wyrick Rd. - take right, follow till fork, take right fork, Smith Dairy Rd.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ` 08 48 Longitude 79 • 38 21
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Layer
® Dairy
180
140
❑ Feeder to Finish
JCI Non -Layer
I
I❑
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
180
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
252,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 1 0 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I 1 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? OR Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 1 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....Wasie.P.ond........................................ . ............................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-10 Date of Inspection F11/21/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, 0 Yes 19 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 ® 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
i0. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
l2. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
1.3. 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
Required
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.
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
® 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. ,
Cominents:(refer to destid64), Explain anyFYES�answers and/or any re�c m nen`iia[tons o any other comments'
-iYs-t;;y �J .ice .t -�✓ F a- -- • _ -
Use drawings of facility to Eettet ezplam`situations (use`additionalipagesras necessary.) '([]FieldCopy '® Final Notes
Due to recent rain events there is some run-off of soil and waste from the stock trail. Is not entering surface waters. Need to scrape
air soon.
Per operator, SWCD is to come back in the Spring to re -set the marker that has gotten knocked over slightly.
1 19. Operator said that he didn't have IRR-2 Forms so records were all on one sheet. I had some forms with me so Mr. Ivey was able to
complete his records during the inspection. He is waiting on November 2002 waste sample results to determine PAN balance for Fall
waste armlications. Check next visit.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iMelissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: V
05103101
Date:
Continued

• Facility Number: 41_lU I*f Inspection 11/21/2002 40
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge actor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
F-1 I pulls need to be re -designed to match actual pull pattern.
waste analysis = 1.6 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Wyatt, WSRO-DSWC also attended this inspection.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes []No
❑ Yes ❑ No
At
O5103101
J

Division of Water Quality
O.Division of Soil and'Water Conservation
O Other Agency '. 11
Type of Visit 21C mpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint O Follow up C) Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number (late of Visit: ime:
Not O erational Q Below Threshold
�J Permitted ]C''ertifiedd� 0 Conditionall- Certified Li Registered Date Last Operated or Abo1ve hres old: _
Farm Name: Is L5� ,� r �a'r County: L) r Ir
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Location of Farm:
,2,9
Operator Certification Number: r2l 319
HU`(-�,ne Wlt It KA. e'as+ -b hp P le.. W y e 14L [. -4- f7-) rt) rl -r`�p
U -
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' ® EIM u Longitude
Design Current Design-- Current Design Current
swine
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps
Poultry capacity Population Cpittle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I IDairy
❑ Non -Layer I ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW S q7
�.] Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 S ray Field Area
i❑ No Liquid Waste Management 5vstem
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 ves, notify DWQ)
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
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? XSpiliwav
Strucctuurre 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: -7T0
Freeboard (inches):
❑ Yes KNO
❑ Yes ❑ No
El Yes El No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: — f Date of Inspection owl U
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
El Yes
N0
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 maintenance/improvement?
A Yes
No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
`
elevation markings?
El Yes
No
W'aste A lication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop type 0
13. Do the receiving ops differ with thog designate in the Certified Animal Waste Man ement Plan { AWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
MNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
No
3
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[f�N0
`
Required Records &_Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
kN o
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
-UP,
(ie/ IN checklists, design, maps, etc.) / / /
❑ Yes
No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
2§ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
El Yeso
TN
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
X 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
No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Yes
❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain.any YES answers'andlor anv recommendations or anv other comments._
--
Use drawings of facility to.better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):, z Field Copy ~ ❑ Final Notes
Q 4 5 Lop 4' c1*A&e � * - S:
0
\,JW,440 Z) AA AZ,t�
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: lr Date:
05103101 ., r— f Continued

Facility Number; —' Date of lnsprctimi C
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there anv dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there anv 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. R'ere 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 Dra,,inf!s:
cAt�UY
PA-
-aT �64 �- 3w'
��aafoa wo153�
1-'b 1 1�5. t'% I 000
j
05103101 �>U / L-
❑ Yes Ar\o
❑ Yes Rio
es

rv
49
Q *ion of Water Quality r'f
on of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
'late of VisiI; 9/5/2002 'riine: 10:00
Facility Number 30 10
Q Not —operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 ConditionalIy Certified 0 Registered Date bast Operated or Above Threshold: ......
Farm Name: Ae�1 1�tY.,i.�rs��:.JFarrm ............................... ....... N AV.............................. ...... WSRO........
........................................ County
..............
OwnerName: C, Waytie. .............................. Lulz .............................................................. Phone No:(3fA.9�c1�1........................................................
MailingAddress: ..O.Q..Ut .Ltl.e...................................................................................... 1►a.RKJk5Xxlle.N...................................................... 2.7.02.8 ..............
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:............. .. Phone No:
Onsite Represen1ative:.Way7R1t..IatLtA ........................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operat or:CharAcs..W.;*.,uc.................. LuU ................................................... Operator Certification Number:25G33..............................
Location of Farm: _
Located on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 59 45 Longitude 80 • 34 00
Design Current
Swine Capacitv Ptioulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to. Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 250 194
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 350,000
Number of Lagoons I ID Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps I i ❑ 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? (Ifyes, 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
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Identifier: ...................................................................... . ...................................................................... .....
Freeboard (inches): 48
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 30 -10 Date of Inspection 9/5/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the0grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre , 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?
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
N 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
NVaste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
N No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
N No
Required Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N 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
N No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
N No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ® Final Notes
# 3. Small amount of sediment coming from the calf/heifer pasture. May need to install a stock -trail, a cross -pipe, and do some drainage
work in the constricted area. Numbers of cattle in this area probably needs to be reduced.
# 7. Cattle are not on the waste pond embankment and the embankment has been seeded in the bare areas.
# 8. New barn addition needs to have gutters and down spouts installed to reduce water falling on the "new" concrete feed alley. There
may be .come problems created here with the fresh water diversion.
# 8. Cont. Still have one down spout that needs repair.
# 19. Remember to get the 2002 soil analysis before the end of year.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Da6Inspection 9/5/2002 0
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑.No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
Waste analysis: 5-21-02 LSD 5.9 lbs.N/1000 gals. I +
"1
O5103101

