410021_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of NVater Resources -
Facility Number m - a ❑ Division (if Soil and Water Oervation
❑ {.Mier Agency { 111► 1 l
Type of Vint: 7 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation ❑ "f echnical Assistance
Reason for Visit: �b Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up ❑ Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other ❑ denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: 5 q, County: ��� Region: V YSQb
Farm Name: Gp
Owner Name:
;hailing Ad(Iress:
Owner Entail:
Phone: t)Gr} - 9H -!3
J
++ II __-` 33 �t
Physical Address: 3 CQi i 1 2Q
Facility Contact: Ann(A AM-'0`/ pA l0 'Title: Phone: rj i5 • 0-753
Onsite Represen(ative: Aun- monk Integrator:
a hr5
Certified Operator: V Certification Number: pMt Q t -IQ � (6�__
(tack -up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: latitude: � ► C)-1 t ,Cjgtl Longitude: �u ► �I�rt
i iAL)p -W NC 61 ON l< MA-0 Fo-erne-" Chwcc h gr-\ , 2 c,* v{-, gh ax v— w.
S.-sine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Pouilry Capacity Pop.
Laver
Non -Layer
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Dther
Design Current
Dry Poultry CaD.1City POD.
1_a ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Dther
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge obsen'ed 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 ofthe State'? (Ifyes, notify ❑'v' R)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ol'tlie State {gallons)'?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes. notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence cif 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 Pup.
Dairy Cow
bQ
Dairy Call'
Dairy lleiter
Dry Cow
Non -pair
Beef'Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef' Brood Cow
❑ Yes 56 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No
[::]Yes % No
® Yes ❑ No
❑NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I u/'3 21412015 Conlinned

Facility Number- - � Date of Ins ection: ju to 1-1
!'Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is stnrago' capacity (structurai plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard'?
[:3 Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NF
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: rke- Iti�
Spillway?: ��j� —
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 1)12 1 b
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity ol'any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
M11 No
❑ NA
❑ NF
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
C. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed ar.d/or managed through a
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
[] NI:
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 ofthe Structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[R ito
❑ NA
❑ NL'-
H. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
tp No
❑ NA
❑ NF'
(not applicable to roo fled 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
❑ NI
maintenance or improv'emenl?
Waste Application
I O. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
1 F . Is there evidence of incorrect land application`? If'yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
r;rl No
❑ NA
❑ NF
❑ Excessive Ponding [] Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, In, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 1 U`%f or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
:Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of'Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind I7rif3 ❑ Application
Outside of'Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving craps differ from those designated in the CAWNIP?
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NI;
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NI:
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Dees the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[K No
❑ NA
❑ NF
18. Is there a lack of'properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NF
Required Records & Documents
19. DILI the facility fail to have the Certificate of'Covcragc & Permit readily assailable'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NI:
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWNIP readily available'? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NIA
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑ Check lists ❑ Design [] Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Othcr:
rovement? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
21. Does record keeping neOleekly
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NF
E wastc Application Freeboard Waste .Analysis [ oil Analysis
❑
[j2'Wcalher Code
E/Zairifi ll [j-oMtocking Crop Yield 51�minute Inspections E 'IMonthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ S a.
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge`?
❑ Yes
P7al No
❑ NA ❑ NF
23. If'selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
�Q NA ❑ NF
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

Facilily Number: - hate of Inspection:
1O
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? W
❑ Yes
.4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? If yes, check
❑ Yes
❑ No
CP 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 f irst survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide docurnentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
`]Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2T Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
CA NA
❑ NEi
Other Issues
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
K No
[DNA
❑ 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
fA No
❑ NA
❑ NE:
ifyes. contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
TT��
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
[X 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.
❑ Yes
KA No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other-
3 2. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance ofthe permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE:
33. Did the Reviewer/]nspector 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 4). Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or an►' other comments.
11 drawings of facility- to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
W CkS "bS e, rt p I CA CA 0 V) r RAo-
- up,_lei•}-M V\j up 2 W SKO nep-6 A.) rQ
01-1 5�11 60b �U(l _Dbne, ciJS111
a f
�] Ui L40 60d t ao SV �hk \U Ouk 4 60 wl kohl 6 r Ginal,�1615
103 WUCA&t e/ 1 rvm roAdS;&z 5Ao )o ,n%,5610�ior
Coin#u►►ned T va �1 Co�ta.0 ��+' - ► alk.er �a�
- 1f M k o4- Qk- Silo 10&�i,yo W5� C1,10 -k �C`�� �15i �'•
'\i�b 0A t.05, 0108 0,91 311jS_6(l
43y . os �3. b.oy
NVi 11 MUVV e-MW(\K ftV-4# GACr p0m910) 0\U 1c f j- pXC\�cri5 6 r O'V\er C-rmCe,015
Reviewer/inspector N
Reviewer/Inspector S
11'age 3 of 3
Phone: g1 dS
Tate: j I]
/1 rd I I
214/2iI15

I)ieision of Water Resources
Facility` Numtzer ®- ❑ Division of Soil and Hater C_ rvation
❑ Other Agency
Type of visit: XCompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation ❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: (YRoutine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up 0 Referral ❑ Emergency- ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival 'Time: Departure 'Time: ' I Coun(y': jPJ11AM Region: �j �Izc)
farm Name: Owner 1?mail:
Owner Name: Ll � __ Phone: 6 l? —��43
Mailing Address: 3-So d, _ H\QA"[ eQC..i,,- (ZQ-, 4ms'ow, out-, je _ Q-■
Physical Address: 37 3 ? li i w 2L.y_ GI- go it
Facility Contact: ON Ar AMAN FLL4 Title: Phone: r a753
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator:
Certification ,Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Z' 40E -i-t, P Jt- Hla 6t m , t.&� D WW"Q CM Rp ., (1447- OAJ 1-11AI POCK PA .
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Pouliry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Laver
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilt%
Boars
Other
Qlhcr
Design Current
Dry Poultry Canackv Pol).
l_a c�rti
Non -Lavers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Points
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1, is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ StrLLC[lrre ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made`!
h. 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 (lie discharge bypass the waste management system:' (II'yes, notify DWR)
?. Is there evidence ofa. past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any obsen'able adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of,tlie State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
DaiEz Cow
Q
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non-Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes J�fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑Yeti ❑No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ Nl:
❑ NA ❑ NI:
❑NA ❑N'E
Page 1 u/'.? 21412015 Coiitbined

jFacility Number: b,L - ¢_ l j � Date of Inspection: i (o
Waste Collection & Treatment
4• Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [!3�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NI'
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure •3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: o2w 1::p, UXR
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in). _
Observed Freeboard {in}: ILA ---
5. Are there any ininiediatc threats to the integrity ofany orthe structures observed?
❑ Yes
KNo
[] NA
❑ N'li
(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
Pg No
❑ NA
❑ NE;
waste management or closure plan?
if any of questions 4-6 ►tiere ans►vered ►'es, and the situation poses an immediate public health
or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structure~ need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NIi
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
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Arc there any required butlers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
l 1. is there evidence of incorrect land application:' If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [g"No ❑ NA ❑ NE:
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Fleavy Metals (Cu. Zn. etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10`%, or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soii
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside or Approved Area
12. Crap Type(s): C'4NJ , �rMPt4 (9kCiRD +
13. Soil Type(s):
— 14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWN91'?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ N F
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[2 'No
❑ NA
❑ NF
lip. 1)id the facility flail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation cicsign or wettable
❑ Yes
C• No
❑ NA
❑ NI
acres determination'?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE:
—' 1 S. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ret aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of'Coverage Sz Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[J�rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have; all components orlhe CAWMP readily available? ifyes, check
❑ Yes
NINo
❑ NA
❑ NI:
the appropriate .
iv&f❑Checklists
❑Other-
2 1. Does record keeping need improvement? Ifyes, check the appropriate box be] ow.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ N1:
Wee it! ,-_ --l- -:._.l ��._. � __,_ ._
❑ Waste Transfers
�
f ❑ 120 Minute Inspections
is
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility full to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Bf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. 1f selected, did the Facility flail to install and niaiWit iti rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'.'
❑ Yes
❑ No
KNA
❑ NE:
Page 2 of 3
21412015 Continued

(Facility Number: - Date of Ins ection: `j
24. Did the facility tail to calibrate waste applic� .n equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
e o
❑ NA
❑ NIS
25. Is the facility out ofcomp] iance with permit conditions related to sludge'? I yes, check
❑ Yes
NK
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:
d 26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Na
❑ NA
❑ NEE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
[] Yes
[Z-No
[ <NA
❑ ,CIE
Other Issues
2S. 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 oldie inspection did [lie facility pose an odor or air quality Concern'?
if yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility tail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
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 ❑ LagoonJStorage 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 sarne agency?
❑ Yes [gNo ❑ NA ❑ Nl"s
❑ Yes "No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CRr No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Q�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes C5No
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes CJNo
[]NA []NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to (Iucstinn 4). Fxpiain 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).
�, �c-e r w1Q,P,, Sr�ww B�-o F M at5. [r.7eLuA�,S i aG39
al- Salt- WrkS OU6 900,
aL Ch-trNeg�r i two glut- �kc . C.o Nit' L_&� � t�
l d^} SSE 00 L M&6Q 5 ` o 45C- �6Qr f A , `14& w s& qW,-ion
s
AUWW � 1-756e_f­*,
1 �- � ; R&C01 t v as
Reviewerllnspector Name:
Reviewerllnspector Signatui
Page 3of3
Phone: SJ%- 406•#,Tgl
Date: 7113 t
21412015

Division of Water Resources
Facility lumber P6 Division of Soil and Water Co ervation 'a
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review p Structure Evaluation Q 'Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral D Emergency _D Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: J 7 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: {a nrd Region: LC 5P-0
Farm Name: err i ►+ 4 e r b0.1_r y �^ Owner Email:
Owner Name: L 0_r d £ it f i Phone: & % — r? a 13 rK
Mailing Address: 3 "36 �- �%tg h 12a Llc. . ' (� r San v r 11i° N C
Physical Address: 3-7-3
Facility Contact:
A n r),a_ A Sri 0-10 Title:
Onsite Representative,
Certified Operator,
Back-up Operator:
0-C4-2i1 Y/(0 -b
7S
Phone: aM G Y qq _ 124R_ ,6
Integrator: .4 "4�►F-N '
Certification Number: (0 /,4r5. 19 M/?/ /
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: W 07 rs9 "' Longitude: %3 ;? �� / q S/'�
Swine
LUY F r i eJ en
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La cr !
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Fecder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Non-L
Pullets
Other
Pouits
Design Current
Dischar es and Stream Impact
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
1;200
o
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes Q�r]No ❑ NA ❑ 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 2/412014 Continued

Facili(Number: - Date of Iinspection. ] d�
"ante Collection & Treatment
4. Is,storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
�Irb y a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
/� Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Jeri- Identifier: UA-0) A-
YJ Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): 3 Q Q
❑ Yes $ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Observed Freeboard (in): t b
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? ❑ Ycs �(No ❑ NA ❑ NI's
(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
R. 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
tR"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
I�o
[] NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11, is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
2f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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): �Aj��� '
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops di(ter from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
;NNo
0 NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[g No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
P�Nb
❑ NA
❑ Nl:
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
tR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of'properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ N13
Required Records &_Documents
19. Did the fieiIity flit to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'/ ❑ Yes [J do ❑ NA ❑ Nl;
20. Does the facility fail to have a]] components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes L)Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. ocs record keeping need is provement? 1 ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ Ni:
��Rste Applicat' n Weekly Frccboar Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑ ❑ Weather Code
aainfall Stocking ❑Crop Yicldr20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1" rainfall htspcctions I-1" '
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility tail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No Cg�dA ❑ NE:
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued
►1

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? If yes, check [ j Yes ❑ No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge'?
27. Did the facility Fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
2K 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 ol'the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative imtnediatcly,
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 No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
PNA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
j NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
V� Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ,O<No
❑ Yes o No
❑ Yes � No
❑ NA ❑ NE
[DNA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑Nl;
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any outer comments.
Use awings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pater as necessary).
Q
L4 p
ID
a o�
1013 /l I s
1,57 s-h sr U z
Reviewer/Inspector Name: MP —A I S j 2 f� 6 rpCl� -_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: — f►I � �L�.%t�-�.L'��
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412014

k " "vision of Water Resourt�
Facility Number - Z D Division of Soil and «'titer nservation
Q Other Agency
T►•pe of Visit: Cmliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up a Referral p Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
tvA
Date of Visit: d WL4 Arrival Time: 'Z4 /) Departure 'rime: i 3J County: ,i �� Regiot��XD
t �
Farm Name: ✓1 � 4A Vr Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
!Nailing Address: .��g� � G 1•� G� _
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Vyl�r, 10 Title: C. Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Rack -up Operator:
Location of Farm: Latitude:
�qoe ck. ft—,4
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
Certification Number:
Design
Current
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
La er
Non -Layer
Design
Current
Dry Poultry
Canacity
Poo.
Layers
Non -La ers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Im aets
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. ❑id the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify ❑WR)
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)
Z, 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?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
2 Do
�
DaLry Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
,Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes E2/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ N I"s
❑ Ycs ❑ o Q NA 0 NFi
❑ Yes Zo ❑ NA ❑ NF
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page J of 3 21412014 Continued
t

>Facility Number: - Datc of Inspection: 0r
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
EZ/No
❑ NA
[] NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[v]rNA
❑ NE,
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: V r0' WVJOL
Spillway?: A —
Designed Freeboard (in): -SD + �
Obsmcd Freeboard (in); `j ,]
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. Arc there Structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yeti
ff No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan'?
if any of questions 4-6 were answered ►'es, 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�r`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ 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 ❑ NI;
maintenance or improvement'?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buff'crs, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes E!fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes rlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ (Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ 1-leavy 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 ❑ l:videnec of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12, Crop Type(s): pffrr&
13. Soil Type(s): &'-i 1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from use designated in the CAWMP?
Ef Yes
❑ Nu
❑ NA
❑ NlE
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
&eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
I S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
dNa
❑ NA
[] NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
Q 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 dNo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [ f No
23. Ifselected, did the facility rail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [2fNc
t
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
[:],Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
4
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge'? if yes, check
❑ Yes
EZ"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
VN❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the Facility Fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
0 No
[2'NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
. yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were Itigher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
E�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
[Ef No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, frceboard problems, over -application)
31. ❑o subsurface tilt drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Ycs
NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative`?
❑ Yes
dNu
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow -tip visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
&N o
❑ 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).
LIMA 8&3M } & 3 51 j 913SL r 7, fu, t,►,-- J cif t 1 `f
Cf. � ► �rz. ,,�. t v. 2d`t i w r coma., 2.a3 �
4mI' ? - Gi � �S Ghrs hu 14� b.� i 2 �31�L
C
wUP - U1,3a - Ft14 r-'yt � r -'� I > �s� '1 Sy,l kla-, (b'AA,,Jj f44J w UP)
AAtLI"N wt C} 5,yl-o — Wt /;. Skr,"J
p,1 J"f 'tik F'&JIS 1r;1YL_Wtfµ� 001�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
I� 11age 3 of 3
Phone:14'��
Date: — 0, ILI )JkA
21412011

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - ❑ Division of Soil and Water Con r►ation
"��**---- ❑ Other Agency
Type of Visit: 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Evaluation ❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up n Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: i arrival Timer Departure Time: 2'" p County: �� r { � Region:
Farm Name: ke.��t,n,yr N�,� Owner Email:
---
Owner Name: �7t�✓��G`` Phone:
flailing Address: �f02 t t'G►t�t zZC - LF +^ +�� ►. NL
Physical Address:
31�- 3
1
Facility Contact: i%M(A 14VVt, JAG Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
1( It
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to finish
Wean to Fecdcr
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Gther
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude:
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity- Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultr►• Canacity POD.
Layers.
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Pouits
ether
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 roan -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)?
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
i ILI
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No NA ❑ NE
d. Doc% the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes E6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge'?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facilit Number: L41- Date of Inspection: Z
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate" ❑ Yes [�f/No ❑ NA 0 NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No Eg"NA ❑ NE
Structure i Stnacturc 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Uppl—`
Spillway?: r;
Designed Freeboard (in). -
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E3No ❑ 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 CNo ❑ 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 D"'Q
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
R. Do any of the strictures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes. ZN a ❑ 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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Annlicatinn
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 dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate ManurcJSludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [] Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): CP /6 Sr
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?
❑ Ycs
© No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
C� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1]� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
E(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[4 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 EiNo. ❑ NA D NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste. Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfali ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 441 - Z isDate of Inspection- Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'? ] Yes E�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25.1s the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(cs) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-cotnpliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List stntcture(s) and date of first survey indicating; non-compliance:
25. 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
ZM)
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
0 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
ZNo
❑ 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
dNo
❑ NA
NE
permit:? (i.c., discharge, freeboard problems, aver -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or C:AWMP?
❑ Yes
EN o
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
E(N o
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency'?
❑ Yes
d 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').
'669
-pleC-]C Cr-+]• SlIJn - �0 (!, �,rt �^+' C� jir► e I�l�Vlr"Y.J
49",, Wes^ 3 " Wig 111, (3'444, wi mis)
CMk 6Lj sit jDoV,, �DJ
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of
Phone: 3 -1/0 - T1/' 5 zy�
Date: 1 7_ 1 d i 3
21412011

