790002_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number t7 Division of Soil and Water CoMservation I a : 30y1
-- Q Other Agency f 'M
IType of Visit compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 0(o Arrival Time: ® Departure Time: County: bC�l Region: V ) 5
Farm Name: a 5n e-U FtlLrm-S Owner Email:
Owner Name: lax 10_y' / C/o 0 U try �Phhone: �21 703 0 (C-)
Mailing Address: °BCD_ ' " ` a 1 t� ram- l� t I v l� �cJ�n , N a 7 o
Physical Address: /��.Y�-7i1 � ��/j /1
Facility Contact: (D WI 1� VW
� /ll�0 � IP Vk Phone No:
Onsite Representative:: i'l &T 1t?l� 11' 1.0 C l V 1m Integrator: 66
Certified Operator: ( /OAl0 1 knil E' -' r `- `O l I V m Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: m O© Longitude: M o 20, L
from. (-5oj us l i aao E45+ oR W\/10Y,Ce onto
K4SSet-1 (ree_v, Fo-4r \ —
Design Current Design : Current
Swine Capacity Population : Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ Layer
I❑ Weder cn to to Fm sh I I 1 ��_ O -Layer
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Des
Cattle Cap,
y Heifer
Cow
LJ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of, Structures FT1"
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes *No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O(Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: G\ Departure Time: '®a..� County: Region: ZL9-0
Farm Name: ANASSeV M raynAs Owner Email:
Owner Name: Pla4and, 'M rn. Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: ('a(Aww M1 COI I uwV _ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:'6&4,')-1— 3o 3Q
Integrator: �AVk- i
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
n
Capaity
Current
Pop.
WetPoulttry
Desi n Currente
C>>apacity :ti
ij1De¢rsi
Cattfapacityi�ti5
Wean to Finish
La erg
EI
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
;}
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
Feeder to Finish
3
t
Xuprdp.]
"'
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
1)r, P.oultr,jMapacit�'
D Cow
Non -Dairy.
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
t
Boars
Pullets
IBeef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
'
11,
.f
t
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 21412015 Continued

Facilit Number: q Date of inspection:
JNW
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �m 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):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a [:]Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ® Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required 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 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Prattling ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved Area
Crop Type(s): Y
12. ��
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes rv.-I No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes N No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes [ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes I" 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
19
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists []Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
[]Other:
2 L Does record keeping need im Emegt\f yes, check the appropriate box below. T" Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
9 ^ Weekly Freeboar ❑his etyeis- ❑Waste_Trausfers ❑iVeaNte
Rainfall Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections R ' ldg e.._,.o;;
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'? ❑ Yes ❑ No PQ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste apoion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ta No [3 NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ["No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [—]Failure to develop a PDA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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
No
NA
❑NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J�j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ;4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
to question #): Explain any YES,answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other', comments.
Uyi u'A p2fnn it) ayLf- -b Cbl(QC;hCrnS
Need tb cleES(gna�e. O�G (r�e�)FUrm pvtrndecl. '(QbeCCa.. Cktknd(froncdenr. qa�
3Zv-nb-CI-705 U
wUwo-1 pe,rrvu'4 egechve,3'1-1111
n lJs Oyu y-ckdd �x(s=wve, -Foy .
Vwd -t Y-ACodd 'Vto6afa V, OS J�V_LkIY. nod- rccorXdl cuo__1111p
CUB V,10
YC b pre.UeA_j r �, ��la E tr -P u-YYl QXI'Dri r) q pV-" Ck(o 1 rQ_/I/bro
Q�nkS o� WSp look. �ce�-(•
��d >r71p�S 51Y1C2 aprJtbl �a�l- S1tJG%a�- �-.vr�{��-U�Q�.
l0 P.t 95 i n Pas-t-u r Q' �VJ
Reviewer/Inspect(
Reviewer/Inspect(
Page 3 of 3
PhoneMt 116—q -1M
Date: I 1
21412015

.¢
(Type of Visit: A Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 11<Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
1.
Date of Visit: I b RF(. I Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Rpej;#mC&#4 Region: („1SK
Farm Name: LSSE/ emew r"^ Owner Email: �(Jylp(✓�f�LL t)NI���,Co�^
Owner Name: &AZLP/ C) r^I e. LAM Phone: La7.7030
Mailing Address: 940 Lm',E-( OR66K 040 Mwt)IsmtJ� )JC- 0-1`0�-Cj
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Cq%&U1M1) Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone: Lk a%- 70 -A
Integrator: 'tt4WE4j()"T
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
iMM MILL M `fo NU+1 8
t60-oa6o 11IJq Q Q Mt ID U-0-
`M ht'-q Go CW- tUM) -0 lS$ Wl E A'JC A L&Pr.