.y s 0 sion of Water Quality •
ion of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit © Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
1' acility Number 30 10 Date of Visit: 3/26/2002 "Time: 1330
0 Not —operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ...............
Farm Name: liecCli�t�:.,LtRrs�J:.k:asT]n.................................................................... County: 1?�Fx1.................................................. ��'.Q........
Owner Name: G.Y!'a3'.aC .............................. LUtz.............................................................. Phone No:03.0.998:_.6101.........................................................
MailingAddress: 3O.Q..1. mU.L;).tte...................................................................................... N1.RgjksA1kJSK..... .... ............................................. 2.7.02.8 ..............
Facility Contact: 1!'ayUe.L.uXx.................................................... Title:................................................................ Phone 1\'0: G......................
Onsite Representative: WaY.Ur.LutA................................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:�hax�� .?4'aX10.�..................Lutz................................................... Operator Certification Number:Z5633.............................
Location of Farm: _
Located on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 5911 45 Longitude 80 • 34 r 00
Design Current
Swine CaDaCitV Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 250 153
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSLW 350,000
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps I 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream imi2acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of die State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin?
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: ......Waste.Pond................................................................................. ................................................................. .......
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes
[]No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches): 28
05103101 if� a / J Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 3/26/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the inte* of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, sifvere 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 ®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 ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
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?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. 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?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any reconnnendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ,❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes—
3. Sediment and waste is washing from denuded calf/heifer pasture into the creek (T-1378 F-3). Suggest contacting SWCD for
assistance.
7. Cattle are continuing to damage embankment although it looks better this year,
8. Some pastures below the waste storage pond are pretty denuded. May want/need to increase buffer.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Mel'ssa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur � j Date: 75 r-2
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Dat I' tnspection 3/26/2002
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes []No
❑ Yes []No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
S. Water lines are busted and are causing excess water to accumulate on lot above waste storage pond. Still have a downspout +
needing repair.
11. PAN that was applied to T-1378 F-6 (pulls 1-9) needs to be deducted from allowable corn PAN this Spring.
115. Wheat stand is sparse. Per operator, it will not be harvested and will just plant corn into the stubble.
J
05103101

0 1 .*36P*')
�DtvrsWn of,V4'ater Quality `
tQ'+Dtvision of Soil and Water Conservation
aL
:...:.
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: me: °y
Facility Number
Nat O erational Below Threshold
Permitted ertified ©Conditionally Certified CO Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ._QQr� l ��j���1/__i_Qr�} County:
Owner Name: ii L U `j Z jj�� Ph1one No:.a:
Mailing Address: ,�d_o L -z _{„ ��� K S t%t"5 �l r ��'
Facility Contact: &14 6CZ Title: Phone No
Onsite Representative:: i LL4 Z p Integrator: �j
Certified Operator: (�1 4 1 ne_ L LA
Z Operator Certification Number: 6-63
Location of Farm:
'- 40 s+ oAe�ul�b(i► vf:onto ()CJ? ' J n
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®'� Longitude
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacitv Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
11
❑ Laver
I
I
)airy
'Zoo
I
❑ Feeder to Finish
1
10 Non -Layer
I
INon
Dai
❑ Far -row to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
"Q
[3 Gilts
Total SSLW
s-5000
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes KNO
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated now 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
Struct re 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Stnieture 4 Structure 5
Identifier; (i
Freeboard (inches):
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
o
Yes�io
❑ Yes
XNo
Structure 6
05103101 Continued

Fapility Number: :3 Date of inspection - " �/() � ,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structure o served? (ie/ trees, severererosion, ❑ 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? ❑Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public stealth 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 INo
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 1
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in thY Certified Animal ante anagement Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes )6
No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes A -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 ANo
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 , NNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes O(No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes )(No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes, to
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes X No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes WNO
-yi6lati6ris ;oi- dg>1lciendt,9 •*ere ngt;ed during this; visit; • You will-r& iye uti fut thgr • : • : -
corresponcieRt e. about this visit...... .
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.:
Use drawings of facility to better plain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): -
�ws PLuu�. m A.t
IMIn /A A, . # A. bl/H !l!
Reviewer/Inspector Name r urQ ,
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date:

Facil:ty•Number: O — Z} I (if Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below � o
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'? ❑ Yes �No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes yw
o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? *eS -$ O
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? ^ *or EJ-No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? Q vo- [ -bLo
ngs:
1)141c� .JL�F. ;> ALIO"
FALL afl� I
II. PA N -C,Qet, uW
.9 ,