{XDivisitin of Water Quality
Facilih Number - z D Division of Soil and Water Co . r►•ation
Q Other Agency I p, pD 11
I
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection O Operation Re►•ie►r• Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: Routine ❑ Complaint p Follow-up Q Deferral Q Emergency ❑ Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: ArrivalTimc:l T=a Departure Time: j County:[ r Region:
Farm Name: et(+} c 'Doj, r j Owner Email:
Owner Name: A��k �, �P,'I wc�t'.f Phone: (M41% "^J) 64) 7— 2— 3
Mailing Address: � 7 d Z— �s`1 i2 � G'� �3 r�ytyi��� �G 2 Z �17
Physical Address: 3'7 3 r7
Facility Contact: lIn 8 p (i e l t 6 _ Title: Phone: _
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification ~lumber.
Back-up Operator:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: v 1 I1 r
-•�ta C17 ,j � Longitude: 7� ,��. , T 3
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non-l.a er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Fecdcr
Farrow to Finish
[Tilts
Boars
Other
Qther
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkev Poults
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
ZC.ra
1z i
Dairy Calf
Dai heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
l3cef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
O(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? (Ifyes, notify DWQ)
[]Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NI:
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NFs
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ YesN❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge`?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued
►mil

acilit� :Number: 0 IDateof Inspection: Z x [
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 l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
r1� v
Observed Freeboard (in): L�7�J 2-JI
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NEI
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
& Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closurc 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 ❑ 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 AvnIication
10. Are thcre 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 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 jDrift ❑ Application Outside ol'Approved Area
12. Crop Typc(s): S' 1&'c , ;>I)
13. Soil Type(s):
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes XXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
C] Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records &_ Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 9 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ I20 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes XNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ANo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
[]Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
[] NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - y 1 Date of Inspection: Iz zr
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 X 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 structurc(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a 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)
3 l • 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 some agency.'
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes No [3 NA ❑NE
❑ Yes j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ YesNo
❑ Yes j�j No
❑ Yes ��t " No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ Nfs
Comments (refer to question f#): 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).
11Vkc-44(m e�i,k"4— cal«riMyi co.jeA� (but 2,4iZ) ? y&s
s� r Z0lz� �r,.4r. Ltd
1�L.' �.�i +�t Crr��• f Ir _' n �;r:',�..r{'�G� '-,-7,��"
��� "/iJ1r� Steil cnalG}11 (�►'�LCd 3�� 1il'►1� 4v� a T�J•!Z jCi� ��J �i'1�� Li� n�c�
!c G��G - �:16,7
y'�GI/�-s �Fr�'t?,�9�,1'�,cL [Grrrl::r� _02I 61-0•IG
z'C// Z.
9fi,y/j 1 = "Q t 1-ir ur _ o, 2,i
+
Reviewer/]nspector Name: -Psi 'kr &k M_1-4Z. ►-e i i _
Reviewer/]nspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ,SS —
Date: 12-' 2 D1-Zy 1 LL
214rzor r

' Division of Water Quality *L'rN
Facility Number - Division of Soil and Water ation d .30M
❑ Other Agency
rype of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Structure Fvaivation ❑ 'rcchnical Assistance
Reason for Visit: { Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow-up ❑ Referral ❑ Emergency ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I q I �Llj/l I I Arrival Timer Departure 'rime ❑Q County: �_��
Region: C
Farm Name: O p r Q_ rq Owner Email:
l ,
Owner Name: ja
Mailing Address; d giah _ Ace— /(
Physical Address: 7 J
Facility Contact: Anon Aron rt P1 It) Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone: ZO 9 7 — xd 13 • `i L ay
IuG a 7 z
Ca 1 A,,-nn vt //P_ 7 2 9
P one:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: _ �i �] Longitude: � q 3 Qj `t
37- qn East to rr4w y 141 ti , Gc l<'f 6n fa Fr ieroen +�lz
wfo 4�3 h Ao cv-- 0
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Othcr
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La cr
Design Current
Dry Poultr►' Capacity Pop.
Lavers
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:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify ❑WQ)
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 oFthe 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 Hcifer
DryCow
,Non -Dairy
Bect'Stocker
Beef Feeder
Bect'Brood Cow
❑ Yes co No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes [ No ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continrred

Faci lity Number: it I - T 1 46 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes P
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:
Spillway?:
Designed l7reeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Arc there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [W 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 ❑WQ
7. Do any ol'the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 11No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes I �} 0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks) ���CC[
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes J[V/No ❑ NA ONE
maintenance or improvement?
11. !s there evidence of incorrect land app]ication? I yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside or Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
+P_<eue-1rye -+- b--rkU
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
P 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:
21. Does record keeping need i rovement'' ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ <<ste Applica 'on ekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis Soil Analysis [1 Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections EWonthly and I" Rainfail inspections
22. Did the facilit_O ir­nstall and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes P
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No X NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: !
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appMtion 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 0 NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(cs) below.
gc-surveil— ❑ 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 [ail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge`' [] Yes &No ❑ NA ❑ NE;
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (FLAT) certification'? ❑ Yes [%No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues 28. Did the facility fiil to properly dispose of'dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? 'Mj Na ❑ NA ❑ Nf;
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yeti, 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 tilc drains exist at the facility? [f 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 �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes )eNo D NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE;
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑Yes �No ❑NA ❑NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use draivings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary),
7 ? nhrt�
aolo G61
PA&4i* 7 n &t
G014M
i�u LU V In ,r�c]
0
3/4l►/ _ 1. ;�_ L= o. is
Rcviewer/Inspector Name: r#
Rcviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: c�
Date:
21412011

Facility Number I �
I
Division of Water Quality
Di►ision of Soil and Water Conser►•ation / Q AM
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint D Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: w
j 0 Arri►al'Htne: Deparlure Time: ® County: r Region: ��
s
Farm ,Name: ex-ri Ylq� QI �� Owner Email: 3
Owner Name: Zq �' 4 F. C -. lr r f Q r Phone:
LIIailing Address: d PO t-v-- aZ -7
Phvsical Address: 10C a 7 ��
Facility Contact: A�4• ,rifle: Phone No: 0-7 53
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back -tip Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ® 0 07 , M Longitude: [Ro all,
�- 40 IE y l e f orv+o Fried,8*1 "'I Urea
Swine
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
j
❑
Boars
i]
Other
❑ Other - - _.. _ 1-
Dry Poultry
❑
Lavers
❑
Non -Lavers
❑
Pullets
❑
'Turkeys
❑
Turkey PdnitS
❑
Olhcr
Disc It a Egc:ti X Stream Impit cis
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ structure ❑ Application F icld ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made'!
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the Slate? (If'yes, not ity DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Duiry Cow
Ej
Daia Calf
❑
Dairy Heiler
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beei' Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters orthe State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: I GO
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 N, <o ❑ NA ❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
❑NA
❑NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑NA
ONE
❑NA
ONE
❑Yes
❑No
❑ Yes ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Cowie ed

i'M
Facillty Number: -- ;. Date of Inspection "=f—'�►� 0
Waste Coliection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stonrt storage plus heavy rainfall) less: than adequate? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
it. If'yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? El Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 ,1Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure C
Identifier: L O W �C
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
(W large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
b. 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 sere answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate puhlie health or environmental threat, notify DNVQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? !N Yes ElNo ❑ NA ElNE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes X
No ElNA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part cif the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes �(No ElNA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
%Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes `'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenanceh tnprovement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? Ifycs, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ (Excessive I'onding ❑ l lydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen (_;round [:]Heavy Metals (Cu, %n, etc,)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate ManurcJSludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptahlc Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(~)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWIMP? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ 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 acre determination'? Yes XNn ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage For land application? ❑ Ycs KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack ofproperly operating waste application equipment?
[--]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):
� AV
■
�1
� 11► � �� 'OWN i I30
�
1
Revie--ver/Inspeclor Name 1i11VIO if iZ._ R ■
Reviewer/Inspector Signa
Page 2 of 3
W/
Phone: — S
Date: a
I212 �4 n►rfi►rued
��S

Facility ,Number: — Z *of Inspection V�d
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?.If yes, check
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ [)csign ❑Maps ❑ Other
❑ Yes << o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
21. Doe' record keeping need im covcment?
►{� �Vekly Freeboard
Rainfall Etocking {'Crop YicId
❑Yes Nc} ❑ NA ❑ NI:[]�1�'asteApplication
Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
[Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections m'Wenther Code
/Waste Analysis
120 Minute Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge'' A AnneL5 h o u te- ml le- ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. 1f 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 p No NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit'? ❑ Yes ❑ No rSKIA ❑ 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 (PLAN) 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
❑ NI
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? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Revicwerllnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yeti
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a Hollow -up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
),No
❑ NA
❑ N13
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
A to nc# i vtd ual p ►nr t Q - e_ ee e Ope `�iu►� ,
3 C� �• +L�✓`� 4
1 L.! V-e
` &49-)L,
P447LA_k" f
O
O-k�-
n
r,
1MAN_s,_ -� _,ram_ �• — %: �' ati, r

Division of Water,.am'
Facility Number
l.
Q Division of Soil ttitid Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit ecom a Inspection Q Operation Review n Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint a Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency a Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of N'Nil: ArrivalTime:
Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: e -a-; P—i
Owner Email:
Owner Name:
Phone:
Mailing Address -
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
`Title: Phone No:
a
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
j
Certified Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: ❑� ❑ ' =„ Longitude: =o
Swine
Design Current Deign Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Luger
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
U Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ '1•urkevs
❑ Turkev Poults
DischarlLes & Stream Iin pacts
L Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made!
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Vesign Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑
Dairy Co
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Ilcifcr
❑
Dry Cat►►•
-
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef'Stocker`
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Bec f S road CA
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)"
Number of Structures:.
d. Does discharge bypass the Haste 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
ether than from a discharge?
❑Yes o ❑NA ❑NE
❑ Yes No - NA ❑ NE
Cl Yes o ❑.NA ❑ NE
❑Yes �No,.,O A"'❑NEI
ElYes o NA ElNE
❑ Yes o ❑ NA , ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Numher: 0 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'?
a. I f yes, is waste level into the structural Freeboard?
Stnrcture i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
❑ Yes o A ElNEi
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure fi
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): LI !�
5. Are there any inunediatc threats to the integrity ofany of the structure~ observed? ❑ Yes No A ❑ NI
(ic/ large trees, severe crosion, seepage, etc.)
b. 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 ans►sered yes, and the situation poses it immediate public health or en►•ironmen(al t74,
t, notify [7V1'[�
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stttctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 , o ❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits. dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement''
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No A
❑ N1:
maintenane:elintprovenuent'?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 13xccssive Ponding ❑ Ilydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heav,y Metals (Cu, Ln, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 1 U lbs ❑ Total phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of'Acceptrrble Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
11 Crop type(s) (-a '-4'e�T��� i �a Q.t ,S` r•
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ From those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
'o11' ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
o [] NA
❑ NE
lit. Did facility foil irrigation design determination ?
the to Secure and/or operate per the or wettable acre
❑ Yes
Ne ElNA
ElNE
17. Docs the facility Iack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
N,,NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use dra►sings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary'):
Revie►ser/Inspector,tiame Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,t'.pt' e'i4 e— C4 Date: 14 � j $ � 0
12128104 Con i► ued

• Facility Number: 9of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes V." NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWN1P readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below,
❑ Yes
ZNo ❑ NA
❑ N13
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge`?
El Yes
Io ❑ NA
❑ Nf:
.23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
i2' ❑ NA
ro"'El
❑ NE:
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA
ElNI;
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
-- ElNA
ZN
El NE:
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Ycs
15NA
El NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification'?
❑ Yes❑
NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
�EDI
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
o A
❑ 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
3 1 . 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 -tip visit by sarne agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE:
Additional Comments and/or. Drawings:.. :.r; w :`?e;'
�1 �G1L 0 QGtII Y--r 1''f 5� k5.
7 0 .Su t /C w 2- I/
lea J
rV p
1E--
12128104

op
Facility Number I ED: ,�
Division of Water Quali.
Division of Suil and Water
Q Other Agency
nervation 16fM
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access p�
)late of Visit: Arrival Time: JI n- 1/� Departure Time: � County:U I { Q�� Region: �!`�
Farm Name: 1 r Lj Owner Email:
Owner Name: I��Q r r y F errggcj- - - phone: ��•5 LL4!f r
Mailing .address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contaet: RM rua Title:
❑nsite Representative: _ Nna koirle)lQ- -- -
Certified Operator: &0 h&6(jP1j0
Phone No:
Integrator, Operator Certification Number: __ ;1113 OS
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of harm: latitude: coe ®El" Longitude: 12
I - Fri e4 C
Pon
r9 hf c� 11+0 14; h I -a
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
1 ❑ Non -Laver
Dry Poultry
El Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ 'I'urke s
❑ Turkey Poults
10 Other
DischarLpes & 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'!
Resign Current
rf attic Capacity population
Zj
Dairy Cow
c�-p
❑
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy I Ieifei
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
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)?
Number of Structures:
DJ-
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?
El Yes �No El NA ❑NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
El NA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ N1:
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes Lbl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
,V,<Yes ❑ No ❑ NA Cl NE
12128104 Continard

i
Facility' aNumher: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & 'I'reatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage Plus heavy rainftli) less than adequate'? ❑ Yeti A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a, if yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yeti ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in);
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures Mtn -site which are not properly addressed anchor managed ❑ Yes A
No ❑ NA [_1NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 %sere answered ►'es, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notif►• DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
H. 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? 1�
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or COMP li:uice alternatives that need ❑ Ycs No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? 0
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes A 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 ol'Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area Moue _ (eafe_-F-a Il
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
9 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 acre determination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
❑ Yes
6�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I X.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment"
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain anv YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility- to better explain situations. (use additional pales as necessary):
am e(���� e ����-►�tt�on 1 n �o � '�-0� 10e I� w fre_5 4 WQ f,.e —
Q 0 Qld iY. +prat �� � `5 No�S� �u� � VKa' ,4 1 s�
AL
Reviewer/Inspector ,Name Phone: c
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
1 12128104 Continued

0 1 1 -./ 6
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Reg uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ [7esi15 ❑Maps ❑ Ctlter
21. Doe record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Uxastc Applica ion a ee y Freeboard Wastc Analysis Soil Art lysis nZXastc Transfers
[ IV infgll Vocking Crop Yield 20 Minute inspections nnthly and V Rain Inspections [<cathcr Codc
NR - at
22. Did the lacility fail to install and maintin a rain gauge? ❑ Yes CVNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility rail to install and maintain rainhrcakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 NA
❑ NI:
24. Did the fhcility Phil to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the pen -nit'!
❑ Yes 14No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes ❑ No
01 NA
❑ 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 ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours asldlor document
❑ Yes X
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? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Rcviewerdnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes VNo
❑ NA
❑ Nl3
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes o
❑ NA
❑ N1-
AO6fRth4,I Comments and/or Drawings:
t lD�60i One- a o sd .
AL
vZ� t�[o7�vja7 Upp4,,Ir = o ��- LG w42-� =❑• U�
t1'Rood Sail pfm 1151,5 nay[ (Dhiz+ )),ed ye-4- CChe-cle-n # Vs�f
ar�f Cori ►Aex- ral0-eC-hviC-0+) f45 to i a 0 0 .
y r � T - '6 t� [ F C U ! 3� f � + i ca- �-t tit w�5fe y
I rrt an C ho.r l u �a5futi {5" not l s�ej n WU Pot&
12128104

Alk
Facility Number a 1
Division of Water Qualit.r
Division of Soil and Water
Q Other Agency
6nservation IN i`' f
Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review a Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4 Routine Q Complaint o Follow up 0 Referral o Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
[)ate of Visit: Arrival Time: �%�� Departure Time: ® County: Region:
Farm Name: Owner Email:
OwnerName: co �r t' l Phone: l
Ij 9
"Mailing Address: �a L�— `1 on V l [ [Q ^ ���. a 7 a y
Phvsical Address: CLIL _sw U 1 I/e r V(— a 7
Facility Contact: A 110 Title: Phone Nn: 516— 7 S3
Onsite Representative: 1—1 Ahn A 1Yidf c�� ,¢, Integrator: r� 6
Certified Operator:. L�� Operator Certification Number: v�
Sack -up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
a �� u «
Location of Farm- Latitude: ® Longitude:
T- C)E }0 ► JC, y Mrtin. Lef4an#o FrIe Ch A)rc.h 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 Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkevs
❑ 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?
Design Current
;attic Capacity Population
ix Dairy Cow Ob
El Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Ileii'm
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stockcr
❑ Reef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures: EZI
h. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify ❑WQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ot•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 1�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
❑No
El NA
❑NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
*Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/2N/11.1 Confi►nued

Facility Number: qj— o� Date of Inspection 1,311 2. 0
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4, Is Storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate'? ❑ Yes ?.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. Ifyes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 }}Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6' 1� Identifier: U �.+r Ld Loex—
spillway?: • e 5
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
(ic/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there strictures on -Site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NI:
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 enviro
nmental threat, notify DWQ 7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
H, Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry slacks and/or wet slacks) 1111!!
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require Yes El ❑ NA ElNli
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes )(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? XNo
11. Is there evidence of•incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below, ElYes ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Froten Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phasphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence or Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do Inc receiving crops oiiier iiu:❑ uwse uesignau u in i=ic e.,H W1vtr: Li r es /I'll NO
15. Does the: receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? Yes [:]No
16. Did the facility fail to secure andktr operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?f Yes ❑ No
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes �dNo
19. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 0 No
Ll iN A Ll iN L
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El 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 pales as necessary):
1ID li> NYC
, ULI`_�
lmlo -1, eQ--,1-UAjAA­1 N C.>
V%e, k-S
mosNakl To toe- ce- 5eeded.-��1•5 S r' P ' 4-
u
•
Reviewer/Inspector Name
0 rt)c L Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu'
Date: a
(0*') YR U,�+ {I q ¢I�v� �v - - - Q � 12/?�S/U4 Continued