&M 20 NI Kten-r-ON.M �b4 dkT r6Y aeFak RP
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Cattle
Design
apacity
Current
Pop.
) Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Feederto Finish
Non -La er
Dai Calf
Dai Heifer
Farrow to can
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dry P,o.ultr,
Layers
Ca tacit
P.o
ltp
ow
airy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beet Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made'?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[]NA
[_]NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes i No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: 1 - O • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure Structure fracture 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Structure 5
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
{r
Observed Freeboard (in): -i
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
Un No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
F1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
f'71 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
f4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
PU No
Zj NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 100%or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate
Manure/Sludge
into
Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application
Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s): FES C tI g r*K dahz i lJ4
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
'® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
�]l No
gNA
❑ 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.
5a-E)e�p-- aps L;Iew �s ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i vement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. 19Yes ❑ No
(J:J�Weekl Fr I —I "his 4�fysis ❑ Waste Transfers
Rainfall St ckin-Grep-'t`ield A�te-Insuections onthlyand I" Rainfall Inspection
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? Pq Yes ❑ No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes KNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: O Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste applic� ion equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Q� No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Vg 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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes CK No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 8 No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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?
NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [a No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes CK No ❑ NA ❑ NE
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [KNo
❑ Yes k No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional paces as necessary).
�q.)?RJ &WM, Mop bJ" tSSuQo OcA-06aR oP '40%, WMVkL F*" rowtT- Be PiA0
WRW Peary mee CM-? k o q 26EO M*M tS POPWA\ T
32,) ?6er,rmee IS w1 wmw r'&*.ta►AL1 �30V kb pmo%mr:,
r^.JtSM /MPL( kredeps AK— i.0 APPue6&_6- LAsT'SMC �sT p�wQ 2aIO
Smk I_ &01� 1_1915 0vs -
2�> RAW�AI C'ICRE-E%6A4t P.6COLW oc i A-VAAL&t t
aa, pc�rn�T `TRACkWG RAa► RtL U5W6— iWA Co& 11fV1Acn1(0A
a6) RPtlses�PA►� �S rr♦NNo nePucn^,tart F ? �'r Elf-r-M&s To PloW
Is r)-c e& h0p*0 <,a 0&
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatut
Page 3 of 3
Phone:/j, - 404 - tkgq `5
Date:
21412015

Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: rtr� Departure Time: County: Ii�F/Utegion: � Z)
Farm Name: A,,�51 a-y-M Owner Email::
Owner Name: urk Ot,h C CD ll V m Phone: `} 9 I — 703 0
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Ql �' lain d Title:
Certified Operator: N io NE
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator: mnde-yA dat4ck-
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
La er
Design
Capacity
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -Layer
Dai Calf
,Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
0
I)r. P,oultr.
Layers
Design
Ca acit
Current
P,o
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Other
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
1-6c C' { eL � ��� 5 0" 6�, . 4N �f f 02"_Almi- _
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
}A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - o aa,• Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
�o
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 02
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes NX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �d 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 O No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? i�
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ;�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [-]No ❑ NA g'NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
CRrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
&NE
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA CUNE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA �rNE
ONA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: . Date of inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA Z NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[:]No ❑ NA NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge
levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No gNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No
[:]NA
ONE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question,#): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
P+ �P�fiVll {' Qtre- �oZOS �OUTOLO � �1'1 FQi�Y4l 15 1-(kI51YLC�
�Fnav rots to Finis -, To i'J c r I e
1=ac•ili
h no lor)e�c at5 0. �r�l%e� dPe�a ore W4S o4Col
160,Aores sold ? itw wAnj &CM5 le f (fir s lVol- 7DM4' Vnou
19 11a5 not Sfoctee4 ? aso 51 nce— Fe-b. 009 , Permli 15' e1(P hrred • Fees (�
al No wa5�•e, &4P" ed aoto-- aol�. not pd, aot a-aol�#.