Son of Water Quality
Q on of Soil and Water Conservation
O' Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 30 10 Date of Visit: 10/26/2001 'Time: 1130 Printed on: 10/26/2001
0 Not Operational Q 13elow Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..••.•••••......
Farm Name: D-mr e.w.1enicy-Farm................... .. County: Dayle .................................................. WMRQ.......
OwnerName: Gn.lYa3ar .............................. t~u.kz....................._........................................ Phone No:{,3C�.9r.GX6t........................................................
Mailing Address: ..Q.4.i�lat .l t►e...................................................................................... M.Qrk5. Al1e.NC...................................................... 2.7,018 .............
FacilityContact: Waytie.1miz....................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative:.Yi'atyng.Luitz............................................................................. . .. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Chaxles..W.ay1ae.................. LMU................................................... Operator Certification Number:2,5633 ...................... .......
Location of Farm:
. ocated on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 59 & 456b Longitude 80 a 34 I 00
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
JCI Layer
® Dairy
1 250
1 182
❑ Feeder to Finish
Q Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
JE1 Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
250
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
350,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges K 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ......Wasxe.Pond..... ;.
Freeboard (inches): 34 '
05103101 �c�L r% / Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection I 10/26/2001,LL Printed on: 10/26/2001 , "•
a
5. Are there any immediate threats to toe ntegrity 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? 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 ❑ 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 ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re aired Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
7. Dam is rutted from traffic on the slope and is getting worse. Need to repair and re -seed.
8. Workers were repairing downspouts today.
19. Need to make copy of irrigation pull page, showing acreages, and include with waste plan. [deed to keep weekly freeboard.
27. Mortality going to mink farm.
Soils for 2001 were boxed and in the office. No waste applications since May 2001.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Meha a Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103/01 T v r Continued

Facility. Number: 30_10 Datc�spection 10/26/2001
• Printed on: 10/26/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27, Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31, Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
[]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101
J

t_ 52 on of Water Quality
kt ;Vilslonof Soil and WaterConservation �*
a p Other Agency M
�. - 4
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit XRoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Time:
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold.
FarmName: r�l ... ...... i�W..�i7 ............................... County:............. ......--..-.-...- .......................... ......... ..............
Owner Name: A(L........ Phone No- �� (Q `............. 1.6 /......................
Facility Contact: ��' CV ' . Titles .. Phone No:
..... ..�.. ate... ............... -------.......................-
Mailing Address: ...3�...... -.u+Z .... n q .i.............. eC�:S v. i �e .....-........................� 7�
............... .......... ................ .......................................... .......... ................
Onsite Representative: .....-v .. 1) ],. Z� Integrator:
II,,....................................................................................................................
Certified Operator: ..-..w- ...... ............ Operator Certification Number:........(.+,,.
Location of Farm:
+b " TFr • Turn akXta Cane •j °� L�
u L�
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry dCattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®* aT, 11 Longitude ®• t , ®44
Design Current
Swine C8Dacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Curreht"`-
Poultry
CapacityCipacity Population Cattle
Capacity Po ulstion
❑ Layer
Dairy
I e2
❑ Non -Layer 1
❑ Non -Dairy
15�
•
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity.
�Q
Total SSLW
3S 40
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Iloldiig Ponds /. Solid Traps. J. ID No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharaes & 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
'1` f 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?
�Z
f 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?
� Str Structure 2 Structure 3XSpillway
Identifier ��RR.......................................Structure ...................4 ................. Structure ........5 .
Freeboard (inches):
5100
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
Structure 5 I
Continued on back

Facility Number: 3a— � . 0 Date of Inspection i rum
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, sPere 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?
❑Yes
�No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
T 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
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 ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
a
12. Crop type AJ abL�i-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those signated 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
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
�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?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
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
No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
/x
I0: �o:yiola>�igris:o�• def eien•were thntjted: dt;�rit�g �h�s"v�s�t; • Yop .treeeiye �o fu�-tpetr • :
corresI
' oridence.'about is visit.... .
Comments (rerer•to question-O.: Explaid any-YESanswers and/or any -recommendations or, any otiier;cotrtntatetats , lr ti
Use drawings of facihty to better.expIat situateons..(use;additi6nm pages as necessary) ' , ,# i ,^ 3 .•
CD%
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date:
5100

?•�P ? (�abOo -b w q '
Fdeility Number: — Q DO Inspection IL11 /d(a/011 •
Odor Issues Tim'
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -e-*eq EJ 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 �'�T0
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?
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
e
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriatcover? • E *e- ^ N-
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? des- [g NQ
f A A
t
a7 yy� �--
0