Facility Number: Bate aif Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available'? ❑ Yes LJ N ❑ NA ElNI,
20. Does the facility mail to have all components of the CAW MP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes L7 zo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑ Other
21. Does ecord keeping need im o�°entent? If yes, check the appropriate box is low. [I Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
�aste Application L►Z Wee ly 1'rceboard Waste Analysis SVMonthly
alysis �Wastc 'Transfers tion-
l� Rainfall L..YStockingrop Yield 12{] Minute Inspections and 1" Rain Inspections eat}tcr Codc
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 D<NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit'? El Yes X,o [I NA ❑ NE
25, l]id the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ,❑,/No ONA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility [,sit to have an actively certified operator in charge'? ❑ Yes 09 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No E NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes
D(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Drawings::Additional Comments and/or
,�y • �
i �iii
A
7
owfj III
W-1414 =-111W
t

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410021 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWC410021 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspecllon Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine __ County: Guilford Region: Winston-Salem_
Date of Visit: 08/29/2005 _ Entry Time:01:00 PM Exit Time: 03A0 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Gerrinaer Dairy Owner Email:
Owner
Phone: [phone]_-
Mailing Address: 3802 High RoQh Rd Gibsonville NC 2T249 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:36°07'59" Longitude:79°32'48"
From WSRO: 140 east to Mt. Hope Church Rd, exit and take left at top of ramp. Right onto Knox Rd. and left onto Carmon Rd. Rt.
onto Frieden's Church Rd. and left onto High Rock Rd. Farm is on left.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment ji Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Anna G Amoriello Operator Certification Number: 21305
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Anna Amoriello Phone:
24 hour contact name Anna Amoriello Phone:
Primary Inspector: M sa Rosebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: �ZmDate: UFO
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
14. & 28. T-8635 F-1 through F-10 received animal waste in Spring 2006. Crop was not harvested due to land owner dispute. All these
fields are to be planted in pasturelhay Fall 2006. Must get pasturelhay crop added to WUP.
21. Most recent waste sample is still in Raleigh,
21. Due to a date error on operator's T-8639 F-4 & 8 records. there was no PAN balance calculated. Check next visit.
24. Calibration was completed, however, it's suggested that the system be re -calibrated since there is a new gun and reel now. Need
psi, etc. added to CAWMP,
28. Need PAN for pasture on T-8639 F-4 (pull#1 )added to WUP. Operator used hay PAN for pasture crop this year.
28. T-8639 F- 5 & 6 are to be re -seeded w/ grass mix. Add to WUP.
Page: 1

•
0
Permit: AWC410021 Owner • Facility: Larry F Gerringer
Inspection Date: 08129=06 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 410021
Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Milk Cow 200 175
Total Design Capacity: 200
Total SSLW: 280.000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard observed Freeboard
�Iste Pond
LOWER WSP
30.00
52.00
aste Pond
UPPER WSP
30.00
34.00
Page: 2

•
Permit: AWC410021 Owner - Facility: Larry F Gwinger Facility Number; 410021
Inspection Date: 08129/2006 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 DWO)
❑
■
❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
In
❑
❑
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?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ 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?
❑
■
Cl
❑
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
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10, Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
❑
❑
■
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWC410021 Owner- Facility; Larry F Gerringer
Inspection Date: OWO12006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410021
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes No NA NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 Ibs.?
❑
Total P205?
❑
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
Sorghum, Sudex
(Silage)
Crop Type 2
Sorghum, Sudex
(Pasture)
Crop Type 3
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 4
Small Grain (Meat,
Barley, Cats)
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 craps 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 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 CAMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below
Page: 4

•
•
Permit: AWC410021 Owner - Facility: Larry F Gerringer
Facility Number : 410021
Inspection Date: 08Mf2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
WU P?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
Cl
Ma ps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑
Cl
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after n 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?
❑
❑
■
❑
Otherlssues
Yes
No
NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
■
❑
❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlcr document and report those ❑ ■ ❑ Cl
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
Page: 5

• 10 1
Permit: AVVC410021 Owner- Facility: Larry F Gerringer Facility
Number: 410021
Inspection Data: 0M912006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues
Yes
No
NA
NE
30. At the time 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 Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
❑
■
❑
❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
■
❑
❑
Page: 6

Facility Number
Division of Water Quality
Division of Suit and Water
0 Other Agency
1 PM
Type of Visit P Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason far Visit ( Routine Q Complaint Q Follow up O Referral Q Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0 Arrival Time: w r: 0Q Departure Time: County: (bU l I V CA Region:
Farm Name: ' �'rl tP.�---�1 7�� �'lli Owner Email:
�.J 4
Owner Name: Lartmt Phone:
Mailing Address: ICt7 L iI bSG n ! Je� .,F �' 1;7_7
Physical Address: ' 3 oLk-- ,i �e + �. 02 72
+"� �� f`3Ylbr l Title: Phone No: b 7
Facility' Contact: 1'1 Yl
Onsite Representative: h It1 C:( A I r 1ori e_ t l O Integrator:
Certified Operator: n Gi as+e 1 to Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: a o —0 ? Longitude: " M. [B
4b Ea4.I W
psi �a + 6So nv i I t2 . Lef � o n f o
Frl�en Chuth ��4 h} o nfo 4,!-;n h �oCV_ Qd
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 cr
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
Dairy Cow
I Zpo
Dai Calf'
❑
Daia Heifer
E]Dry
Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beet'Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
r
Number of Structures:
DischarL'e5 & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
VfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters ofthe State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? {If yes, notify DWQ}
❑ Ycs
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
El Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
n5
other than fro a d?_ ischarge
Page I of 3 p� ` I2I�8 tl4 Continu d .
`� � � i=- Pull 11 P A N t�, V15 1

Facility Number: — a 0 Date of Inspection 1
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. 1s storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes yNo ❑ 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: L�WP.r
Spillway'?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of'any of the structures observed'? ❑ Yes I► 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 *o ❑ 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'! El Yes No El NA El NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA El M:
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) /// tititi
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
1 ,
LUM
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alteratives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. 1s there evidence of incorrect application? If ycs, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ llcavy Metals (Cu, 7n, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN ? 1 D% or 1 U lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soi
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Winffrift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
❑ NA ;eNE
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? Yes [--]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop anti/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16, Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes U[ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment'?
❑ Yes *o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question 4): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
rawings
Page 2 o ' ' 'Nti� ' � � f, 12128104 Continued
�;w . Iq�f 9

C
Facility Number: Y1 Mute of Inspection 0
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 PK�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. ��WasteApplic
ecord keeping nee7wtekiyFreeboard
ovement'. ^ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ion Waste Analysis Soil Analysis M Waste Transfers �/W_e,a,thcr
Rainfall rocking rop Yield [R40 Minute Inspections �✓J Monthly and V Rain Inspections 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?
❑ Yes
P No
+++❑ NA
ElNI;
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
ElYes
9NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fled to have an actively certified operator in charge'!
El Yes
�❑jNo
p No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
06A
❑ 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 tail 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
❑ Nf:
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
I
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
32,
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application) QQ((�� 1
Did Reviewerllnspector fail discuss maff'v§ `
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ Nl;
to review/inspection wit o an on -site repr,
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? � �
❑ Yes
�40
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: A-M WE m_v*
� r
�► Cf � ;r �ril.�/
' 1
'' 1 v . ► I .

1/1
0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 410021 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWQ410021 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: County: Guilford Region: Winston--Salern___
Date of Visit: 06/02/2005 Entry Time:01:15 PM Exit Time: 03:30_PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Gerringer DailyOwner Email:
Owner: Larry F Gerrinaer_
Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address: 3802 High Rock Rd _ ibggnyiiie NC 27249 _
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude. 79°32'46"
From WSRO: 140 east to Mt. Hope Church Rd. exit and take left at top of ramp. Right onto Knox Rd. and left onto Carmon Rd. Rt.
onto Frieden's Church Rd. and left onto Hiah Rock Rd. Farm is on left.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts
0 Records and Documents
Q Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Anna G Amoriello Operator Certification Number: 21305
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Anna G Amoriello Phone: [phone]
24 hour contact name Anna Amoriello Phone:
Primary Inspector; elissa M Rosebroc Phone: Ext.38 1 600
xt.363
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
15. Matua fields are to be planted in small grain this Fall. These fields have not received waste in the last year.
16. and 18. Can not evaluate. need nozzle type, psi, etc. to complete calibration.
28. Cheese operation is running. Tech specialist is revising WUP and completing application for individual permit on behalf of
owner/operator at this time. Whey is to be stored outside the cheese parlor in a 1200 gal. tank and is to be fed to about 40 steers and
heifers located on site and at one location off -site. Whey is to be tansportad off -site in a square tank located on the back of a truck.
Larry Gerringer owns the land where whey is to be fed in plastic half -barrels. Approximately 100 gal. of whey is produced per week.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC410021 Owner • Facility: Larry F Gerringer Facility Number: 410021
Inspection Date: 0610212005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle -Milk Cow 200 176
Total Design Capacity: 200
Total SSLW: 280,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifler Closed Date Start Date Desiqned Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond LOWER WSP
30.00
78,00
Waste Pond UPPER WSP
T
1 30.00
66M
Page: 2

•
•
Permit: AWC410021 Owner • Facility: Larry F Gerringer Facility Number : 410021
Inspection Date: 06/02/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit. Routine
Yes
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
No NA
■ ❑
NE
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
0
■ 0
0
b. Did dischargo reach Waters of the State? (if yos, notify DWC)
❑
■ ❑
❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWO)
❑
■ ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Cl
■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any advorse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑
Yew
■ ❑
No NA
❑
NE
Wiste Collection. Storage Tleatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
5. Are there any Immodiate threats to the integrity of any of tha structures observed (I.eJ large trees, severe erosion,
❑
■ ❑
❑
seepage, etc.]?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed andlor managed through a waste management or
El
■ ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
■ ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
■ ❑
❑
andlor wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
improvement?
YPc
No NA
NF
Wasle Appllcdtion
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or Improvement?
❑
■ 0
0
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■ ❑
❑
If yes, check tha appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
1s PAN n 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
Cl
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
Crop Type 1
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Natural Vegetation
Crop Type 3
Small Grain (Wheat,
Barley, Oats)
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 3

Permit: AWC410021 Owner- Facility: Larry F Gem nger
Inspection Date: 0610212005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 410021
Reason for Visit: Routine
Wastp Application
Crop Type 6
Yes
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)? ❑
❑
Cl
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
1& Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
Cl
❑
M
17- Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
0
❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Records Documents
❑
Yes
❑
No
❑
NA
NE
and
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Peur,it readily available?
❑
0
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
0
Cl
❑
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)?
❑
❑
E
❑
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?
❑
❑
E
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0
❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑
M
❑
Page: 4

•
Permit: AWG410021 Owner - Facility: Larry P Gerringer
Inspection Date: 06/0212005 inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility dumber : 410021
Reason for Visit: Routine
Other,lssues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-cvmpl ante of the Permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those mortality
rates that exceed nominal 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.
31. aid the facility fail to notify reglonal DWO of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. 0 i d Reviewor/Inspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No NA NE
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ■❑❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

AML
,:. ;.. )iv'isioitofN'aterQualit}1' '
r
aclllt� tiurribt'r f �'Division of 5itil an R'ater'Canser►�a(ion .,;p, • n
--- -- Q' )ther Agene �..
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint Q FoFollow up O Referral Q Emergency Q0,O�th+er ❑ Denied Access
�
Date of Visit: ! Y1� Arri►al "1•ime; Ucparfurr 7'inur: Count►': LLV L "" Region: iw
F r --'
Farm ,Name.: L� L�1 r � Owner Finail: ++++
Owner Name: _ ' err Phone: q
b Inc u� • o 7 z
Mailing Address: 3� ��
Physical Address: -7
Facility Contact:f/L1 Title: Phnnc No: 4
Onsile Representative: _An��.t'x�ari � Jam _ Integrator:
Certified Operator: —at,q cc, Operator. Certification Nunrber.
Back -tip Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
a
Latitude: .Vf.
Sack -up Certification Number:
[A" Longitude: ®0 ©'
Design Current Resign Current
Capacity Population «'et Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Laver
❑ Non -Laver
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Weanto Feeder
El
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
❑
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other —
Dry Poultry
❑
La ers
❑
Non -Layers
❑
Pullets
❑
Turkevs
❑
Turkey Poults
❑
Other
DischarLws & 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 Catlaeit' Population
Dairy co". 1 c2
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Dai
❑ licel' Stocker
❑ Beefl-ceder
❑ Beet'Brood Cow
Number of Structures: 121
c. What is the estimated Volume that reacted waters of the State (gallons).'
d. Does discharge bypass the waste man igernent system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation'?
3. Ve CTC there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes J`No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ N'A
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Con i►rued

Facilili tiumher: l — p� 0. Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus stonn storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 'Po ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If ycs, is waste level into the structural t'reeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
-1 Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 StrlCtnre 6
Identifier: �_di.t_ 4Al —
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): C) �r t 3.
Obser►,ed freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes VN(, ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste managcment or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an itmediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
KNo ❑ 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 WiLS c structures require ❑ Yes
XNo ❑ 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? `
It. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check (lie appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ i lydraulic O►•erload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ l3eavy Mctals (Cu, T_n, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of -Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) rV) t 5 M— ' —
- ----
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
El 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
ofNO❑
NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of'properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers arid/or any. recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
ISM f es true /ate c hcu-d � ►rass re- se -el Ae ov e r , mQ}L4 7 -C-o O&kAdc4. %SAk
iB ce--5su re, 6-A-) o qu ri LV
- a4l
Reviewer/Inspector Name I Phone: 7 �•
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: r�
12128104 Continued

Facilif►' Number: — a l�of Inspection
Rec uired 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? Il'yes, check ❑ Ycs No ❑ NA ❑ NEl
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑ Other
21. Doe record keeping need i provement?-If yes, check the appropriate bo below. ,� ❑ Yes Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
'aste A lie lion VV • board ` Waste Anal •sis soil A lvsis . (� 1�'aste Transfers ` n
pp y
Rainfall F Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and V Rain Inspections L]�'�'�'eather Code
�K�
22. Did the facility Fail it) install and maintain a rain gauge? El Yes No � ❑ NA .❑ NE:
23, ['selected, did the fiacility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yesr ❑ No KN A ❑ 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 WA ❑ NE
20. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ElNA ❑ NE'
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certilication'? ElYes KNo VNA ❑ NI"
Other Issues
28, Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29, Did the Facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
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?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office oFemergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector flail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ Nli
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
[Additicinal Comments assd/or,Drawings: I
19 `��5-a s o� 1 la
a
'l- 5631
r

ision of Water Quality
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation ❑ Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit @ Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
date of Visit: 1 ]111112{iU4 'Time; 09d[I
Facility Number 4l 2l
Q Not Opera tionn I O lielow Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified 0 Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold . ................
Farm Name: G.wingcx.Vatiry:................ County. G.tJjjjQX.0 ........................... .. V!'.$RQ........
Owner Name:L;jr.ry........... ..... I...................... Gexrirtt*u...................... .................... ........ Phone No: - .#9.-7.5.V.{1...1. �R2. .Att�►u.LC�................
Mailing Address: Q,k�l�t><.liReli.ftdfl..............
Facility C❑ntam Ainan-Arttori,e.11u............................................Title:
Onsitc Representative: �rxna.Anasaxi►llsa..t>vtsl.l.�trxr..�;�zxan��x....
Gh'smi lyMlle..N................................................... Z.7.Z:#9..............
Integrator:
Phone ,No.4.49..7B-96..(H) ........................
Certified Operator-.ATana-G .................................. Attl.Rfll4.11,Ll.................. ...................... Operator Certification Number:,Zl3.Q5,..................... ........
Location of Farm: _
From WSRO: 1-40 east to Mt. hope Church Rd. exit and take left at top of ramp. Right onto Knox Rd. and left unto A�
Carmon Rd. Rt. unto Frieden's Church 12d. and left onto Nigh Rock Rd. Farm is on left.
ElSwine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Lattitttdc 36 • 07 59 Longitude
Design Current
Resign Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Ca acitNr attic
elationauaUn e
❑ Wean to Feeder
Layer
❑ Dairy
200
1Elfeeder
to Finish
LEI
Non -Layer
❑Non -[]airy
❑ Fa[Tow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
200
❑ Gilts
Total SSLW
280,000
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 0
2
DischarL s & Stream Impacts
1. 1s 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? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. lI'diwharbe is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
J. 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 ®N❑
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. 1s storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: Upper. ........... ... Lover........................................................................................................................................................
Fr'eehoard (inches]: 54 53
12112103 Conli► "erl