S. Swine. a-5he p ftsw eYl in wL)P
S�Neq 6razlnon irr`gca ioil Fields
Tbd I 051f 15 iv Cie+arvy t,n& *iie +1 pe o� petr+4AOk i5 rnosi'
p-PV te_. -to + i S Of er&4i can ;
Nb WDA Q
19
u ra-9-1, eel r,� ��¢�e.�12,Q¢� lfaz o w- lti aot'i`1 Jt
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: i V���
VI I I �r
Page 3of3 5ilpit�PA�(1 (Vj5PO)
Phone: -1-1(a - / G `
Date: 1 0
r�s� ile?

Vperatton ttevtew
Visit:
structuretvaluatton u Iecpmcal
Referral
Other U Denied Access
Date of Visit: O / Arrival Time: Departure Time: � County: /CO�egion: W5A 0
Farm Name: asSey feces F—Qcm Owner Email:
Owner Name: ( '4"'la.1ndAC tollum Phone: 'X 7;L7-7630
0
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (Q oyr I ayl_ d Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
C,
Phone:
Integrator: �—
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
*-q0G. Us Hwy kFN, NCG 6-T E, UL i3et4erS rrossr 5
i-- h(oLz-5 env, (-d.
Swine
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Capacity op. P
Design Current Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop. Cattle Capacity Pop.
I JLayer Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
11 lNon-Layer
I
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Des[gn Current
I)t. P,oultr. Ca acit P,o P.
La ers
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
1
Pullets
I
lBeefBmodCow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turkey Poults
Other
r+
Discharges and Stream Impacts
,,_/
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
[:)Yes
I XI No
t`
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
N(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
54 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: Date of inspection: Q
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
N'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
/e•
Identifier: 2-
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _ -5
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes X"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 XNo ❑ 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 ;S(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes [A 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 Dj�hlo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
> NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground
❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift
❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): ai
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
E,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
®'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
P?lNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste pli ation a mpment?
&_ U.) has reel
❑ Yes
rZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records &Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
C4 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.
7�
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements []Other:
21 Does record keeping need mp ovement?7fyPSZheek�F pprep� ❑Yes g No ❑ A ❑ NE
[ante Applica ion eekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑aste�rmtsfers Weather Code
Rainfall �tocking ro Yield ❑ to Inspections Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to insPet[ and ma n a r angel n Yes lS;�rvo n NA n NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No P6NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facilit Number: Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app cation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �5No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? Yes [:]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No WA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [:]Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[k/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
0No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
.2UO'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