vision of Water Quality
-Sion of Soil and Water Conservation
Q ther Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other p Denied Access
Facility Number 30 10 Date or %,isit: 5l22/2001 Time: 13:00 Printedcon: 10/17/2001
0 Not O erational 0 Below Threshold
M Permitted E Certified Q Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ......................
Farm Name: IamGYA!<.IY..Rrsty..Fum...................................................... h ........................ County: 1),�XAr.................................................. SRO ........
OwnerName: C..8y.11C .............................. Lu.tz .............................................................. Phone No: { .0 .9..:b�6X.................... .......... ..........................
Mailing Address: )OQ.hut .la tte...................................................................................... NA.o 1 xx11�.N.G...................................................... V.02,8 .............
FacilityContact: ............................... 1.1.............. I ........ ....... ..... ....... ..Title:
Onsite Representative: y, Ayxjg„Lj tz..............I
......................................
Certified Operator:Mangy......................................tiitht................
Location of Farm:
PhoneNo: ...................................................
... Integrator: .... 11 .... ­..­...­ ........ ............. ................. .... ....................
... Operator Certification Number: 7.1.41A. ...........................I
Located on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle [I Horse Latitude 35 • 59 45 Longitude SO • 34 00 {f
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
F1
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacitv Population Cattle Cai)acitv Population
❑ Layer I I IN Dairy 250
❑ Non -Layer I I ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 250
Total SSL W 350,000
Number of Lagoons ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 10 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. if discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ................................... ..............................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 78
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 5/22/2001 Printedon: 10/17/2001
f.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ 0".severe erosion, 0 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? ❑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 maintenancelimprovement? ❑ 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 ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Rye ( Grazed) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain)
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
e) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
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 or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
ts.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any enrcomments.11l
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
# 19. Need to be keeping weekly freeboard levels, per General Permit requirements. Will need to get a 2001 soil sample.
AL
_
Mr. Lutz has taken the certified operators exam and is now certified again. Mr. Lutz filled out the designation form and I will send it in
for him.
# 7. There are still a couple of gutter down -spouts that need repair/replacement on the lower side (calf hutch side) of the milk barn.
# 9. Mr. Lutz has a max. liquid marker but, while the waste pond is pumped down, I recommend having a graduated marker with the top
of spillway, max. liquid level, and 6 inch graduations installed.
Keep cattle access to the waste pond embankment to a minimum to avoid erosion and other damage to the structure.
Reviewer/Inspector Name f Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 30-10 1) f Inspection 5/22/2001 Printed on: 10/17/2001
dor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29, Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30, Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32, Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
facility and records look good.
aste analysis: 3/16/01 LSD 5.1 Ibs.N/1000 gals. 1, 5.5 lbs.N11000 gals. B
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

1
AlM $
imumm"
"- is
now
IN
at 12
a I'MV
IN fu
—Y

Smitherman's sons love the machinery and working the
crops, but Tim and Vicki simply say they'll take one year
at a time.
Both Wayne and Karen Lutz are college graduates.
Wayne majored in animal husbandry. Karen has tier masters
and works in the insurance industry, `'to support my
farming habir," quips Wavne.
Wayne and his two brothers grew up on a Jersey dairy
farm. Now each Lutz has his own Jersey operation.
From life to home, car and business. Nationwide's
affordable insurance plans are designed to tit your needs.
For more information, just give us a call.
,Nariorrwide Is On Your Side'
DAVID
SLOAN
N C E AGENCY
N. Bridge Street, Elkin
f 993 [phone]
Nationwide
insurance &
h
Financial Services
Products underwritten try Nationwide Mutual Insurance Company and affiliated Companies
Home OKtce: One Nationwide Plaza, Columbus, OH 43215-2220
Nationwide• is a registered federal service mark of Nationwide Mutual Insurance Corrkmay
The Jersey is a smaller cow than the Holstein. She has
smaller bones and is shorter in height. She doesn't eat as
much as her 1200-pound Holstein cousin but produces
a milk with higher far content. Nancy Keith labels the
Jersey as "efficient" based on the amount of feed to milk -
production on a daily basis.
Remembering when he first started managing his awn
dairy, Wayne could compute his monthly expenses within
S2-3,000 but now with the regularly changing milk prices
the farmer gets, it becomes a monthly guessing game. Once
the milk is sold it takes 30 days to receive payment.
Compute 100 pounds of milk being sold for $15. A
gallon of milk weighs 3.65 pounds. If the farmer gets la
cents a pound, that's $1.30 a gallon. Remember what you
paid for the last gallon of milk you bought:
Wayne admits he would go crazy if his only job was
milking. He has two employees that do that twice a day
for him. While the Lutz Farm does grow some of its
feeder crops, it also relies on other farmers for silage.
Stock management is obviously Wayne's preferred
area. Embryo transfer is a complicated procedure that is
comparative to human multiple fertilization. The process
requires veterinarian assistance because the embryo must
be transferred to a cow that is at the same cycle point
(within hours) as the breeding cow. Wayne says it's not
unusual for a breeding cow to have as many as 10 calves
a year using this technique. One of Wayne's Jerseys has
had 100 calves to date.
As Wayne Lutz is breeding and exporting stock all
over the world, Europe is exporting dry milk to the
states. Wayne commented that European regulations are
no where near as stringent as those of the United Scares
Agricultural Department.
Wayne and Mark Smitherman are third generation
Holstein dairymen. The Smirherman- Dairy Farm is divided
into three areas. Wayne is in charge of the dairy and is
milking 52 cows. He realizes if the herd got much big-
14 I'adkin Valley Litriut