Facility Dumber: 41- 2I 0 Date of Inspection lI1lQ12Qt7a 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees. severe erosion, El Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes ® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered Yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ 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 ❑ Yes N No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes N No
1 I . is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or 'Zinc > 3000
12. Crop type Com (Silage & Grain) Matua Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Ilan (CA WMP)? ❑ Yes N No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'? ❑ Yes N N❑
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes N No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes N 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 N No
19, is there any evidence of -wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes N 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.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/inspector Signature:
Date:
12112103 Co► finueel

Fneility Numbers 41-21 10of Inspection 1111012004
Required
Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
N No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oc/ WU11, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
N No
23.
Does record keeping need inprovement? 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
N No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
N No
26.
fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(icl discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
N No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
N No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
N No
N11" ES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPI)I:S Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
N 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 time appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crap Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" 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.
Additional Comments and/or Drawings;
3. Recently installed gravel silage filter appears to be containing leachate. Looks good.
7. Operator has lightly graded and re -seeded embankmentwith fescue. Has not germinated yet.
15.Operator is to re -drill fescue/orchardgrass over the matua.
16. Irrigation gun needs pressure gauge.
23. Records look good.
23. Discussed the new recordkeeping requirements that are in the general permit with operator.
acility plans on operating a cheese production facility using the milk produced by the dairy operation. Whey is to he fed onsite and
?t added to the waste pond. Need individual permit and waste plan revision.
.VI
12112103

' 3; Mps ion of Soii aied+Wsti:i:Coasen'ation fir; '.,` :.
.: (=. •�}. - '.�.� ?` -e ;-.-•- T.7 .;,--n - i "•r y. .•i-se -a i t �.u"�.•. : fix•'• i c
O..
Other.'A e � :'a �'w• 0 Q ] kq
-'..
.dL:Sw_ .r.,_S."n1�.c:���.+.C:. "::�.lYe:..:�:. �.ti.,:i�-_. �7.r-'k19��.�.=7�;:3i3;"�.�e�,i(:�.r:�•-'�:..��t..,�'.-_.�r.:.�. �':��s��.l�1rl'- �':arr'.,c -CC
Type of Visit C pliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Irate of Visit_
Permitted [j Certified [] Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
p�. If'
Farm Name: .._.�I �.•.... �� n.. P'�
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Facility Contact:
rune:
Not Operational 0 Below
Date Last Operat or Abffo Thr old : ................ _..._..
County: _ L� r ......... _ .
7 oo�'-(C sr�. o7s3
Phone No: Rnry
�:. �
a!r t.�r�_....... Title:.. .......� ...._� ._ - - - .__. Phone No:
IL
Onsite Representative: _._[ 1-�._!vL4 �� -: ((�-- Integrator:
Certified Operator:... n. n r ........ j Qrr� j� Operator Certification Number:
_... .
.... ..•
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry VCattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• ®1 �11 Longitude • 6 dc
Desi—Cnrre 2t ,._:. -.=De_siga - Curren , : - : - I gn r Current ~�
�.''
Swine ,i '" Pais2 ::7Ca` aci Po iilatrou tde'': 'Ca aci `'.Pa elation �. Ea� ci ']isPo elation : b`3'.==:
Wean to Feeder ❑ Layer _- Dairy ❑ :t
Feeder to Finish ❑Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
El
)~arrow to Wean '
❑ Farrow to Feeder _ Other
Farrow to Finish;' fir'r '. P Tot Desi 'C$ achy;
�r
Gilts :.3 �F.. A.� . �. -
❑Boars j, ?:Total SSLW ;.a�
_ w
.'F
F
'• • '.Ri'7 �'-,:-.=` .. •. A•.. !.•Uir
Nimilier 1
' .. of Lagootas
Unlr 6 Pnnric'I ntirl Y cane": iz 4 5•r ;..'.�' *;
Discbarees & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes �Io
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other I!
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 gailrnin?
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. Iyts storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes b(] No
5V;l. Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure, Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6 J'
�' Identifier: ..PT- .....---.... .... ............ ........ _.... _....... --••----- •-------_._._........_....._._....... .......
--.............
Freeboard (inches): ��
121I2103 a ;,. Continued
i

Facility Number: ZT1— Date of Inspection I 1 I t /o/ o
5. Are there any immediate threats to thecty of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tFees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ Yes
No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need 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 minimurn liquid level ❑ Yes No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes io
11. Is there evidence of over application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes o
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type (7" &"j I Aj A 1,-L�
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designadd in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑
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 To
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? Xyes ❑ No
Odor Issues
17. 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?
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 o
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes
Air Quality representative immediately.
Caintnents (iYfer. to g-nrters�.a.n lain »y YES asrswrrs andlar an�y. _r—eo=m'smenr. ^-i r. `onr*" Z7fi.
nsoranyo ercmmentr_
L1se drawings of faipty to 1; ttercxplain situations. (use additional pages as necexs�r]'3=' FKFic—ld-&—py
❑FinalNoustes�1�
51 I0'y t
10
D
0 eAtj
V OR
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector SignatureU Date:
12112103 r U , � Continued

Facility Number: to of Inspection
Required Records & Documents .
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
22. Does the facility fail to have al] components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel Wi7P, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
23. Does record keeping need im rovement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
'Waste Application need
'Waste Analysis ❑•Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
NPDES Permitted Facilities
34. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
❑ Yes *io
❑ Yes Xz
No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [N0
❑ Yes N0
❑ Yes )io
❑ 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 ►isit.
Additioaal'Corsirricnts and/or,- Di awin
.�� _ram. - _
Ffo�a- aPirue�;,���
ea tu/ nu � (� dou5{�tb
d �a�.f/v
N p eal i b 1-6-4 1 ew p •� �s . , chi, ► o�► ► �1
3C) PM A, Ue 4-5j, Lb D rqp(
12112103

hnical Assistance Site Visit Re
DWon of Soil and Water Conservation'"
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 41 - 21 Date: 129104 Time; 1 9:25 1 Time on Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Gerringer Dam County Guilford
Mailing Address 3802 Hiqh Rock Road
Gibsonville NC
Phone: [phone]
onsite
Representative Anna Amoriello Integrator
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
n Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
n Boars
QQ Routine
p Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Q Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
p Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
0 Emergency
Q Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy 200
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27249
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
5tructurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches) 72 65
CROP TYPES jCorn, Silage Fescue -graze Small grain silage I Imatua-graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CcB EnB VaB HhB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
® Dairy 200
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27249
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
5tructurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier upper WSP Lower WSP
Level (Inches) 72 65
CROP TYPES jCorn, Silage Fescue -graze Small grain silage I Imatua-graze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CcB EnB VaB HhB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

■
Facility Number 41 - 21 Date:
4/29/04
PARAMETER
Q Na assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
El 10. Level in structural freeboard
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
El
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12, Waste structure integrity compromised
El13. Waste structure needs maintenance
28. Forms Need ]list in comment section)
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15, Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 15. 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
❑
❑
❑ 19, 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 removaliclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
❑ 24. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
❑
❑
Reclulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation designlinstallation
❑
❑
El 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 - The Gerringer's have installed a filter for the
47. Evaluate WAD certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationlrecommendations
❑
❑
silage leachate.
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)
El
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
5.
58, Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil andlor waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

r
t•
Facility Number 41 - 21 Date: 4129104
COMMENTS:
Waste analyses: 3-31-04 LSD (upper) 5.0 Ibs.N11000 gals. I, LSD (lower) 0.13 Ibs.N11000 gals. S.I.
Last soil samples dated 4-08-04 had two fields calling for a ton or more of lime per acre.
The facility and records appear to be in compliance.
Records looked good.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 513104 Entered By: lRocky Durham
3 03/10/03

�vision of Water Quality
p�lvision of Soil and Water Conserr•alion
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection n Operation Review Q Lagoon Evatuation
Reason for Visit S Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
[1:+t�• ��� �'irit: 09/19/2403 'I'irur:
Facilil►• Number 4l Zl 1130
NNot O wrational Q Bclo'r Threshold
® Perntilled ® Certified p Conditionally Certified ❑Registered Date [,art [}peraled or Ahit.'c 7'hrerhuld: ...-.........
Farm Nante: G.erriver.l?ailry :.............................. Count►-: CAtjkjt(jjr.d ................................. }N�i.R......
................................. .
0"ner Natne:Lam- Phone No:
Mailing Address: ��{U�..HA�t1..FZA.FIf.Fi.O.Aid................................. . 2,72,49 ..............
I;acility Contact: lima.A.tqO.CkUR....... ........................... i'itle:............................................... Phone No: 33b,449.7.$90 (H�...........
Onsite Representative: t�31PrlAND3 ILQ---•---------•---•-•-----•-•-•-•---. Inlegrater:.-•---•-•---•-•---•-•---•-•---•-•-•-•-•----,
Certified0perator:Aiaxw..Gx.............................................................. Opera for Cerl Mea I ion Nomher:ZJ.iOS.............................
I.ocation of Farm -
Fro m WSRO: 1-40 east to ,Mt. Itope Church Rd. exit and take left at top of ramp. Right onto Knox Rd. and left onto
-armon Rd. Rt. onto Frieden's Church Rd. and left onto High Rock Rd. Farm is on left.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse I.alitude 3fi • 07 5911 Longitude 79 " 32 4R
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑esign Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer 1 10 Dairy 200 l47
❑ Non -Layer I ID Non -Dairy
❑ Other
_ . Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW 280,000
Number of lagoons 10 Subsurface i}rains Present ❑ l.at;non ,krea ❑ tips►• Field Arcs
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Uquid Waste Management System
Discha gt.%& Stream Im�ts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the Operation? ❑ Yes ®No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. I f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. lidischarge is observed. did it reach Water of the State:' (If yes, notiry DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. Ifdischarge is observed. whist is (lie estimisted flow in gal/min?
d. ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence or past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® Na
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 & Treatntcnt
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Mrucl ure: 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:--.-.lJpp LMSE.--...--Law-cir-WJSP.-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------..
FiCCb0ard ( inches). 31 66
05/03/01 ��/ � � _ j Continued

Facility number: 4r-21 0 hate of In+pection 09119121103 0
_
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ 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/improverent?
❑ Yes
® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste Applicalinn
10. Arc there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
Cl Yes
® No
1 1. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management flan (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
if. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Reuuired Records & Docuruent%
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? (le/ irrigation. freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the titne of design?
❑ Yes
ENO
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
Cl 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 R evi ewer/[ ns pect or fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You Kill 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); ❑ l:ield Copy ® Final Notes
3.Visited farm the day after hurricane Isabel (2.5 inches of rain). Observed that there was a large amount of silage leachate that had
drained into the creek. See 911MI and 9/20/00 inspections also. Operator is to install some type of "settling basin" to detain the strong,
daily, silage leachate within 30 days.
9. Upper WSP marker has been re -set and looks good.
19. Don't forget to take 2003 soil samples. Rocords look good.
9/15/03 Waste Analysis: Lower = 0.16 and Upper = 2.5 lbs. NI1000 gal.
Reviewerllnspector Name R9elis a Rosebrock �}
Reviewerllnspector Signature: 1 r Date: 9 . r"
05103101 Continued

Facility Number. 41-21 I�of Inspection 09/19/2003
Odur Issues
26. Docs 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?
2T 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 Fm blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do t}te 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 ® Na
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
..
05103101

0 0 11.- 30 AM
I Division of NVatcr Quality
Q Division of Soil and NVater Conservation
0 Other Agency
Typo of Visit /1) Compliance Inspection ❑ operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint D Follow up Q Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
(lute of Visit: Time:
Facility Number
tint tl teratinnal ]Kelm► '1'hreshnld
Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditional],., Certified U Registered bate Last Operated r.1bo►•e' ' resh d:
Farm,Nante: I fIOO� `l dQ ry Couniv: r
O fi ner Name:
]flailing Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite RepresentatireV r Ijj(2_(� n,A
j:2f YPlC
Certified Operator: Anna • a' i
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine C'annrity Pnnnlatinn
❑ Wcan to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ a its
❑ Boars
Phone No:
Ll�'�ILIIto- 1, t� 3(, C
Phone No: '-CY`f .
Integrator:
sj6,675-3 "
`"� ^^77 1 I j /� �--^
Operator Certification ,Number: C C (0
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acih Population C the Capacity Population
❑ Lavcr JL& Dairy ❑
❑ Non -Laver Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity �dQ
.I otaI SSM
Number of Lagoons ID Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I.a �o.n Area ❑ Sp my Field area
IIolding Ponds! Solid '1'raps HE I0tin Liquid NVaste Mana +ement System
Disch:�ries C Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge oribinaled it: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a, II'd ischargc is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. II'd iseharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (!f ycs, 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?
_1,aste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storabo capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate`? Spillway
Struclurc I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S
Identifier:IJY-)P.P
Freeboard (inches): (P T�
1�To to
I
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
Ycs ❑ No
❑ Yes )(No
Slruoluro 6
Continued

0
Facility Number: — pZ fate of Inspection �fU
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integriy of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion.
❑ Yes
No
seepage. etc.)
G. Are there structures on -site which are not proper]}• 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
❑ Yes
No
immediate public health or environmental threat. notify DWQ)
�. Do any of the srmctures need maintenancelimpro.•ernent?
❑ }'es
No
S. 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
gNo
%Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance improvement?
❑ Yes
o
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ElPAN ❑ Hy'Oraulic Overload
❑ 1'eso
tNll
12. Crop r}-pe AO
13. Do the receiving c ps differ with those designated in the Certified Animal W to Managemem 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?
❑YesXNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
L]p No
Re u' ed Records S Document
j
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage 8- General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XNO
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(it/ WUP, checklists, design. maps. etc.) V/ / / ✓
❑ Yes
No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie! irrigation. freel,a,d, waste analysis d. soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
N❑
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
o
22. Fail to notify- regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
No
tie' discharge. freeboard problems. over application)
2I Did Reyiewer!Inspector fail to discuss reriewfinspection with on -site representative?
El Yes
No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes
No
25. Were am additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AA1'MP?
❑ Yes
No
© No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit, You w'ilI receive no further correspondence about this ►•isit.
,.4•"r��'°iiii'.f"......+CwAs^5: .:��" i`€a«rw1.w.Wi... ...-.Z.0 -V., .y-
Comments (refer to question #`#};' Eitplain oily YE.S answers sudlvr any recatnmendations or any er comments:
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations: [use additional ,pages as nee
a.. exsa Field Con' El Final Notes
„M } f Y r1
�- �.�� �a''ia~ .xY°-:W ��a cif :.y✓•S• � � "='..%. N�i -.i.Y:Y.6*Si7�'•.1i.�Kf 1.5Y✓'+.�• 4-:. rr� � HL•u�itie °•kv�:. � ]IC:-T.P�.
Luae,r 0+ `e UD OX V�� t L_jjJf�S {'5
r
L
Epp '2 .5
Re►'iewerllnspectarNome - •= f: ' w� �` _ ���.:,.:��i...,.::,;,; �:": �t;-� � "�^='r-=^ .ar�:!:xr
y r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: / Date:
05103101 Continued

Facilit►' Number- — Date of Inspection
nr 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. Arc 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(~), 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?
a
❑ Yes Na
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes $ No
d4L L
u � go-nw,�e Qaar -�Pa
dtie.�w�� �kta -[.Ao e�ezf SAe v/i4�oi �-
q/ao�od woe �(e6,�0-mod. u�kl�
919-733. S08'j
05103101

,Technical Assistance Site Visit
DilWn.of Soil and Water Conservational
Q Natural Resources Conservation Service
Q Soil and Water Conservation District
Q Other...
Facility Number 41 - 21 Date: 129103 Time: 1 11:30 1 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Gerringer Dairy _ County Guilford
Mailing Address 3802 High Rock Road Gibsonville NC
Onsite
Representative Anna Amoriello
Tyee Of Visit
Operation Review
Compliance Inspection (pilot Only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
❑ No Animals -Date Last Operated:
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Integrator
Phone: [phone]
Purpose Of Visit
Q Routine
Q Response to DWQIDENR referral
Q Response to DSWCISWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
Q Emergency
n Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy zoo 170
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27249
GENERALQUESTIONS:
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 pond ing ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
b- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
5- 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 Upper W SP Lower W SP
Level (Inches) 48 84 IF- IF
CROP TYPES Lorn, Silage Fescue -graze Ismall grain IMatua Grass
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CcB EnB vaB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/ 10/03
Integrator
Phone: [phone]
Purpose Of Visit
Q Routine
Q Response to DWQIDENR referral
Q Response to DSWCISWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/local referral
Q Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
Q Emergency
n Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
® Dairy zoo 170
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27249
GENERALQUESTIONS:
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 pond ing ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
b- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
5- 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 Upper W SP Lower W SP
Level (Inches) 48 84 IF- IF
CROP TYPES Lorn, Silage Fescue -graze Ismall grain IMatua Grass
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CcB EnB vaB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/ 10/03
® Dairy zoo 170
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
27249
GENERALQUESTIONS:
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 pond ing ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
b- Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
5- 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 Upper W SP Lower W SP
Level (Inches) 48 84 IF- IF
CROP TYPES Lorn, Silage Fescue -graze Ismall grain IMatua Grass
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES ApB CcB EnB vaB
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/ 10/03

a
L l
Facility Number 41 - 21 Date:
4129/03
PARAMETER
n No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
❑
El
10. Level in structural freeboard
Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12, Waste structure integrity compromised
�• Farms Need (list in comment section)
❑
❑
El 13. Waste Structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
El❑
15. Over application < 10% or r 10 lbs.
30, 2H00 .02re-certification
[116. 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
[121. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
[122, Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removallclosure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient 5prayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker checklcalibration
®
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41, Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El Other.,,
43. Irrigation system designlinstallation
❑
El
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 certificationlrechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationtrecommendations
❑
❑
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. Croplforage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