5a"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ise wings of facility to better explain
a 1. n!o wa-5+e &fPlie-d
D3a, Wa5te. kix\ n
DF6_V_' "/ wl ne,
015Lash Stu�Qe
any YES answers and/or any artdf
situations (use additional vases as
or any
;n ao16— 2013. IjoYlcin ao,�d
_eA.S % Ipe r�en is e� 1� Mafabl
Dp�X'a�on� IY�� tom('-Ci i�l�l'i '1'm
eAf r w� b slru
ftwl 5..
I ROL Ino� e'n cTT above. *iire_shokl o � aSo s in�� aoo9,C� \
'1o�-� �e has no�I- 1��. f0o 13 r'y-
D�
J
9 I -red 54+,e-"er zo�s� .
3 I�ib 6r "-%%nrav\m-ev%+cs_I 155u-e5 no
�, �� o- �Da.��n�r► ;
�
�e
pia ffi nwe4- 2CeM2_raze n'
w t ne- a s h�2P m n
°� t r y
5h raz lvl on ' r o d5 i
�/ 1' /i n W u P L� 1 �nl %. 9
Reviewer/Inspector Name: i fQ(X Phone: % 9
c- 8 i 3, 708
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/ Q 4°27 0

• Irr-1 •
FORM IRR-1
Lagoon Liquid Irrigation Fields Record
For Recording Irrigation Events on Different Fields
Farm Owner!Massey Creek Farms
Irrioa6on Operator IGariantl McCollum
Facility Number 79-2
Tract#
Field #
Date
Crop Type
Field Size
Stan Time
Irri
6 Time
# Sprinklers
Rate
Gal Applied
N Applied
per acre
Check
Reel
Weather
End Time
Total Minutes
1
2A
5/18/2008
Fescue
8.08
9:45
15:46
360
1
197
70020
14.92
J
PC
1
2A
5/28/2008
Fescue
8.08
10:50
16:45
355
1
197
69935
14.71
J
PC
1
2A
7/9/2008
Fescue
8.08
8:35
14:45
370
1
197
72890
15.34
J
PC
1
2B
7/1012008
Fescue
2.42
7:05
9:15
130
1
197
25610
17.99
J
PC
1
2A
7/1612008
Fescue
8.08
13:10
19:15
365
1
197
71905
15.13
J
PC
1
2A
7/1812008
Fescue
8.08
10:00
15:55
355
1
197
69935
14.71
J
PC
1
1 2A
1 7/20/2008
Fescue
8.08
11:15
1715
360
1 1
197
1 70920
14.92
1 J
PC
1
1 2B
7/21/2008
Fescue
2.42
8:00
10:15
135
1
197
26606
18.68
J
PC
1
5
BM2008
Fescue
8.46
9:15
14:00
285
1
197
56146
23.47
J
PC
1
5
814/2008
Fescue
8.46
13:25
18:00
276
1
197
54175
22.64
J
PC
1
5
8/5/2008
Fescue
8.46
10:00
14:40
280
1
197
55180
2305
J
PC
1
4
e/92008
Fescue
6.32
14:30
19:00
270
1
197
53190
22.72
J
PC
1
4
8/1012008
Fescue
6.32
7:15
11:50
275
1
197
54175
23.14
J
PC
1
4
8/1112008
Fescue
6.32
8:30
13:00
270
1
197
63190
22.72
J
PC
1
4
8/12/2008
Fescue
6.32
7:55
12:25
270
1
197
53190
22.72
J
PC
1
4
8/25/2008
Fescue
6.32
11:30
16:50
260
1
197
51220
1 21.68
J
PC
1
1 4
8/27/2008
Fescue
6.32
11:56
10:15
260
1 1
197
51220
21.88
J
PC
1
4
8/28/2008
Fescue
6.32
11:00
15:25
265
1
197
52205
22.30
J
PC
1
3A
8/29/2008
Fescue
3.38
14:10
18:60
leo
1
197
31520
25.18
J
PC
1
3A
8/31/2008
Fescue
3.38
9:30
12:15
165
1
197
32505
25.97
J
PC
1
3A
911/2008
Fescue
3.38
9:00
12:10
190
1
197
37430
29.90
J
PC
1
3B
922008
Fescue
4.44
10:05
13:40
215
1
197
42355
25.76
J
PC
1
3B
9/32008
Fescue
4.44
13:10
17:00
230
1
197
45310
27.55
J
PC
1
3B
9/4/2008
Fescue
4.44
1 17:00
1 21:25
265
1
197
52205
31.75
J
PC
1
3B
9/5/2008
Fescue
4.44
13:00
16:35
215
1
197
1 42355
1 25.76
J
PC
1
5
11/112008
Fescue
6.46
12:00
18:30
270
1 1
197
53190
12.35
J
PC
1
5
11212008
Fescue
6.46
13:35
18:05
270
1
197
53190
12.35
J
PC
1
5
11/a/2008
Fescue
8.46
8:45
13:20
275
1
197
64175
12.58
J
PC
1
5
1114/2008
Fescue
6.46
11:20
16:00
280
1
197
85160
12.81
J
PC
1
5
11/16/2008
Fescue
6.46
9:30
14:05
275
1
197
54175
12.58
J
PC
1
5
11/172008
Fescue
6.46
12:20
16:45
265
1
197
52205
12.12
J
PC
1
2A
12/612008
Fescue
8.08
10:00
10:00
360
1
197
70920
13.17
J
PC
1
2A
12IM008
1 Fescue
8.08
1 13:30
1 19:25
355
1
197
69935
12.98
J
PC
1
2B
121912008
Fescue
2.42
10:10
12:20
130
1
197
1 25810
1 15.87
J
PC
1
2B
12/102008
Fescue
2.42
9:20
11:15
115
1
197
22655
14.04
J
PC
1
28
12/112008
Fescue
2.42
16:35
18:25
110
1
197
21070
13.43
J
PC
1
28
12/142008
Fescue
2.42
17:00
19:05
126
1
197
24625
15.26
J
PC
1
2A
1/42009
Fescue
8.08
8:35
13:55
320
1
197
03040
11.70
J
PC
1
2A
1/5/2009
Fescue
8.08
7:30
12:45
315
1
197
62066
11.52
J
PC
1
2A
1162009
Fescue
8.08
10:00
15:40
340
1
197
86980
12.43
J
PC
1
2A
1/8/2009
Fescue
8.08
9:30
15:20
350
1
197
68950
12.80
J
PC
1
2A
119/2009
Fescue
8.08
1 9:00
1 14:55
355
1
197
69935
12.98
J
PC