get he would have to hire help.
Mark is in charge of grain produc-
tion. The herd requires approxi-
marely 80 acres of silage. He also
raises 300 acres of soy beans as a
cash crop. The remaining third of
the farm is tobacco production.
"There's no money in it," bemoans
IMark. Wayne too feels the the economic
ups and downs with the regulatory
headaches but he doesn't hesitate to
tell you it's a great way to raise kids
and instill the work and responsibility
ethics. He'll also tell you his favorite
time of day is right after daylight.
And he'll admit, "Everything is planned
around milking —it doesn't matter if
it's a football game, a wedding or a
funeral."
Wayne appreciates the specifics of
urban sprawl and the need to maintain
clean water but he also feels the same
degree of stress and frustration as the
farms with 800 head of cattle when
it comes to waste management. In
addition there is the big challenge of
low prices for milk and grain.
Small dairy or large dairy, farmers
have learned to depend heavily on
computers as a part of management,
from basic record keeping to printing
out monthly milk sample reports.
To dairy farmers --big operations
or small ones —the schedule demands,
the ever -changing budgets, the rules
and regulations are all the same it
only different in proportion. Surely
every farmer ponders if his dairy
heritage will be passed on or even if
it can afford to go on for another
generation. As the curtain closes and
the show is over we have to wonder
as we watch our dairy farms disappear,
what act will step up on the stage to
take their places.
From a 1940s dairy farming text book: "a small modern churn, this type
cliurn is found on many Southern farms. It is especially suitable on farms
where electricity is not available."
It's Time To Pack
Your Bags And Get
Rudy forFun►
Shirley and Ray Robbins have a
whole year of exciting fun vacations -
lined up! From a day trip to weeks
of pleasure, here's just a sample of
some of the upcoming tours!
Cherry Blossoms in
Washington, OC
April 1-3
Springtime on the
Gulf Coast —New Orleans
April 9-13
Discover Johnston County, NC
April 27-28
Barn Dinner Theatre
May 5
Explore Gaston County, NC
May 12
Atlanta Braves Baseball
June 30-July 1
Summer in Washington, DC
June 14-16
PA, Amish, and "Noah"
June 21-23 and Sept"10-12
NC Outer Banks
"The Lost Colony"
June 27-29
Niagara Falls, Canada
July 3-6
"Unto These Hills"
Cherokee, NC
July 20-21
Call now for details on
these fun & exciting trips!
[phone]
[e-mail]
t (ID
Robbins
TaUR0, INC
PO Box 266 Boonville, NC 270I I
Yadkin Valle), Living 15

r
L
vision of Water Quality .
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 30 10 Date or Visit: 8l10/2004 Time: 1030 Printed on: 8/10/2000
Q Not Operational Q Belo%,&• Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold . .........................
Farm Name: Iher.VkWJ.fNCy..F0XM................................................. ... County: MAC:.................................................. WS.RQ........
OwnerName:W.AYng.................................... LIJAX .............................................................. Phone No: {? ().9`1.:6tbt........................................................
©oQ.a6(K
FacilityContact: Way.m.I.miz....................................................Title:................................................................ Phone No:..................................................
Mailing Address: 3.0.4.Luttt1mv.................................
Onsite Representative: W.aymr..Luau..................
..... M.orlC5xi11C.NC...................................................... 2.7.07.8 .............
Integrator:........
Certified Operator: Ian&y...W................................ K6tht................................................. Operator Certification Number:Z1.41.$ .............................
Location of Farm:
Located on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 59 4546 Longitude 80 ° ®1 00
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
10 Dairy
200
200
❑ Non -Layer
I
1
10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
200
Total SSL W
280,000
Number of Lagoons 0 10 Subsurface Drains Present ©Lagoon Area JEI Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees Sc Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. if discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes
® No
Waste Collection $ Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
❑ Yes
® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: .......Waste. P.arid.......................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 60
5100 � 3 S/�� f
Continued on back

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 8/10/2000 '~
I Printed on: 8/10/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i0grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trefevere 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? ❑ 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 maintenancelimprovement? ® 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
WasteApplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Sudex (Hay) Rye
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?
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?
U— No yiolA'tit) ns:or iiefc_iencies'were noted :during this: visit: ;You:wiIi ireeeive r>Eo further• : • ; •
correspondence: about this .visit. • :: :: .....
..
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
7. Need to cut vegetation around in/outside of dam. Need to keep cows off dam. Need to extend parlor pipe.
8. Need to attach downspout to outlet pipe.
9. Marker needs to have maximum level more clearly marked.
13. Sudan grass and rye not in plan. Needs to be added. No record of waste being applied to the sudex fields.
17. Permit application to be sent in by Sept. 10, 2000.
19. Need to identify soil and waste samples better. Does not correspond to field numbers.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Plan will be re -written for 250 and add rye and sudex if possible. I - I
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

' Fac lity Number: 30�10 I of Inspection 8/10/2004 Printed on: 8/10/2000
dar Issues 0
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® 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 and/orDrawings:
26., 31., and 32. Omit for 2000.
5100

r no Am
Jivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit XCompliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit );rloutine Q Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date or visit: V 'inw: ® Printed on: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
© Permitted 13 Certified p13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered
{ Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: ...... Ff F.v.�..�.. ....... F L� F� ...Fl��'.+'1....... County:.....bay.]..Fr...........................................................
Owner Name: ........ 1oC3[..�i..............tc-UTr..... ....... Phone No:..>�4Q..!.......................ifl..[..k7...�.....................
Rg.
FacilityContact: .. .11e ne........... Lv+-zr............... Title: ................ ........... ............................. I....... Phone No:...................................................
(/� "
Mailing Address: ....... .........L.u+,.z, .......`-�` ac....1..... Q. .v�.... .....L.l..`'.. ..........Q�......... .. ...................
Onsite Representative: .............. L v�z_
p............................................................ ....................... lntcgrator:....................................-.................................................
Certified Operator:... ' V' i u•t• Operator Certifi
Location of Farm:
cation Number:
lK�-- �l'y�
� P P6 iwl I SO -�- � �a C�b�
T
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �•� Longitude �• �� ©« .
t Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer airy
❑ Non -Layer I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other I I.
Total Design Capacity JZD
Total SSLW d O� 0
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagnnn 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? ❑ Yes ANQ
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance; ntan-made? [:]Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) 0 yes ❑ No
c. If dischar�,e is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min`?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ElYes 0
No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes X No
Structure l tructurc 2 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:eC:�a . ......
Freeboard (incfKs): ipO
5100 1 1�0 Continued on back