IFacility Number 41 _ 21 Date: 41zs103
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 2-10-03 LS❑ (upper) 0.84 Ibs.N11000 gals. I, LSD (lower) 1.6 Ibs.N11000 gals. I
4-14-03 LSD (upper) 14.2 Ibs.N11000 gals. S.I.
Soil analysis dated 3-18-03
The maximum liquid marker in the upper WSP needs to be replaced as soon as possible.
Remember to use the wettable acres when figuring the PAN valance on the irrigation records.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST ocky Durham I illie Langley
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 5l1103
Entered By: lRocky ❑urham
03/ 10/03

of Water Quality
QIlion
ion of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
]Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Fallow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Mile (PI' Vkh: 10/22/2002 I'inx; 14i}p
Facility Number 41 21
Q itint —Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or AIH)►e Threshold:
County: Harm Name: G.r~rxartgex..Q;aix�:............................................. .utl Qxd.....---............ .. .............. 1..S.EZ.
0%ner Name: Larry..... ..... ...... . .... - .... . ........ Gurijage '.................................................. Phone No: 336-4�%.7..S.V.A...........................................................
Mailing Address: 3B.Q2.H19t1.Roflc.Ro;Ad...................................................................... G.ib.so ille.M.........---...---...---........................... 27249.............
Facility Contact; s° nna,.i]rimexit IQ .................................. .......... "I'itk:...................................... --........................ Phone No: 449 7N96,(U),5.16.,Q.7.S3L...
Onsite Representative: Airm.l.#tpl[lxlWo........................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
CertifiedOperatomAtIrM.G....... ........................... Al[T'Aoddk......... .............................. Operator Certification Numher: 13Q3.............................
Location of Farm:
From WSRO: I-40 east to hit. Hope Church Rd. exit and take left at top of ramp. Hight onto ]Knox Rd. and left onto �
Carmon Rd. Rt. onto Frieden's Church Rd. and left onto High Rock Rd. Farm is on left.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3fi • [l7 59 Longitude 79 ' 32 4Z3
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑esign Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ® Dairy 1 200 1 165
❑ Nan -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSI,W 280,00:0::::]
Number of Lagoons ID Subsurface Drains Prescnt ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Arru
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ Nc: !Liquid Waste Management SVNtem
Discharses �, Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at; ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field []Other
a. It' discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. nobly DWQ) ❑ Yes [:)No
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallrnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (Ifyes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge frotn 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? to Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Struclure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure h
ldcnfifier; ......Upper.. .S.V..... ..... 1..sawa....SP............................................... ..
Freeboard {inches}: 24 45
05103101 Crynlinrrer!
07337

Facility Number: 41-21 Date of Inspection 10/2212002 .
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc,)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property 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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ 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
1 1. Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Graze) Matua (hay) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley,
13. Do the receiving crops differ with these 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
® Na
lb.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Retluired_R_4curds
& Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Dues the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
('tel WUR checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement'? (iel 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
2L
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?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
CommenLs (refer to question #): Explain any YFS answers andlor ant' recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. {use additional pages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
9. Need to re -install missing marker in upper WSP by the end of this year.
Upper WSP Waste sample dated 5l15/02 = 12.8 lbs. NI1000 gal.
Lower WSP Waste sample dated 5115A)2 = 0.24 lbs. NI1000 gal.
Questions left blank are not applicable to ?his facility at this time.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melis • Posebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
A
05103101 Continued

acility Number: 41-21 Da0lnspecliorl 1U122/2f1[12
0
n_ dyx Issu
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
IN No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
1s the land application spray systern 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
tl dHi(Ii-aI Conilments`andliir:Drawings: g., ,
r. i
J
115/U3/o1

apm
AD Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency .
Type of Visit /S� Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review ❑ Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit kRoutine Q Complaint Q Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
7 Facility Number [late 01 Visit:
reshold
MPermitted /� y Certified ❑ CondttronalIN Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or -Above Thresh Id:
Farm Name: I @ rrj r &r Ta I C_V Count,.--.
Owner Name:
Mailing Addre
Facility Conta(
Onsite Representati-ie: jj1'1�T�Mul r C 1 0
Certified Operator: M6- r 1& r+ P_1
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Cnnsacir►' Pnnnlatinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
[:IF ceder to Finish
❑ Farrow, to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Phone No: _.--.,• r � -
cdv d 7!�
r
Phone No:
Integrator: C
Operator Certification Number: 13 � •�
Design Current Design Current
Pouitr Ca arih Population C ttic Capacity Population
❑ Laver i, Dairy
❑ Ron -Laver ❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La o0o Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ® ❑ No Liquid Waste Mana ement Ss stem
Discharges 8 Stream Imparts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is obscned, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is obsen-ed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notifi- DWQ)
c. If discharge is obsen•ed, what is the estimated flow- in gaVrnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if ves, notify D%N'Q)
❑ Yes �No
❑Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
?, Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Y'esVo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes XNo
Wastr Callection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? spillway ❑ Yes No
Structure 1 Structure ? Structure 3 1 ` Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 Continued

Facilih' Number: — Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trees. severe erosion,
❑ }'es'o
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(if anof questions 4-6 was answered ves, and the situation poses an
❑ Yes
NO
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify' ❑WQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
A No
S. Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
ANo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
I O. Are there any buffers that need maintenance.!improvement?
❑ Yes
b No
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding , ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
1
❑ es
JKNo
12, Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ wit those designated in the Certified Animal «asre Manag ent Plan (CA'" P)?
ElCs
Xho
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
4No
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
o
Re uir d Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage R. General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
D<No
15. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Cenifted Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
fie! NVUP. checklists. design, maps, etc.) V V
o
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie! irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & sd l sample reports)
❑ Yes
'�;FNo
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
No
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ic.! discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
'KNo
23. Did Review•er,'Inspector Fail to discuss review•iinspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
NNo
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
J�(No
0 I a 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 any iecommendations or any other comments.
U4;c drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessarv): Field Cory ❑Final antes
Reviewer/Inspector Name eh
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
n vn yin ► r',,,, ry�„°a

0 0
Facilit►' Number: — [late of Ensltectinn �}C-R—
Odor LS is
26. hoes the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid Icvel of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Arc (here 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, andfor public property)
29. Is (lie land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Wcre 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 permanenthcmporary cover?
Addition aI Cornmen 1% a ndlor Dra,�►ings:
i,Jca�tP -� �Y,a( sll s�o a
u-�o�— 1 a• 8 l �s• N/ IooOc�o-Q.
l..�t uerJ— O • a� 1 Ins . N//oo�o rv,
;r,>®tom
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes �'� 00
GimE nii ,
05103101

Division of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
ther Agency
(Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
I}:rir of y'itiii; 411f3C2t]02 I'ii„c•; 13:15
Facility Number 41 21
Q Not 0 erational Q 11cloN Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date bast Operated or Abo%e Threshold: ...........
Farm Name:
Counts-: Guitlforal........................... .C.i.�xxllllglrlC..l7i�lxy....................... ...................................... ................... ...........
O" ner Name: Phone Nn
Larry...... ..................................>rxxtra�er,.......................... .............. .......... . 336-349.-:I.BUR.............. ..................... -.......................
Mailing Address: # 2.11i�h. taslc.l u d...................................................................'JJb.5.Q1A1!11Q..NC ............................................ ..... 2,72.49 .............
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative:AlIUM.Amorif,00........................................................................ Integrator:
Phone No:
Certified O erator •„• Operator Certification Numher:21305............................. P • �llu3,A..Cf.�................................. t'�lttaQxll�ll.R....................................
Location of Farm:
Dairy located on High Rock Rd. just n. of Frieden's Church Rd.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ' 07 • 59 Longitude r48
Design Current
Swine c anarity Ponnfation
❑ Wean to feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ B oars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I ® Dairy 200 E $D
❑ Non -Layer 1 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
_ Total Design Capacity 200
'Total SSL W 280,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lat;cxin Area I0 Spray Field Arc -
Holding Ponds/ Solid 'rraps �.J ❑ No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Dis harr_cs ,� ` r •an Impactti
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ifdischarge is observed, was the conveyance ratan -made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. li' discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
c. Itdischarge is observed, whit is the esliinwed flow in gallntirt'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yeti. 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 Collectiog & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate`? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structurc 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure h
identifier: ......Upper... .SI.'...........1.ctWrx..W.SP............................................................................ ......
I-reeboard (inches): 45 46 _
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 41-21 0 ]kite of In,pertiun 4118120D2
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel treesvere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Donny stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
!Paste-jlpplication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Fescue (Graze) Corn (Silage & Grain)
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?
Reuttired_ltecords_& 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? (iel irrigation, freeboard. waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20, Is facility not in cotnpliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss reviewlinspection 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.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES ans►_ ers 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. The bare areas on the upper waste storage pond have been seeded and mulched.
19. Need to use the wettable acres when figuring the Irr. II form. No evidence of over -application.
ReviewerlInspector Name Rocky Durham ;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number: 41-21 Il: tc of Inspccti�fu 4/1t3120f12
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'?
ante analysis: 1.03-02 Upper pond LS13 8. l 1bs.N11000 gals. S.I.
9-11-01 Upper pond LSD 0.95 " " 1, Lower pond LSD 0.24 ibs.NlI(W gals.
analysis dated 3-17-02
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
[:]Yes ❑ No
05/03/01
J

vision of Water (Quality
�iivision of Soil and Water Conservation
I Q Other Agency
IType of Visit D Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation j
Reason for Visit *Routine O Complaint O Fallow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 41 21 Pate ill' 1'i'dI- 9/18/2001 'I'inw: 11q{} 1'rititrd ton: 9/19/2001
Q Not O erational Q Belo% Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified..0 Conditionally Certified 13 RegisterW.: r, Daft imi 4)p, Ge A xnit mod:: • ,
Form r amir:. [ai rriugC]CD,81iQ...............:...:............:::................:....:............. ................... Cenaft: Gullfor. d.............. WSRQ:--,
Mail:r� �+►�sr > l .t�i :>Eiack. _ ._.»..... » ..:.
Contact: ��1 F ....'Title:• ................. Phone No: 3MA49,.7.89.6, [�lnfaa...........
:rcilitr' 1R7.,P11R].Rol.[tl1lR......::...:......:...:..............................................................
Onsite Representative: ARtM.Af1 orielslo........................................ Integrator: ..............................................
Certified (erator:at..........................at�lla....................................... Operator Certifcation Number:
l i?5.::........................
Location of Farm:
[)airy located on High Rock Rd. just n. of Frieden's Church Rd. A.
[:]Swine ❑ Poultry'. ® Cattle .. •❑ Horses .Latitude 36 • t17 59 Longhlb c 79 o • 32 4ti
Design Current
Swine CaDaCitV POOnlation
❑ 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 N Dairy 200 145
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
s
tD
Other '
Total Design Capacity 20
-- Total SSLL W ' 280,'000
Number of Lagoons [1
IIolding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 0
Subsurface Drains Present JJ❑ Lagoon Area
No Liuuid Waste N1
❑ischarLesAstrMat fmnartts
l . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ElSpray Field ❑Other
a. if discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
h. if discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'?,(lt• yeti, notify.,DWO)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the cstintated flow in-gal/min?
d. I7octi discharge bypass a lagoon system'? ( If yes, notify DWO)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
.''
Spray Field A rest
[]Yes
® No.
❑ Yes
❑ No
a Yes
allo.. • .
❑ 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'?
Waste Collection C Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Idier: .
ent1t............Upper........... ...........LU.ti er............. v......................................
:....................................................:........
Freeboard (inches):- 32 57 '
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Slruclurc [1
051173101 Conlinued

Facility Number: 41-21 Date of Inspection 9118120i11 1'r•inted on: 9/19/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the i1ruity 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 maintcnancelimprovement? '
H. 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?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
% No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
a Yes
Z No"
Waste
ApRlicartion -
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
HNo
11.
Is there evidence of over application',' Q Excessive Ponding Q PAN . [jHydraulie Overload'.
Q Yes
. ®No;; ;: -
l2.
Crop type Corn (Silage & Crain) Pasture Wheat
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with these designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management ]'],in (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) (hoes 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. Dees the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Restuired Records & Micuments
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
lii. Does the facility fail tro have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie! WUP, checklists, design.'maps. etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel 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'certif-ted operator in charge?
22. fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
oel discharge, freeboard problems,' over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Draw 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
Off No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes'
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
aYes
CKNo- ;.
❑ Yes'
® No
❑ Yes
.® No
❑ Yes
K No ' ..
0 Noviolations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Cmm�tcrits (refeiquestion #): Expla�n;:tny YES answers antll�nr' � ommendatinns nr any other romments..' . ; :.'x'�`�w• `�;
4se dra�win�sof�acl'�ty tnYbetter ex}}pyylu-i"suations. (use a�+dRyitonpal;es as necessary}: ❑ pield Copy ®Final N�}tcs 'fin r
�'+1ti�
..C� . �i9�� "..�i.3.1-id.Y.. � .:.�Y '..Y3 k '_i .'�i`• ! Y_x
3. There is a dischargelrunoff of silage leachate from the "old" trench getting into waters of the State. Need to contain leachate-NOV...•
ewer silage trenches ok today. Just keep an eye on these. Received ca11 fro nr operator today, 9/19/01• stating that discharge had been.
contained with soil that was piled around to form dam.
7. Need to repair damage on eastside of upper WSP dam and control vegetation.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Mel' s Rnsebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05I0.3/01 3 Continued

Facility Number: 41-21 I)*f lnspertinn 91181Zillll � Primed on: 9/19/2001
12 irr Issu
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor 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 vege(ation, asphalt, ❑ Yeti ® 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? (Le. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) . aYes No
31. []co the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cnver? ❑ Yes ❑ No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged till pipe or a permanentlternporary cover'? Q Yes Q No•
Additional oniments an orDrawings:
AL
r
05/03/01

:,� e :.� d ;'' �, •',�'.,.. �.. torsion of Water Quality
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
f•. s . ,' Q Other Agency
ti.
Type of Visit ompliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit outine ❑ Complaint D Follow up ❑ Emergency Notification ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: rime:
a Not Operational Q Below Threshold
OfPerrnitted Certified 13Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date last Operated or Above Threshold
FarmName: ..... r4. .Q .... o i. r ........................................................ County:....... :.......................
�Ij
Owner Name:....... Qr .r11�...............!r.L.)............................................ Phone No: .... '—�.'....4....L..r.:.....�[.. St.ra.........�r^r�
Facility Contact: .l f. ..!�.a1 . i .t.�..................... Title: ......................................... I ..................... , one o: 3.1...q.T :..7 ..I.. 1l1'1
p� f,,c + f �+Ph N , r
Mailing Address: 3$� i ..., ....&r-vr...,f-u �...... l.li.�-��n.. j..i.1.� .. .i..r...........;........................ .......................... � �.. a `..
Onsite Representative: Yl V1 A Integrator: ......................................................................................
............................I...............................................................
a n J
Certified Operator:,,l1, .n ......................................... Operator Certification Number: .... ��.�.y 5..........
Location of Farm: ,p
o ver l -J46, I' h -onfb V- x P-4 • Hope, f&Pi- on �o CQr"ar) Rd, n
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ,WCattle Horse Latitude ®' �' '° Longitude ®' ®� ®• "J
[Irt
Design Current
Swine Vnnarity Pnnnlatinn
❑ 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 T IDITairy 2 oQ
❑ Non -Layer TO Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity [] a
Total SSLW a o 00 0
Number of lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Dischart'es & 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, wits the conveyance man-made?
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c, If discharge is observed. what is the cstimalcd 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? 1di Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Struclure 5
Identi Fier; Lo
... P..............................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches); 37— S
5100
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes KNo
XYes ❑-No
❑ Yes No
Structure 6,
Continued on back

Facility Number: 0 Date of Inspection 17711761 0
5. Arc there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
t
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-5 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
S. 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?
❑Yes• No
❑ Yes b�No
0 Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes kNo
Waste Apelication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ] No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop typed e) rr) S i1 4.4 - 0d 4L) re o_)Ap
13. Do the receiving crops differ wA those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'? El Yes�N'o
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records &_Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) I I
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel 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 reviewlinspecdon 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?
El .IVQ i a#iltjs'tijr del eiencii;5 ry re n et. drrt°iitg 4h}s;v sit; Ynp wild -fie n e iti fu4-tper . .
''COrrespondence: about. this ' isit.. � •
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes Vlo
❑ Yes 9 No
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes �NO
❑ Yes lNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ANO
❑ Yes ) 'No
ElYes 9TNo
❑ Yes �`j No
❑ Yes /X' No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
L.sf rawlinp of facility to better explain situations. (useadditionalpages as necessary):
(�- a ✓U � A,
3 •�
11 11
*\° V
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
rp
Date: 71 !IW/ 0 l 5/00

•Facillity Number: 41— Oe of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -EJ Yes B 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"tNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
24. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? � 3i-es 9 ter_
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 6V,
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? El Yes EiNt-P
Additional omments an orDrawings-.
s�l 1 i5 Co►al n�a ? rpe
Ab
J
5100

'4 isron of Water Quality r
0
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency 'Y
Type of Vislt Q Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review ❑ Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit @ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
ll:itr to Visit: Tiole. t3:111 Printed ion: 8/29/2001
41 2 l
FO Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified ❑ Conditionally Cerlified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or AboveThreshold: ...... •....••..........
Farm Name: Gerrittager.Dair .... County: Gullfo d.............................. ..
Owner Name: Larry ....................................... GsrriKtFmT Phone No: 3,3,6r4.49..-15[lli...........................................................
Alailing Address: ��S1Z.�Itdlu.�V.��C.�itt�tl.............................................. .. Qjbom-illt..&C ........................................ . 2.7.2.49 ..............
FacilityContact: ..............................................................................'I'itle:................................................................ Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ..A nno.AmorivIlo....................................................................... Integrator: ......................................................... -...... -.................
Certified Operainr:,Cl,taw....................................... El murklio........-.....-.....-............-.....- Operator Certification Number: Z)I3.05.............................
Locution of Farm:
Dairy located on High Rank Rd. just n. of Frieden's Church Rd. A�
[]Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse La itude 36 a f17 4 59 Longitude 79 • 32 1 486.
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 pulationCattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I IN Dairy 1 200 1l63
❑ Non -Lay I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSI, W 280,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ l.agaln Arca ❑ Spray Fic1d Arcs
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &, Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. ]['discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'' ❑Yes ❑ No
b. [fdischarge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (ll'yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallntin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yeti. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
1 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): 70 63
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 41-21 ;late of Inspertion 4111}12[li}1 Printed on: 8/29/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to theTrit of an of'the structures observed'? ie/ trees, severe erosion.
Y Y
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 DNVQ)
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'?
%Vaste r1V,p11Ciltion
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ l;xcessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Fescue (Graze)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended For a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
lb. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records K Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
I$. 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/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by sarne 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 [luestion.#): Explain any ES answers and/or any reemm�rcndations'nr any other comments.
s`- r
Use drawings of Facility to better explain situations. (use additionaligages as necessary): ❑Field Copy ®Final Notes
2. Some discharge occurred when loading the slurry tanks, agitating the waste pond and from a leaking irrigation pipe. Did not reach
_
surface waters. 'Fake measurements to contain any sizable spills.
19. Use the acres from the irrigation table on the Irr-2 forms. Get irrigation and soil incorporated on the waste analysis.
aste analysis: 3/20/01 LSD 5.1 lbs. NI1000 gals. I, LSD 0.37 lbs. N/10W gals. I
Review•er[Inspector Name iRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

.' 1oqmmhun |i1umdon: 8829/2001
Qdu Issacs
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon Cuii to discharge ut/orhu|ow
Fl Yes
Fl No
liquid \cvo\ of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed oyproperly within 24houm?
[]ycx
HNo
28.
(sthere any uvidonuu'fwiudd,i0du,ingland xpp|iuoh"n? (i.o.residue ooneigh h^xin&:n&cmion, asphalt,
Cl Yes
[M No
roads, building structure. undhxpublic property)
29.
)sthe [arid application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface o[the lagoon?
0yex
H No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the vcnNxAon6o(s)noted? (ie.broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan biodc(x), inoperable shutters, etc.)
[] Yes
00 No
31.
Dothe uninm|sfeed storage bins fail tvhave appropriate cover?
[]Yes
No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack submerged 0| pipe nrupennuncnoAompnrurycover?
[] Yes
No
0.5103101

isiort of Water Quality
{ision of Soil and W-wer Conservation
0 Other agency
[Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit @ Routine O Complaint O Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q 0ther ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 3l 21 hate of Visit. 911912t}Ol] Time: 1000 Printed on: 9/20/2000
❑ ,Not O wrational 0 Belo►► 'Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally -Certified [3 Registered hate last Operated or Abu►e'I'hrezhold: ....••....••....••.....
farm (lame: Ckr. 11199rJUilry......................... .... Count►•:G.11i1ford..................... ........... ............ !�'SRQ.... ....
.............................................................. .
0,wner Name: 1., rrY................... ............... .G'ia.0 Aux.................................................. Phone No: 3 -:#:fit-.7.5-0.......
Facilitycontact: 1 sl.rf,l'..�i.�rx]lit��J............. .............................. '1'itle:.............. ................. ... ........................ ...... Phone No: ................................... ....... .........
lVl:iiliitf! nrldre,s:#Q2.lEiigi7►.1�UsJk.�uat1....................................................................... ............... ............... .. .... ........ U:19..............
Onsite Representative: j �txA'y:..GPa. ilttgcr. Alxlw.AlzllrrkItp ...................... .. lntegrator:.............
...................................................................................
Certified 0perator:A11,t1.i.(s.................................. AJ[i],V.1'!,L'.tIR..................................... ... Operator Certification Number:213.QS................. ............
Location of Farm:
Dairy- located on High Rock Rd. just it. of Frieden's Church Rd.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • U7 59 Longitude 79 • 32 4$
Design Current
Swine Canacit►' PODnlation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
1'uultry' capacity Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer IN Dairy 200 127
❑ Non -Layer JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity' 200
Total SS1.W 280,00
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I•agoon Area 10 Spray Field area
Holding fonds 1 Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid 'Waste Management S►•stem
Discharges S Stream lmpac_1s
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 gallmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence ofpast discharge from any part ol'the operation'? ❑ Yes 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than From a discharge'! ❑ Yes 0 No
Waste Collection & 'I'reatnrent
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? 0 Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stnlcture 6
Identifier: ....... .....I.Ipper........... . .........................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 30 54 1-107�
5100 Continued opt hack

facility Number: 41—i1 Date of Inspection 9/19/2000 1'rfntcd ort: 912012000
5. Are immediate Ority
there any threats to the of any of the structures observed? (ic/ trAvere erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
b.
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 ansvvered 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 strictures 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 Tobacco Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Timothy, Orchard, & 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'?
❑ 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?
(ic/ 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?
(iel 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 AWIMP?
❑ Yes
® No
No,violations:or def dencies-were noted during this visit. You vViII receive nolurther ;
correspondence ahvuf this.v'ish..'.-. . .
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. Upper pond needs to have vegetation established as soon as possible. The pond dam was added to this Summer. A,
9. Need gauged marker per permit.
19. Contact SWCD regarding the addition of March to application window for corn. See SWCD regarding the change of matua fields
to another crop,
an eye out for any possible silage trench runoff.
Reviewer/Inspector Name �Mejiss;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Perry W. Wyatt
I�
Date: L Ok- _ 5100

Facility Number: 41-21 D�f Inspeclion 9/19/2000 Printed on: 9/20/2000
Odor Issues 0
26.
hoes 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, andlor public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
®Na
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.
Uo the !lush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additional itiona o mments and/orDrawings:
AL
5100

of Water Quality
of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
)Type of Visit ]0 Compliance Inspection ❑ Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation f
Reason for Visit Routine ❑ Complaint ❑ Follow up 0 Emergency Notification ❑ Other ❑ Denied Access
Darr• Of Vi,il: I'irne: ® Printed nn: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
a Not Operational 0 Iielo►s Threshold
4'ertuittcd�Certi4ied ©Cundititrnally Certified ©ltel;istercd
a [late l.asl Operated ur Above Threshold : ............. ..
G
l�arnt Namc: .G r.�t er bal-E.. Couniv:....C�'.+-3.....FQ.r.................................................
()N'I1L'1' N:IrrIL': � r �,1 ......... ..r.r t n..Q � I'hurte lti'n:.336 .....1......��.`.....�.......................
Facility Contact: ... arl.. rl...�.e...�..�`1........ 1`......'I'it1c:............................................................, Phone a. ...................................................
I 'hoc e
Mailing irlrlrctis: .go. ......... �.....1...... c�-....1��.� ...............f..l.:f ...�....jj...................�.
i i
(?ntiite F2cl}rescnl:rliy'e: �.�]��Q... �Q../..-.. ...... c�jCr.► ttor:.................
CertifiedC?perator•:..�'..n.�!a....6......... .J Q. ...Q ............................... 01 "r� :rtor C:er•tilic:rtion tinmher:..-al..361s—........
location o arnt:
aC.u- Nor`? D -rri5 �'
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry
Swine
Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®� Ltu► a i``.
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Nun-I.avcr
❑ Wean to Pecder.
❑ Feedcr to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
❑ Other
I.ongitude �•
Design Current
Cattle (rapacity Population
Total Design Capacity
a 0
Total SSLW
Aio, O00
Number of I.agoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagmhn Area I0 Spra}' Field Area
IFoldinf; fonds 1 Solid Traps a. ❑ No Liquid 11'aste Management 5ystern
Discharges ■\ Strewn Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yeti
g(No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field ❑ Other
a. ]f discharge is ohserved, Nv:tS !hc conjeVanCC man -marls"
❑ Yes
❑ No
h. If discharge is ohsen•ed, did it retch water trf the Stale? (It' yes, nosily DWQ)
❑Yes
No
c. lldischar ,c is uh,urvcd. ,what is the c,titriatcd Row in gal/rrtin?
d. Docs discharge hypass a lagoon system" (If yes, notify MVQ)
[-]Yes
[_-]No
2, Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operatitm7
❑ 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
1Vaste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm ,, ,(
storage) less than adequate? k
El Yes
)(No
Suncture 1 Stn r urc; 2 Structure 3 Structure 4Structure 5
Structure 6
�y
Identifier: Up .n....... di r....... ........ .......... ..... ..........................
.....
Freehoard (inches):
_ /00
Continued on back

Facility Number: — hate of In.;lteetittn � 11rinteef on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there.anv immediate threats to the , Pe-rity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tr1T, severe erosion, [] Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'' El Yes � 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 maintcnancclitnprovcment'?
)(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
Wa0v Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/itrtprovemerit''
❑ Yes
n
11.
Is there evidence of over application" ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
ElYes
kNo
12.
Crop type G D IJ'
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated 1, Certified Animal Was e ManagN11C t lan (CAWMP)7
❑ Yes
ko
14.
aj Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
h) Does the facility need a wettable acre dcterminalitn'?
ElYes
No
c) This facility is pended liar a wettable acre determination'?
❑ Yes
No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improve men/'?
❑ Yes
o
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment`?
❑ Yes
o
K
Required
Ro t:ords & Docunicnf.e
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XN'o
18.
Does the facility fait to have all componcn(s of the Ccrtificd Animal Waste Management Plan readily avaiIahle7
fie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
o
19.
Doles record keeping need lmprovcm? ( i cnlc/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & suil sample reports}
El Yeso
$No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design'?
El Yes
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
XN 0
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Perm it'I
Oe/ discharge, frechoard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
x No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'!
❑ Yes
n
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes
o
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWN!P?
❑ Yes
No
�: �Citi �ibiaticjlis:or defirieneii•ti here ilr}ted clirriErl�; this: isit: 7'tlir iw'ill i ecei�c Div. Tut ther
.���cari-es ilrideit�e:abi>'itt:tlris:r•isit..�.�. .:. .�. .:.�. ...:.:...:.:.:...:.:.:. ...........
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):
AJO
V,
Re►•iewer/Inspector Nme
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:��00 1J WA, ' It' -do f k .--v J Date: 19 /jQ 511111

facility Number:qj — of inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge Wor below tj'� , —No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation'? Ohl IT, oZU00
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'' ❑ Yes kN0
29. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes �<C'
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 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 shuticrs, etc.) ❑ Yes o
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover'? ❑ Yes Io
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a pemiancntltemporary cover? d tyy I T- 1 a600 . — ►Ia
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
No�-e s n
•
G owe Pon J— a0 d I S fo►- e_ (,3 my. tokpa4
lzve'l r5 3, e)60 I-oP off' barn
} f r k1� &4� or)
U PPtr Pond - l ao 'S i-o ra e. mo ), )off, Ior m
,
�vt / 1 5 .2 u� 4-opaid
S'lurr �-
y a.►n V. s p ,,,,d.�-r
moo
&-AJ.
Uri
5100

O . tun of NVater Quality
0 ion of Soil and «'ater Conser►•alion
❑`Other Agency "
Type of Visit Q Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine Q Complaint ❑ Follow up Q Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 41 21 Date OF vNit: Thne: 13:4t1 I',•inled on. 9/18/2000
Not 0 erational ❑ Belo►►' Threshold
® l'ermilled ® Certified 0 Couditionall►• Certified © Registered
Farm Name: G&rj:Wgcx..VAjry...................
Owner Name:Locry...................................... GKirrima.............................
.............
Facilit►• Contact: ...... ......................... ................ ..... . ritie: .................
Mailing Address: 312>ilk.GS�i.!?.tl............................
(.)"site Representative: ................................................................
hate Last Operated or AboveThreshold:
Court[►-: Guilford- ......................... ll SRQ
Phone ,N o: 919. 49..-IS00................
Phone No:
►.i1r�Rra.►.'xlf�...................................................... 21249..............
Integrator:
Cerlilied 0perator:Al1p.;1-Q ........................ AAng..l:1.4 19........................................ 0peraIor C'erlificati(in Number:
Location of harm:
hairy located on high Rock Rd. just n. of Frieden's Church Rd.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse latitude 3fi • 177 59 Longitude 79 • 32 48
Design Current
Swine C'anacity I'onulation
❑ Wean to ]ceder
❑ Feeder to finish
❑ barrow to Wean
❑ barrow to ]'ceder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Cattle
?rCapacity I'tr rttlatiott
❑ Layer ® Dairy 200 200
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSL«' 280,000
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Main% Present ❑ Lagoon ,%rea ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding fonds / Solid 'Traps 1 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste ,Managentent System
Dischurtes & 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, ►►•as the conveyance man-made;? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State:? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ Na
c. If discharge is obscn•ed, ►►hat is the estimated flow in gallntin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify I7WQ) ❑ 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 G
Identifier:..-Rushufl..pt]nd.... ..... lluAoff -pand....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 48 36
5100 Continued on back

Facility Dumber: 41-2] hate of Inspection fi11912000 Printed on: 9/18/2000
Y�
5.
Are there any immediate threats to th grity of any of the structures observed? (ic/ tosevere 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
N No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DNVQ)
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?
N Yes
❑ No
Waste A mlication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
N No
12.
Crap type Small Grain (Wheat, Barley, Corn (Silage & Grain) ,Matua (hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CA«WMP)?
❑ Yes
N 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. 1s there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Rerruired Records & Docurnents
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?
(ic/ 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 (lie time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional 1)WQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ic/ 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?
ho�r,iolati6ris;or deficiencies were noted during this yisit.';Yott will receive no•furth-er': ;
correspondence about this .visit:
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other conurtcnts.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
# 9. The local Soil & Water office will be assisting the facility %vith installing graduated markers.
# 19. Will need to start keeping weekly levels on the molding ponds per General Permit requirements
Records looked good for the most part.
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes [-]No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
A I
'VI
ReviewerAnspector Name Rocky Durham .Millie Langley
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5I00

`Facility lumber: 41-21 Date [nspeefion 611912QUQ Printcd
on: 111,112100
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application'? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
®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
Z 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.
❑o 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/tentporary cover'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Additiottal. Comments and/or Drawings:
5100
5100

I
a urvIsron of . lnu wa[rr �orlser►atron - uperarton tccvt
', 10 Division of . .►ud Water Conser►it(ion - Coinpliance Ins ton
Division of Water Quality - Coin pi inncc Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation Review
10 01111ne 0 L.o1np In1111 0 1-n u►v-up ti 111spec11(111 0 1-rl (Iw-up of 1 _ rr►'1e►r 0 (.11 her
f arilit► ,Number, Daik of hasp •ettoll
l itne f I I Ir:,,�Iuvrlutll 24 hr. (hh:mm)
p Permitted 0 Certified a Conditionally Certified p Itegislered in No peralnln,l 11,Itr Lnst Opt'1-tried:
F:1rnr -Name: GerrijarcrMairy'................. County: Cuilford WSRO
........................................................................... .
()1►nvI- INaIII e: Lahr. . G.errier................................................. Phone No: 3.36-149:.7.5011..........................................................
Fac•ilil►• f:cnrtact:.Aaaa.G..Anlariello.......................................Title: Ups:raxta.r.......................................... .. Phone No: 33h-..4.4!)--.7h9fi .......................
M:lilinu- %ddreo,: JAN02..H.iglt.Roo-k,UWad....................................................................... Gibsutivi.lic... NC.................................................... 27249 ..............
Misile Reprcwtki Eve: Anail..Ajawrielto......................
Crl'1ilielI ()per:11r11': Ain aa..G,,................................ Amor.1£ll(k................... ..................... tllrei':1I(IrCeI'tit-ic:11irlrl i`ulrrlr.r:Z.13i1S.............................
Lt cutupt (II' F;rr„I:
L3111trtle ©0 © L Lullf;ittitle ©a ©. ®..
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry
❑ Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to Pines 1
CI Farrow to Wean
p • arrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
p Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ .ayer
p Noll -Layer
® Datry
❑ Non -Dairy F
I
p t ter
Total Design Capacity 130
Total SSLW 182,000
.,
NIII lnber of Lagoons
0
❑ S u bsur ace
Drains
Present . 11ra►, 1c t rc:r
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
JE3 No Liquid
Waste Management
System
1)ischnr'C—.cti & Strr,IIII IIII pac•IN
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? p Yes 0 No
Dischart-c or's+inaicd at: ❑ Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a. II'd ischarge is ubserved. ►vas the con ►}cyancc In an-IMILie'r ❑ Yes p No
b. II disch&1-t?C is nhsenrd, dicl ii reach Wit ICr of [Ile 5lllIC"I (If v0s• nntiIV I )WQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. II•dischanac is I+bscrvcd. ►►hat is the estimated Ilo.v in -allnlin?
+cs cl -[sc II a I-L'e bvpi lss �i Iagrrun s►1Stel11'' (I I• Teti. anti I'v I ) V 3) ❑ Yes p No
2, Is there evidence ot'past discharge frorn any part of the operation`? p Yes 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ®No
W-11ste C(I1IVeti0l1 .l' 'VITOI111eI11
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 0 No
Stl-ticitlre I StI't1cltlre 2 Strticltrrc 3 Structure 4 strtlL'llllt Stl(lCtull-e o
IdeIII itier: sol.ids............ ..ciampa.�St.run fl.......................
Frreboard I inches): ...........
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
❑ Yes ® No
C'wrtinured au hack