Facility Number: �7l_! — Date of Inspection IK/ fin/ nUl Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i rity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ tre`t�., 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'? ❑ Yes VNo
(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? X 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 1Qj No
Waste Al2plication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,j�o
No
11, Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulc Overload ❑ Yes
12. Crop type s t)a q
i �� u. F e— c Ea
13. Do the receiving crops differ t� ,mated 114he Certified Animal Waste M
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?
Iteauired Records & Documents
Yes
Plan (CAWMP)? I.
❑ No
❑ Yes
A No
❑ Yes
�Po
❑ Yes
PKI�o
❑ Yes
No
t"0
ElYes
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? N I N
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'? (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 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/lnspector 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?
Nd-- iolatioris:oe- deficiencies -were h6fed. during �ihis:visit; - You :w.iil-receive do further • : •'
corresporidence:abot:tt:this visit.:::': :':':':':'::':':'::':':':':':':':':'::'.':'::: :::'
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
darn .
r0 churn
• j�] q. ore o� n�, v� o4 W-
❑ Yes *o
Yes [-]No
Yes NPdo
❑ Yes N(�o
❑ Yes , NO
❑ Yes ,DZ50
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [� No
Reviewer/inspector Name T 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A l �d Date: IN Qb 5100

Facility Number: — �of Inspection Q 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 at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 001 T- O-zem
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes rNO
o
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ElYes
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 YNO
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? -E3-Y. ti
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?] EFVTT-tff�
At
o P 1 + ° -cl6Y) d ue- 1 20On . S2A+ ?
scan c�dced 4* wu P ?
N)ancU oxp "t oV mpor`- r
�u 5Poufs f-lammed ?
�P
Pl&n i5 for eon 5t fa�e, — 5mQj� rq
�rrI
0.4i0n
MUA-t� hcwe m u rn I eve mare
eAL
�rassy nc!- in ana Needs 46 bP- aMeJ15
10
4

0 jVion of Water Qualityion of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other © Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of Visit: 7/11/2000 Tirne: 14:15 Printed on: 8/9/2000
30 l0
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted M Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .................
Farm Name: Umuk.w..JPncY.Fttt'.tti7l............................................................................ .. County: DAyle .................................................. E'1rSRQ........
OwnerName: Won. .................................... U17 .............................................................. Phone No: ........................................................
FacilitvContact:.............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress: 3.0.0-UM. Aime...................................................................................... MOCUAlNAC.................. .................................... 2.7.028 .............
Onsite Representative:+AyKIg.Ltktz................................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Nwm..W. ............................... Keith ................................. I............... Operator Certification Number: 21.41S.............................
Location of Farm:
.ocated on Lutz Lane which is off of Cana Road, approx. 1 mile south of the Hwy 801 intersection.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 35 • 59 45 Longitude $0 ' 34 00 «
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Po ulation
❑ Layer I I ro
Dairy 200 180
❑ Non -Layer Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps I 1 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
DiDischarzes .Qc Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: ........................
Freeboard (inches): 72
5100
[:]Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
.................................................................
Continued on back

Facility Number: 30-10 Date of Inspection 7/11/2000 Printed on: 8/9/2000 T
5. Are there any immediate threats to th egrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ t 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? ❑ 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 ❑ 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
It. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
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
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
t9.
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?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection 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
, O VIOIa'tions;ol' deflclenCle3-WQI`e itOte'd .during tI115. VlSit: ;Yott;rvill "receive no feirthci-• ;
correspondence about this :visit: • : : :
7. Some gutter downspouts need replacing/ repair.
13. Owner stated he was having sudan grass (graze) added to the WUP. No application was made on these fields. They are currently
sudan grass and the operator is doing rotational grazing here.
21. Operator will have to retake the type B exam. He let his certification lapse. Nancy Keith, NCCES, is currently operator in charge.
ecords and facility looked good for the most part.
Reviewer/Inspector Name iRocky Durham ~ w
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 30-10 Da Inspection 7/11/2000 Printed on: 8/9/2000
dor Issues
6 40
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® 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 and/or Drawings:
5100
5100

fi 0 _Division of S ker
d Water Conservation -Operation Revie
13Division of Sd.Wafeer m Conservation - Copliance InstWn
Division of WQuality - Compliance Inspection
Il
[!ZOther Agency -'Operation Review
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other J
Facility Number 30 1(1 Date. of Inspection i2/10/99
Time of Inspection 13:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
[] Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Dv.Prljc-yv:..1.crscy.Eaxrttx .............................................. ................................ County: Q;Axitf: 1'................................................... SRQ........
Owner Name: Waxne..................................... Lutz .............................................................. Phone No: 9JQ:--614A...
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:....................... ................. Phone No:............----..
MailingAddress: 31ORLu,tA.1. m!...................................................................................... UwAsiAle.N.0 ...................................................... 2.7.07.8 .............
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:.Charjtj 5..W............................ LMU ................................................... Operator Certification Number:219, 5..................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 35 • 59 { 45 L1
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
[:]Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
I,.a rs7...]l.xnx esa>at .a .>~ �. w:.$Q>.uoxtrxsectxQxt.......................................................
............................................................. ... ......................
.........................................
.................................................................................................................................................................
Longitude SO •=1 F 00
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity PopulationCattle acity Po ulatio
❑ Layer ® Dairy r 131
❑ Non -Layer IDNon-Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity YO ��
Total SSL W 96M00
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps i ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Ltrearn Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. ]f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. li'discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge hypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection K '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 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(inches): 10................................................................................. .....................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed! (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes 0 No
Continued on back
Printed on 12/22/99
3/23/99

Facility Number: 30-10 1) f Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are n.*� erly addressed and/or managed through a waafnanagement 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 Corn (Silage & Grain)
12/10/99
❑ 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?
Rec uired Records & Document
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: N6-yiolations:or deticie.ncies •were:noted :dui�iitg-thig visit.• :Ytiu:wiil receive-n6-further• : •
: corres oridence: about this' isit.• . . .. :
❑ 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

� k Y
W [3 Division of d,Water. Conservation `;Operation Reyt
,t �.D' ision of nd.Water�Conseirvation ,Compliance Ins on t
�ision of Water Quality ;...Compliance Inspection
Other Agency,- Operation.Review
Wzoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DW2 inspection 0 Follow -tip of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
© Permitted 04ertified © Conditionally Certified Q Registered JE3 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
FarmName: ................................. ........ ................................................... County: ... ........................................................... .......................
OwnerName:......................................................................................................................... Phone No:......................................................................................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title:..................... ...--.... Phone No:
MailingAddress:.......................................................................................................................................................................................................... ..........................
OnsiteRepresentative: ........................................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: ........................................ .... Operator Certification Number: ..........................................
Location of Farm:
Latitude a�i i Longitude 4 �
Design Current Design: Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity: ,Population Catt1� Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts,
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holdxng,Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
=1
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes PNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? El Yes ❑ No
b- If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes XNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes 2(No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes IX No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: �
Freeboard(incites): ........................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes A No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 0 1'Of Inspection rJ
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or 7
closure plan? El Yes WNo
(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? ❑ Yeses tKNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? 3 Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? es ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ YesXNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding/ ❑ PAN ❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop type L I%�l%' e!'L
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes §rNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes XNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes XTo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes RON0
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 'Tao
Required Records & Documents
IT 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 ANo
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 /�o
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes IVNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ElYes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes /XNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ArNo
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes XNo
�: i' 6.yiolatibris;or deficiencies -were h6 ed• di tiff �his:visit.. VoiiWill-teM*4y Rio further • ; • ;
corresp6ridehc'e. about bras visit.. • . • . • . •
Comments (refer to. question ##): -Explaiwany YES answers and/or any;recommendations oar, -any other conim nts.
Use,drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use" additional pages as necessary). W
�dQf�� P now /Q 'vim
Reviewer[Inspector Name
Reviewer/inspector signature: Date:��
3/23/99

Division of S p nd Water Conservation - Operation Revie
Division of Vnd Water Conservation - Compliance Instn
Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
U Other Agency - Operation Review
0 Routine O Com taint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follo'A'-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 30 to
Date of Inspection 3/19/99
l'inie of Inspection 9:55 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted 0 Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ® Registered 10 Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: D �rt'a�t1:.J t �ey..l axtlx.................................................. . ........................... County: Wyk NY'SRQ........
OwnerName: Wgy. e.................................... Lukz..................................................... -........ Phone No: Q�Qr.9'�i3.:6�61...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:......................... . Phone No:................... .
Mailing Address: .............. M.Q.chs W1e.N.C.......................... ..
Onsite Representative:.Clxarks..y.}',.Lmtz................. . Integrator:
.................................................................................................................................
Certified Operator:.Cixadcl .NV . .......................... Lutz ................................................... Operator Certification Number: Z19.75 .............................
Location of Farm:
.......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
I%
Latitude 35 ° 59 [ 4SC& Longitude 8I! a 346 F-o-o
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity PopulationCattle Capacity Population
1El Layer 119 Dairy 140 150
E] Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 140
Total SSLW 196,000
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑lagoon Arca ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges 8 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (lf yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If dischan-*e is observed, what is the estimated flow in Ral/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection X Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (Freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
,-Freeboard (inches): ..... ..........24............................ ........................ ............ .................................................... .... ...................... ..................... .............................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 12f7/99

Facility Number: 30-10 Df Inspection 3/19/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are notoperly addressed and/or managed through a w 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
® 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 ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Small Grain (Wheat. Barley,
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
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?
(iel 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?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® 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
IN No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0: No violati6ris:or deficiencies-W&e'noted during-thi9,Visit:.-:You4i11 _receive-ii6tt rthet
cor.respotidence about this.visit. . . . . . .
9 Need to have tech. specialist shoot elevation for top of dike and max. liquid to install marker.
10 Livestock exclusion fencing needs to be done per WUP to maintain buffers.
18 Operation is not certified yet. No special agreement.
19 Need soil samples (annual) and keep certified operator card with plan.
3ggest calling DWQ immediately about getting certified.
formed Mr. Ltttz that he was in violation since he did not have a special agreement extending his certification date, and was not
Wifted yer. I suggested lie talk to DWQ in Raleigh to see what he could do to get certified and not be inviolation. I also
fornted Mr. Lut;, to contact his local Soil & Water Conservation District cued finish whatever needed to be done to get certified.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Printed on 1217/99