Facility Number: 41 _21
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. [)a any of the structures need inainte:lance/improvement?
® Yes
p No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/intprovemerit?
[]Yes
® No
9, Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
® Yes
❑ No
Wa%te A1)0icaIilln
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/inaprovenaent?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evide=ice of over application? p Excessive Ponding ❑ ['AN
❑ Yes
M No
12. Crop type Fescue (Flay) Corn (Silage & Grain)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certifir ed Animal Wastc Management Phi (CA WM11)?
M Yes
❑ N0
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 deterrnination?
M Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving; crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
M No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
M No
Re,tuir'ed Recurdti & llurumrnrN
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit re,-dily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fait to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W01', checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19. Does record keeping; need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
M No
20, Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setbtrck criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
M 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
®Ns,
23. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
® No
24. Does facility require a f'oliow-up visit by sarne agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompiiance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
11. Nn.Vi(66ons,nr'-irficiin.cics' �err:ntiteti Miring: this .v ish., ; You'' will.receii�e na further.:.
eOrjresp6hdeke about tbis.visit:...::: : .::::::: .:::::: : ::.:...:.:..:::: ::: ;
Comments (refer to question 4). Explain any YES answers and/or tiny recommendations or any other comments.
Use dra►4iitgs of facility to better explain situations. (use Additional pages as necessary):
7. Need to rnow around pond, after construction is complete.
9. Need gauge markers, after construction is complete.
13. Add Matua grass when CAWMP is updated.
14,(c) To be done in updated CAWMP•
lJ
ReviewerAnspector Name ,Tarn Yor�m � _ .ienny Rankin r Hamad Ratite -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: J 7)" 7, hate: % ^ -9

0 Division of S d Water Conservation - Operation Revi
_ 1 [3 Division of S d Water Conservation - Compliance Ins n
© Division of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection 3 ' F r
13 Other Agency - Operation Review, ,
10 Routine a Complaint ❑ follow-up of DWQ inspection a Follow-up of DSWC review C) Other
Facility Number Li Z Date of Inspection
Ti me of Inspectiou : QD 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted E] Certified Q Conditional],., Certified j] Re ;istered 10 Not Opera (late Last Operated .
Farin Name: G crringer c�ir�County:....ut�ord WQO................ S. (h► ner ,Name: �- Q !� r G r r i n er `}' I'hone No-
..................-15bQ
..............................................��............. .............................................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title• ": r i I'lione No. ......................................
Mailing ,address: 3 �O 2 HI r► IC l�l D 1 1 NC. 7-} zy 9
............... ....... Q d........................ , ......1..............................I....... ....
tlnsite Re rrcticntative. ...........,. ., Into rotor:
Certified Operator:....... A.Y..)ao.........6............-n1pnie-A1.0 � Operator Certification Number:......Z.i..AQ 7..............
... ..... ........ ... r. ....... ....
Location of Harin:
....�....i�lrL�.....iUr,a,i rc1.... f?�.... Hf.��.�...Kr!.�..k.....I'lrl....���c�'......�1hr.t::}�.... �� �........rr...r.l.p�Q'n.��......�..�'!.l'.rS::.... ........ �.- y
........................................................ ......... .. ............................................................................... .............
Latitude • 01 + 59 Longitude 0. 32 •
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 ® Dairy
❑ Non-l-ayer J❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
`= Total Msign Capacity 3Q
�,. Total SSLW 8 2 t QGC7
jlvumber of Lagoons ® ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I,aVoon Area JE3 Spray Field Area
Bolding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ® ❑ No Liquid Waste Management S►•stern
Discharge ti & Stream Imuactr r .
r�
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field, ❑ Other
a. If dischnrge is observed, was (lie conveyance man-made'.'
1). If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. 11' discharge is observed, what is [lie estimalcd flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If ycs, 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 .fir 'l't'catment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structuure I Structure 2 S[ructure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:�tarrL�� vup�
Freeboard (inches): ....... f^..............................................................................
....................... .
❑ Yes 9'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 3 No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes 0 No
Smicturc 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (icl trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes Q-No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Confinued on buck

f .: `G'�': 'r ..' �.�. F,r s�►f *rr r•`�`tc� �FwK.,'. Yr i,'tz.:+ . r..q.�!`r �r . -+ti'f S `tt. ; n ; =r` ;.* :'•�, ,
t'
Faciil;ty Number: t.4 21
l zf Inspection 6-z91-I
0. Are. there structures on -site which are not properly addressed anchor managed through a waste management or
closure plan'?
❑ Yes
J]'No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify D%VQ)
7, Do any of -the structures need znaizrtenancelitnprovement'?
❑x 'Yes
❑ No
8, Docs any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
9. Do any stucttrres lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimurn liquid level
elevation markings?
0 Yes
❑ No
1L7a.43c ,Ipplic:ation
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelirnproventent?
❑ Yes
�'No
11. is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
0 No
12. Crop type �. e4 G f05 5 ��� .
i —...,
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Anneal Wavle Management Plan (CAWMP)?
19,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)'1'his facility is Fended for a wettable acre determination?
0 Yes
❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
.0 No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment`?
❑ Yes
0'No
Required Records Sit 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 iManagentent Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, reaps, etc.)
❑ Yes
D No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
0 No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effcct at the time of design?
❑ Yes
0 No
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
0 No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(I -el discharge, frccboard prohlcrns, over applicalion)
❑ Yes
[J'No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑k 'No
24, Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
C No
25. Were any additional prohlems noted which cause noncornpliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Mi yiirlafknis'o� ile icit n6ic s were no#;eil ilitririg fhis:visif: 7'nit will r eceiye rid #'ui flier
,''ti
- . � Corres ont�ertce. ah{gut. this .visit.... ........ .:.:.:.:.:. .:.:. .:. .
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as. necessary):
7. Neigj 4u j crr�� sfi- r o 4A rra t, te e
q. NPO �j a P w tQ V G 6-"C- (' 4) i, 1'14to r . C 't�'
C A {,v M Y 1' S VIO 41— r C y 1' .
Reviewer/[nspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: �/� ;�} �r . ]7,� Date: 41 I9 y
[ f 3/23/99

� . +rj�..-.. , �y, fra---`"rJ+i'tiJ,��": ,}..s}y "..:if : • . .s: �.t-` �,ji'''�7Y+., _ �.+w. r'...- , ".i'rr . C �':�f :. ;ram` � _ .`.. .
Fac�lity Nr-mber: y i — ll f Inspection
Odor Itisucti
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑4 No
Iiquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agi[ation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes iCq;No
28. is there any evidence of wind drift during land ;ipplication? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes S'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 E],No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.c. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan bindc(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes V No
31. l)o the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ❑'Nn
32. l)o the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or it pet inanenthempctrary cover? ❑ Yes Cl No
l fional Comments ate orDrawings:
ti
3/23199

Division of Qgftnd Water Conservation -Operation Rev'!0 Di►�ision of , nd,WatcrC.nnserr•ation - Compliance Ins on
D Division of Water. Qriality..:,Prnpliance Inspection
[3 Other Agency - Operation' Review
19 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow• -up of DWQ inspection Q Follow-up of DSWC review a Other
Facility Number 41 21 Date of Inspection 5121199
Time nf' inspection 12:5{? 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not O eratinnal Date Last Operated: p ..........................
Farm Name: (Arrt eAixy............................................................................County: GuAfrxd ..........................
.... ............... ....
Ocaner Name: Larry ....................................... Gerxincr. ...... ................ ............... .... Phone No: 9.10 4,V-.7.SU[1..............................
Facility Contact: ..............................................................................Title: ........................................ Phone No:
Mailing Address.- ..i 1} .klit;b.xiaels. Q,ac�.......... ..................... ....... ........ I ...... I.......... ............................................................ X72.49 ..............
Onsite Representative: AgllWAF1 Qjrjdf)........................................................................ Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:A[1tW,G................................... AMQrjt:litr........... ........ .............. ....... Operator Certification Number:ZkjQ5......... ....................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 3Cr a t17 4 59 61 Longitude 79 a 32 4 48
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
❑ I,ayer ® Dairy 130 l3[}
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 130
Total SSLW 182,00=0
Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 tipray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stryarn liuWoos
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
it. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-rnade7
b. It discharge is observed, did it reach Water ofthe State? (If ycs, notify DWQ)
c. It'discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin'?
d- Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yeti, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge front 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 froth a discharge'? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection _. Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storn storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure h
Identifier: pushoff runoff
Freeboard (inches): ................N............... .......-.......�.V............................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3123J99 Condinued on hack

Facility Number: d1-21 1) f lrtitipertion
f�, Are there structures on -site which are not ,perly addressed aridlor managed through a w•aN inanagernent 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?
H. Does any part of the waste management systern other than waste Structures require maintenancelitnprovement?
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 rnaintenanechniprovement?
I I . Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Matua grass Corn (Silage & Grain)
5121199
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
®Yes ❑No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13, Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)'? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b] Does the facility need a wettable acre dclennination? [:]Yes ❑ No
c] This facility is pended for a wettable acre detertnination'! IN Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'!
lip, Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
H�itrired Records ct Uoeumcntti
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?
Ocl WUP, checklists, design, reaps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (icl irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the tirne of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23, Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with in -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: �N.o-V.kl,latitins:or deficiencies were'nMed:diiH4i-this Visit.:Y��u;WiIl recei�e-6,6 further "
eo respi)< dense' ahou' this.v isit. • . - . • '
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
7 Need to mow around lower WSJ" for easy visual inspection. Construction is going on on the upper WSP, Finish construction and 1
9 Marker will be installed on upper WSP when construction is complete.
13 Matua grass needs to be added into plan,
15 Corn crop needs weed control.
Reviewer/[nspector Name pocky Durham IltilIie Langley
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date:
3/23/99

13 Division of Soil and r Cornservatio n - Operation Review `
13 Division of Soil and IWr Cohs' creation - Compliance Inspecticm'A*
Division of Water Quality - Ciiinpliance Inspection
0 Other Agency = Operation Revrciv
/ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection ❑ Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 41 Z I Date o€ ins pecl ion 713[It198
7'ime of lnspecliun 1[l3[1 24 hr. (hh:mm}
0 Registered M Certified 0 Applied fur l'ermit 0 Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Ci.t:rlriung!~t<..lWry:.......................... .. ... County: Quxlftard................... ....... .. ..... W;S.11()........
Owner Name: 1. arn...................................... Qf:)r,rlmi e.C.................................................. Phone No: tI..1.SI.40 7.50 I...........................................................
FacilityContact: ................................... ........................................... 'I'itle:................. ............................................... Phone No:
...................................................
Mailing Address: Q ,liigt>, t1sl�.l�tra� ...........................
Onsite Repro%entative:.............................................................................. .............. Integrator:.................
Certified Operator: ana.Q.,................................. sAAilt[lrklift.... ........ ....... ........ ............. Operator Certification Number:�QQ$.............................
Location of Farm:
iJaix :.ictxzticc�.sr�n.�I' lb.k�aclC. H..'txst..r� .trf. Exit lit �a'S..0 hurt l<.k�d�.................................................................................................................................. j A,
Latitude 3fi • [17 & 59 61 Longitude 79 • 32 4H66
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Wean sn Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
® Dairy 130
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Othcr
Total Design Capacity 130
Total SSI1W 182,000
Number of Lagoons 1 Ilolding Ponds I❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ L.rt;rnin Area 10 Spray Field ,Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management Systcm
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any pars of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify ❑WQ)
El Yes
❑ No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts it) the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
® No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoonstholding ponds) require
❑ Yes
® No
maintenanceli mprovement'r
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
0 No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
® No
7/25/97 Continued an hack

�FaciIity tiurriber: 41-21 1)ate of Ins wi-tiron 7131V98
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on siteh need to he properly closed?
❑Yes
No
Strurtury�
{1.agoonsjlolding funds. Flush Pits, c1c.1
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm Storage) less than adequate?
[:]Yes
® No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier: 1gRs,z> ..i................
Freeboard 00: ............ J..Q....... ....... ................ ................... .................................... .................... ..................................................
...................................
10.
Is seepage observed From any of the structures!
❑ Yes
® No
IL
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the strictures observed?
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenancelitnprovement?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste IIrvlicittirm
14,
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(if in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State. notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ........................ Noitk....... ................. ................................. ..................................................................................... ....................................
...............
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did Reviewerlinspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative`?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
Fur
Ccrtili cd or I'i!rmitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management ["],in 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
®: No.vioIations,o' defeciencies.were' nand during this visit. You -will receive, no',fur(her.
correspondence' about. this visit.' •. • .1. • . • . • ... . . ..:...... :...:., ., . .. .....:. .:.....:.
V E•
Reviewer/Inspector Name .Eric Slack
.N
IReviewer/inspector Signature:
Date:

of Sg1I ut1 L'rfC6nscrYat
� a.a a, WauLa Va(ri• as[4/:: alµFRa _ ti1111
Otfie Agency Uperation Re i
Routine ❑ Comulaint ❑ Follow-up of
Facility Number
0 Registered © Certified 13 Applied. for Permit ❑ Permitted
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Title:
ay'�• i:-FIR
.5...�4!
Follow-up (d' l]SNVC review 0 Other
Date of lnspeclion
Time of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Not ❑ erationai slate Mast OperRted� F W..
County:..... ... - ................
PhoneNo:.............................................................
.........I....................... Phone No:.. ;-..-,.......................--.:..-.:.:....
MailingAddress:.....................................................A ---••--........... .........I......!rtte ratrlr:
Onsite Representative:..... .JU...................... .�.-......I4....�. (0. g
Certified Operator;
Location of Farm:
Latitude �• �' C�'�
�Design', �:*Currents'
P Swine ; �e ;, 3 � .' +Capacity, Poptnn`s-
ors
rrt�;
i�
to Feeder
ffWean
Feederto FinishFarrow
to Wean
❑ Faisow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Operator Certification Number;
Longitude �� • 0° �°
DeAgn vurrent
Poultr`y.:=„ nijxcapcity,,,Fopulatiori,• Ca lej, ;,iCapicity Population ;
❑ Layer ❑airyR
=r ❑ Non -Layer :'.; ❑ Non -Dairy
. � � -. •.�.,_ �� �'� ��. ' ;.:;�� x A • :M1i` .. _k � a{•'fei�Yi�: c::�•' �•a "^mow°^'� ^. xd
❑ Other
;Total Uesign,Capacityy�;:
TP.otal'5SL W ,;
r<'ii :r:v: rnn:ds[ i!n '!.. e< :. ._ • brP
=�;�Number.nf Lagonns I,Hatdrng I'nrids' '^ ❑ Suurfifce Urains 1 re,5ent ❑Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
� • c � `k , ` �:� �-� '� �` a�`. �: ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System �` 4
su�3.�. 'G F * :,im .;.. E�L '•r�ti'.,... �L�.iln C'r•'�'r � "�. ,.,,�•4 t,��.,�.%.V
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 discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (if yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gailmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes I&
❑ Yes [ZfNo
❑ Yes Pf No
❑ Yes J6 No
❑ Yes 117No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes q No
❑ Yes I�No
P_"fl,M"OA nn hnrlr
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 eNo
Strugturgg (Lagoons.Holding Ponds, Flush, Pits, etc.}
9. Is storage capacity (ftveeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 11
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .......... c�.p�' ............
Freeboard (ft): j ............... I .... .......
10. is seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes [INo
H . Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes 0EJ
o
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? Yes No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses r
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes FNo
Waste Application /
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? . ❑ Yes��o
(If in excess of WIMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWrQ)
15. Crop type �.Q ............. 1. .../.... �.A....... g.c.4AKP ........ .........................................---........---........
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes Q.,o
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes l No
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? OYes ) "°
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes PNo
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes PNn
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes YNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes ;zNo
For f„ertifigd or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 9No
24, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes a
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes VE No
D.1NoAo'1a'tians:or deficiencies.were nated,d'H4 this:visit.: Y664'iII receive' Airtlier'-::
:. correspbadeitce dUobt this:�isit: ;
1 rti6 1+-f6 0%
��. WK-E�o Cayce p1qs-VY2_
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name ' . U ' F i a : `� s ` � .� ;' ` .= a ,
�, Reviewer/Inspector Signature: • Date: Cj