Facility Number 30 10 Date of Inspection 11/1819$
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:ni
Registered i0 Certified [3 Applied for Permit 13 Permitted IQ Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: .. County: D,avic..................................................
.................................................................................RSJI
OromerName:?+!aytw.................................... Lutz............................ ...... Phone No: 9.10:r9-9"161 ..........................................................
Facility Contact: Sam ................ Title Phone No: SalullFn.......................................
Mailing Address: 3Q0.L&Ltx,.Imc....................................................................................... mockN-011CAC ...................................................... 2.7.025..............
Onsite Representative: WAylac.LU.tz............................................................... ................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: .Ch.atrlea.W...... ...................... Utz ................................................... Operator Certification Number: 2].9.7,5.............................
Location of Farm:
D�AXGtI.t?�I.LI1z.JT iitlx4.lY11AC11 1.9.A.A�.}1i1.SlA. ap p�ra .X. to il� sauttla.m! .. tote.klxry.�iRl-unxe�secxi�a ......................,
................................................................................................................................................................................................................................,
.................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude F 35 • 59 45 Longitude 80 • 34]& F 00 11
General
I . Are there any buffers that need nnaitntenance/improveunetnt'? © Yes ® No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? Cj Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: [] Lagoon [J Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made`? Yes d 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 H No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to [he waters of the State other than from a discharge'? ❑ Yes Cg No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (otlier than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes ® No
maintenance/itnproveniettt?
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
7/25/97

Facility Number: 30-10 1 Date o spection 11/18/98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site 1ch need to be properly closed? • ❑ Yes ® No
Structures (Latsoonsholding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate'? ❑ Yes 9 No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft):
................................... .........
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes ® No
t l . Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? [-]Yes X No
12. Do any of the structures need hnaintethathce/improvenhent'?
(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 strictures lack adequate ininimunn or maxinuun liquid level markers?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
(If in excess of WNW, or runoffentering waters of die State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .............
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in die 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'?
2 L 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 Pennit?
®•No•violatims'ot;•d'eficieadeg.Wbee:rioted:ttariiag> iis.visit.,You-wili•rUeive po'for'ther"•
corrri p66deince ahouf -Ois.vasi�:
Animal Waste Plan being prepared by NRCS.
Farm appeared well operated and maiantained.
Lagoon recently pumped.
No problems noted.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ❑ No
[]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes 09 No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 10 No
❑ Yes ©No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
C_'
Reviewer/Inspector Name AlUner Bratty;;
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:

0 Division of Soiljl Water Conservation ❑ Other
@' livision of Water Quality
® Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Date of Inspection
Facility Number
--// Time of Itispec:tion 24 hr. (hh:mm)
L$Aegistered E3 Certified E3 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:....
Farm Name:....T....l�i •�....r/.�� 1......1 .................
Owner Name:... 1.11
(%((G�t!....... ...........lr-'r' ...........
Facility Contact: ....../'............................................... Title:.................
Mailing Address:........Q�.... ,ra .��.....LrT..............
Onsite Representative:....J�t % .................I.... .........
Certified Operator;..A/ . i!�� ...........
County:..... ..... .....................................
...I..........
Phone No: .��llf,..... ........
'. C /..��......
............I .................. Phone No: ... ;�.i!,e'.1..' e.....................
Integrator:.......................................................................................
Operator Certification Number;...
Location of Fa
".....g ..........��....sc�r�............................................................................. ... .
Design : Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If dischargc is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? Of 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?
❑ Yes J9No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes JgNo
❑ Yes % No
❑ Yes zo No
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes � No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/97

Facility Number: —
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes XNO
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes JWNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):........................................ ...............................................................................................................................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes P No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes J No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes JeNo
(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 /V No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type C�>if
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
P'No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
VNo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes'
PNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
RINo
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
/
❑ No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
of
No:vitila'donsor' ddiciencies.rvere-noted-during this: visit:_ You:will reeeive' m" 6 ftirtlier
correspondence about this:visit:
�/;7
7/25/97
ReviewerAnspector Name ' Ff / i a
ReviewerlInspector Signature:
Date:

f?
OPEPAT I GHS' Wll Fax" 919-715-6048 Ju 1 .25 ' 95 7 :39
n z r. [ 67' ,1%
Cn Si;c Rerrr�cn�titi�: � �. � �•��,
— Catcc _✓
Sn C�;,aity; _�Q ` '�',miac: of Anima l:% on Site: —------�, __
S9 ' 45 Lencutic; ,0_0' ' Q
T)T.t ot': ;sar.: 0mund= �c al
Circle Y�-* or Nc
1JCL a 41,
s Faac . i "-Nq
i"4: 1Jem `l,:;.I �Lmt=d.+Gf:l::i, j:= "::- V�$1 '_bc C..a ---vl0
c�!I:::iC1IIS ;:C:J;)C.
`„ .S ]� E : e.^,a�� pU5C1"1" I_'c,:. ; 1':.CC1'_`y;? :' U�'iY '.:�:� C,C.:GI �: ',s i.•.i 1?:
... ?� t:. 9.':; 1':�1�.• i .�%L i:C".:'i?L: cr �� 7E'�:,?.:�? �'^�3 `0