Facility' Number ,2 J Date of Inspection 1 210
Time of Inspection Ea�= 24 hr. (hh:mm)
❑ Registered (l Certified ❑ Applied for Permit © Permitted [] Not ❑ erational Da/rt�e Last Operated:
Farm Nrimc:rill y,sr ....+C ?�l..fa..................... County:.. r ............................
7u.
Owner Name: ... �i�rl�.....`..�.rflr rr............... .. ... ..... Phone No:...L..3�G14�? 9......7..................................
Facility Contact: ,,,� �r�...S ?,rlr+''5.� ......... Title: .Qq r� Phone No:
Mailing Address:f!.Z �....!^.�el�..{....7!.�..f.!'z^..r............x �2'...................... ..........................
... ........
Onsite Representative: ........ . Alk...... .....-P. .A................................................ Integrator:....... ..............
Certified Operator:........ + �7t1I +ct........................................................ Operator Certification Numher:...-4/�?64:f ..................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ' ®` ©66
General
Longitude 179 * `
1. Are there any bUftcrs that need :nainteuance limin'erve:nent'1
2. Is any discharge observed fi-om any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ S-pray Field ❑ 0ther
a. If discharge: is observed, was the: conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reacli Surface Water? (Ifyes, notify' DWQ)
c, If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin'l
d. Does discharge: bypass a lagrxnt s-y',tent? (If yes, notify ❑WQ)
3. Is there evidence of'past discharge front any part ofdle oi)e ration'?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the water of the State other than from a discharge'?
S. Does any part of the waste tnattageme:nt system (other than l:=goansllutlding pond,) require
: ri a inter ancrli m p ro ve rn ertt?
G. Is facility not in compliance witli any applicable: setback criteria in elIccl at the time of design?
[] Yes W No
❑ Yes M No
❑Yeti El No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Ye,; []No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes WN❑

Facility NumUer: Date of Inspection
S. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on s9ich need to be properly closed?
Structures a ap-nons,Holdintv, Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.]
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storni storage) less than adequate?
I
Structure l Structure 2 Stnucture 3
Identifier: kt fxt ,.....1...... .
Freeboard (ft): .............. J..'.!
10. Is seepage observed from any of die structures?
Structure 4 Structure 5
r
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'?
12. ❑o any of the strictures need maintenazicelirriprovezriettt?
(if any of questions 9-12 ►vas answered yes, and the situation prises an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate niinimum or znakitnuin liquid level markers'?
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application'?
(If in excess of WMI1, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify D WQ)
15. Crop type .............
16. I7o the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWW)?
17, Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage firr land application'?
IX. floes the receiving crop need improvement'?
19. Is there a lack of availahle waste application equipment?
20. floes facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss revicwAnspection with on -site representative?
22. I7oes record keeping tired improvement'?
Fur Ccrtilied or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does die facility fail to have a copy of the- Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'?
24. Were any additional problems noted Which CanSC noncompliance of the Certified AWMP'?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Pennit'?
•Nb•Via�ati�tls'ox'EIQfiCierieie� Her'e.rit�ted �t�ring �4i.q.V L' YOti-r�ill:rUe1Ve:no'Ftirt-helr-•-:
•.earres:pvndeitce.ilrcou# #his:�asat: : : :.:.:. .
Revicwerllnspector Name
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure G
❑ Yes & No
❑ Yes Ud No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes jR No
❑ Yes PINo
❑ Yes iK No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes JQ No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes &� No
❑ Yes allo
Revie►ver1In%pector Signature: • /1". Wj;_ S ; Date:

Division of Soi Water Conservation [3 Other Ag
■ Division of Wat4 Quality
Fe uunlie p Conipiaint 0 •o o►r-up 01 DWO rnspertrnn p •n on• -up of D,AVC review p cmier
!late of Inspection
Facility ,Nuinher
•Time of Inspectiou © 24 hr. (hh:mrn)
® Registered 0 Certified 0 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted 0 Not Opero-ttrona Date Last Operated:
Tarot Name: 1atrxy..G,crriztPr..D.airy................... ........ County: Guilford WSRG
Owner Name:y............... Gerri.nger............ ...................................... I'Itone till: !]t171 4a-.7.S.Qfl...................
Facility Contact: Larjr.y.Gr_ rin1;•er............................................Fitle:[t.►ixer........ ....... ............................ ....... Phone:No:....................................................
'►•Tailing Address: 3802.1 igh.11ack.Ruad....................................................................... Gihson... N.0.......... ................................................... 27.Z49..............
On.site kepresentati►•e:
lritegrator:
Ccrtifted 011crator:Antia..G................................. Aworieffii........................................ Operator Certification Nuniher:2.1,305 ............................
Localion of Farm:
La It u(Ic ©� ©° �`• I.o 1)€F It u(I r' ©F ©' ®••
Design Currem
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to •mis i
❑ arrow to can
p Farrow to ee er
❑ Farrow to Finis
❑Gets
❑ Boars
Design. current DeS1911 Uirrent
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy
p Non -Layer 1 ❑ ori- airy
❑ Other
Total Desil;ti C:ipaeity 100
Total SSLW140,0=
Nu to her of Lagoons 1 I-lnlding Ponds �i�
❑ , u su- .ice
rams
Present
p Lagoon Area p spray He
❑ No Liquid Waste
Management ►•stem
ram.....,..., i
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovemeiit? ❑ Yes ® No
2. Is any discharge observed from any pan of the operation? p Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray field p Other
a, lt'dischar-c is observed, was (tic con►•e■•ance roan -made? ❑ Yes ® No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach 511I'1bCC W111CI"? (II'yes, nntily IaWO) []Yes ® No
c. II'd isc1mr-c is observer!. what is the estimated 110 w in ga1Jmi:t?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (lt'yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ®No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? p Yes 0 No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than Iagoonslholding ponds) require 0 Yes ® No
m,t intenancelim provein cn t?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? p Yes ®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? p Yes ® No
7/25/97

Facr r y Number: 41_21 1 0 0
8.
Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
[]Yes
M No
Structures (Lagoons.14olding Ponds. Flush firs. etc.)
9.
Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
p Yes
® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Stucnirc,l Structure 5
Sirucnire G
Identifier: 1 2-
Frccboard(k):................ 2................ ................3..............................................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
p Yes
® No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
p Yes
® No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate ininimurn or maxintinn liquid level markers?
p Yes
❑ No
Waste Aimlication
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
® No
(II' in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type ....... .....................................................................................................................................................................
16.
Do the receiving; crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management flan (AWMI")?
p Ycs
M No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
18,
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yeti
®No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application e(luipment?
p Yes
® No
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
21,
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
❑ Yes
® No
22,
Does record keeping need improvement?
p Yes
p No
For• Certified or Ilerinitted VaciIiIies 0riIv
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 oi'the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
p No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
p Yes
l] No
t . . o.vur • ttons.or c .terenctes•were.n.titec . wring: t its visit... tart. will receive no' in er . ;
:.
..�tj retipon�itrit' t1 ?utt. . . . ...:.:.:.:..:.:... .:.
Comments (refer to (Iuesrion #): Explain any YFS ans►vers an(I/or any recominendatit) ns or any other comments.
Use dra►vings.oI' f acility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Second pond receives rain flow from drying -beds fir composting. Farm is orderly. (Design capacity may be more that shown in
)ocutnent.)
7/25/97
Reviewerllnspector Name Ron LinVaIIC
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

. - .,........_ ❑ DSW°G malFe °Dp Rev . .
_ .. edlot eirativn _ ie� _ �_•,:
F
Q DWQ Animal,Feedlot,Qperation Site Inspection
t;D Routine-0 Complaint Q Follo►►•-u of l)%N' ins ection Q Follow-up of DSWC review Q ❑ther
Date of Inspection �d
Facility Number
rime of Inspection �L�} U J 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time (in fraction of hours
Farm Status:
Registered ❑ Applied for Permit (ex:1.25 for I hr 15 min)) Spent on Review
❑ Certified ❑ Permitted or Ins section includes travel and )rocessin
❑ Not Operational (late Last Operated : ... .......................... ......... ........ ..................... ................ _---... __.... .......... ................. ........ _......
r 1
FarmNa ex..- . e2, r■ r c-t county: �l...............................................'.......................
..........................................................'r.............................. p e ......� iTt7
Land Owner Name: �G?-rr-� ��-•r Q,..... .. hnn NG: ���. ��..`.....�.... ...............
Facility Ca nctact .Lr�r-� G' �+�► �Ir^�-. Title: `°�
I,....................C.//•.....J.....d.,P..�/.�;�1....1............---- Phone No: � -�
Mailing Acldress:.. .f �.. .....f .c. . ....fS.G .k!`S-C— [J��k��i-u?,.s .! r.. ......�J .........'�..7.,�1...�..---.....
r. ._..
Unsitc Representative:.E?......... GQ-�' r..- ............... Integrator:........ ... -: •............^ -
•CrrtiictOperator:1. ...................�Yk� ......................... Operator Certification lumher:�-.t......
. .... ..a.. ...........
Location of Farm:
Latitude • ©' [3�" Longitude �0 .3 Z- • l K J5`
i ►•pe or operation ana uesign t-:apacity
g esign Current r.Ilc Current []c igit . Current;; .
Swine ';' a • `.. .:':Ca''aci Yv u[atinn ` ; Yotiltry' Cattle''
3, • Ca acity' Po u[atian ,, ' `'° C11 acit „ Pa' U atinn.
❑ Wean to Feeder Laver Dairy13
❑ Feeder to Finish 1E] ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non-Dai
Farrow to Wean ;
Farrow to Feeder Total 'Design. Capacity
Farrow to Finish �. ;.f:'ts.t ''45;. •v `ee;:nii„ r'a a ' =3
fib'.
SSLW
Other _.-..,�.....,, � . ,
:: ,; • -'• �, .:;;, •, �Y^^.y�ij:.': .. �, .. k^Kw, e?e't�' '•• €;5 �?i ! "
:ry. er of Lagoonv/ Holding I'otids 'w ❑Subsurface Drains [resent
�:e. ❑ Laf;oon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
�.
.ene al
1. Are there any buffers that need maintcnancelimprovement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray f'teld ❑ Other
a. lt•discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3, is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4, Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge'?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
413 019 7 maimenancelimprovcment?
❑ Yes. O'No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes W•No
❑ Yes 121, No
❑ Yes N--No
❑ Yes [ INO
❑ Yes O'No
❑ Yes No
Continued on hack

Facility Number:........... 7-7,3._
6. Is facility not in compliance with anWicable setback criteria in effect at the time o*sign?
❑ Yes O'No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
ru t rP.5 (La2gpns an Ii Id'tn- P n 1.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (f4): Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Structure 4
❑ Yes WNo
❑ Yes rM No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 5 Structure 6
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
[&No
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
QTNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
Pa'No
(If any of questions 9-I2 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 Ievel markers? /L/ �4
❑ Yes
❑ No
Wa to i t llcali n
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
PrNo
(If in excess of/WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type .... .............. .... ........ _............... ................ ........ ...................................... ............................... ...............
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
QU'No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
qNo
18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
0"""'o
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
pirNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ONo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
&No
For
22.
Ceoilied Facilities Only
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ Ira
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24-
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Comments (refer to question ft: ,Explain -any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. Use drawings of facili Eo better explain. situations. (use additional pages as necessary}:
g n' ._
Cj'_ / GL, �G - rn +.� L D � t-rti ►-� ►�v i s
a
Reviewer/Inspector P
•ie►v�erllnspectorl`artre . #���,�: �.�,,.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /C Date:
cc., utvis'ion nJ orarer Lruartry, ovarer i_ruat , )ection, t,acrle!}, ASSeSsrrrerrr Unit 4/SUIY /

•
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment.
Health and Natural Resources
Winston-Salem Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Leesh❑ Fuller, Regional Manager
•
�EHNR
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
November 22,. 1995
Mr. Larry Gerringer
3802 High Rock Rd.
Gibsonville, NC 27249
SUBJECT: Farm Inspection
Gerringer Dairy Farm
Guilford County
Dear Mr. Gerringer:
Due to recent concerns about agricultural impacts to waters of the State,
the Division of Environmental Management conducted inspections of all registered
farming operations involving livestock. Mr. Ron Linville of this office in
conjunction with Mr. John Andrews, District NRCS Conservationist visited your
animal operation on October 18, 1995.
Observations at your facility have been categorized as follows:
Category 1. NOTICE OF VIOLATION
A wastewater lagoon at your facility has overflowed.
Adequate freeboard (minimum of 1911) is not being maintained in the
lagoon,
A pipe, ditch, pad or other conveyance can contribute to waste being
discharged from the animal operation.
operational and Maintenance concerns exist which are likely to cause
animal waste runoff in a manner that is detrimental to water
quality.
Category II. NOTICE OF CONCERN
Parlor wash, calf feeding or other activities could contribute
negative impacts to water quality.
Loafing areas have the potential to release waste intermixed with
rainfall to the extent that water quality could be negatively
impacted.
Existing apparatus for controlling waste need repair or replacement.
Other:
Category III. NO OBSERVED PROBLEMS
x No observed wastewater deficiencies at the time of the site visit.
585 Waughtown Street, Winston-Salem. North Carolina 27107-2241 Telephone [phone]b00 FAX [phone]b31
An Equd Opportunity Atfirrmotive Action Employer 5D% recycled/ 10% post-coruumef paper

•
•
Page 2
If your facility has any Category I NOTICE OF VIOLATION item indicated, it
is necessary that you notify this office in writing by December 8, 1995 as to the
steps you have initiated or will be taking to rectify the condition (s). please
be advised that any non -permitted discharge of any type of wastewater to the
waters of the State is illegal per North Carolina General Statute 143-215.1.
Discharges from the lagoons and feedlots must cease immediately. ❑ntil
compliance is achieved with the regulations, your Farm will be considered in
violation of GS: 143-215.1 and could be subject to enforcement action with the
possible assessment of civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day per violation.
If your facility has any Category II NOTICE OF CONCERNS, you should notify
the Winston-Salem Regional Office by phone at [phone] to discuss your
progress in resolving water quality concerns by December 8, 1995.
For both Category I and II above, this office recommends that you seek the
advice of the Guilford Soil and Water Conservation District at 910/333-5400 prior
to providing a written or verbal response to this office. Your cooperation in
this matter is greatly appreciated. If you have abandoned waste lagoons or
storage ponds, you should consider proper closure of the structures. operations
below threshold limits may be removed from the registry providing a written
request is submitted to the Division. If you believe that this notification is
in error or if you have any questions about this letter, please do not hesitate
to contact Mr. Ron Linville or Steve Mauney, water Quality supervisor at (91o)
'771-4600.
Sincere
M. Steve Mauney
Water Quality Supervisor
CC,. Guilford County S&W Conservation District
Central Files
WSRO
a:\gerenger.ltr

- JUL-14-1995 15:34 FROM WATER OUALITY SECTION TO W5R0 P. 02tg2
46
Site Requires immediate Attention:
Facility No.
17MSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 014 , 1995
Time: 6- .' c{-6
Farm Name/O wni
Mailing Address:
�) '),--�? 0
County:
Integrator. Phone:
On Site Representative: 17 r, c--- �' -,-'� •,. — � Phone:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation: Swine Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: 1-3 Number of Animals on Site:
DIEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Ccrtification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: - S 9 " Longitude: Elevation: --.Feet
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of 1 Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event01
z
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Freeboard: -_—Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoons)? Yes 0 N ~) Was any erosion observed? 'es or No 2-7
Is adequate Land available fpor s y? es or•No Is the cover crop adequate? Astor No
Crop(s) being utilized: I e. G►-c� ; �. �-
Does the. facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? et= No
100 Feet from Wells? Cor No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Litre Stream? Yes ar a'
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line? Yes or-
Is animal waste discharged into waters of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or other
similar man-made devices? Yes 091fo If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, Land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No
Additional Comments: -Itl_ .�?
Inspector Name
cc: Facility Assessment Unit
Use Attachments if Needed..
,rmai P - PIP

•
11

•
ci'„^. ; Trru dote Al--nl:cz
Itc-LliVNumber: L/1
SITS VISYrATI0N R17C0Ri3
1995
Far.SI
Ca tmt,. - _ . 0-4 / L F'd t2'
Agcnt Visit:,g Sites .. �-r� _ �� ?!ianc: i'/a -3 3 3-s ow
On Site Rep mrmiiatfva' -- _ S :fir �- — 1"aoac: t L
Pliysicai Address; s _ is D2x+s_
,Mulling. hddreas: � �L`�-- /i��rr.� f�d C� /Lo.4 k
C r 6 s .0 r.•. l/� �C Z 7 z y 9
Type ❑F 0rcr--ti on ~ Swinc Pouitry
Ctsf9a Capacity, c2 '.`,;umbcrof AnimuLc on S'rtt:
LougiLudc; 2r ° ./2 fo "
Type aP :nsp=;icrs: Gmund Acdal
Circle Yss or NC
Doc ;Le A%ima.i Waste LIgccn ` avc aarc! of I :ct - 25 v_ a n- 24 hout storm west
vrrirr rT
(apgrcumrtcly 3 rnat; i ;mac:^tsj ��8r[v e w^r.:sri: inci'mq
For fact ities witlr .;,Oro { CT:C : s rrts, please address tht cli:Cf under the
Cvtrit:1csils sosann.
Was any YLq ar(g'N m 'Lc - cresion of tl-es dRrn?: Yea or ,50
is ad-u.-unto Ianri a-vagable for lard application? Yes or Np Fs the cnvc; crop adtoaatr? Ycs or No
Addiuofial Commcnt.5: 7" Z c..fCn �ia l� .s. %D aid
- — T-r
FtL.T, to (91 g) 715-3559
Sigmiurc of ,grin
—c