1
2B
2/7/2009
Fescue
2.42
1700
19:00
120
1
197
1 23640
1 14.66
J
PC
1
2B
2/8/2009
Fescue
2.42
13:00
16:25
205
1
197
40385
25.03
J
PC
1
28
2/1012009
Fescue
2.42
11:00
13:05
126
1
197
24625
15.28
J
PC
1
2A
211 V2009
Fescue
8.08
9:50
15:45
355
1
197
69935
12.98
J
PC
1
2A
2/132009
Fescue
8.08
10:00
1550
350
1
197
68950
12.80
J
PC
1
2A
5/3/2009
Fescue
8.08
13:00
18:46
345
1
197
87985
12.02
J
PC
2008 CrOP CyCle TOtals 1853770 19.04
Page 1

• Irr-2, 1 •
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
One Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # 1 Field # 1 Facility Number 79-2
Field Size (acres) 3.62
Farm Owner Mass Creek Farms Irrigation Operator Garland McCollum
Owners Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. Imgallon Operaors 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madlwn, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owners Phone # [phone] Operators Phone # [phone]
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 225
Loading (lb/acre)
Data
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN
PAN Applied
N Balance
Start Time
End Time
Total Minutes
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
Volume/Acre
5/10/2007
9:25
13:30
245
1
197
48265
12835
2.7
34.11
190.89
5/14/2007
11:46
16:15
210
1 -
197
41370
10830
2.7
29.24
161.65
2008 Crop Cycle Totalsl o 1 0.00
Page 1

• Irr-2, 2A •
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
One Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract # 1 Field # 2A Facility Number 79-2
Field Size (acres) 8.08
Fan Owner Massey Creek Farms Irrigation Operator Garland McCollum
Owners Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. Irrigation Operetors 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madison, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owners Phone # 910�427.7030 Operators Phone # [phone](
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 200
Loading (lblacre)
Date
Irrigation Waste Analysis
Start Time End Time Total Minutes # Sprinklers Flow Rate Total Volume Volume/Acre PAN PAN Applied
N Balance
6/18/2008
9:45
15:45
360
1
197
70920
8777
1.7
14.92
185.08
5/28/2008
10:50
16:45
356
1
197
69935
8655
1.7
14.71
170.36
7/9/2008
8:35
14:45
370
1
197
72890
9021
1.7
15.34
155.03
7/16/2008
13:10
19:15
365
1
197
71905
8899
1.7
15.13
139.90
7/18/2008
10:00
15:55
355
1
197
89935
8655
1.7
14.71
125.19
7/20/2008
11:15
17:15
360
1
197
70920
8777
1.7
14.92
110.27
12/6/2008
10:00
16:D0
360
1
197
70920
8777
1.5
13.17
j 97,70
12/8/2008
13:30
19:25
355
1
197
69935
8655
1.5
12.98
84.12
1/4/2009
8:35
13:55
320
1
197
63040
7802
1.5
11.70
188.30
1/5/2009
7:30
12:45
315
1
197
62055
7680
1.5
11.52
176.78
1/6/2009
10:00
15:40
340
1
197
66980
8290
1.5
12.43
164.34
1/812009
9:30
15:20
350
1
197
68950
8533
1.5
12.80
151.54
1/9/2009
9:00
1455
355
1
197
69935
8655
1.5
12.98
138.56
2/12/2009
9:50
1545
355
1
197
69935
8655
1.5
12.98
125.58
2/13/2009
10:00
15:50
350
1
197
68950
8533
1.5
12.80
112.78
5/312009
13:00
18:45
345
1
197
87985
8412
1.5
12.62
100.16
2008 Crop Cycle Totalel 567360 11s.ee
Page 1

• Irr-2, 2B •
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
One Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract# 1 Field#28 Facility Number 79-2
Field Size (acres) 2.42
Farm Owner Massey Creek Fans Irrigation Operator Garland McCollum
Owner's Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. Irrigation Operator's 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madison, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owners Phone # [phone] Operator's Phone # [phone]
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 150
Loading (lb/acre)
Date
Irrigation Waste Analysis
Start Time End Time Total Minutes # Sprinklers Flow Rate Total Volume Volume/Am PAN PAN Applied
N Balance
7/10/2008
7:05
9:15
130
1
197
25610
10583
1.7
17.99
132.01
7/21/2008
8:00
10:15
135
1
197
26695
10990
1.7
18.68
113.33
12/9/2008
10:10
12:20
130
1
197
25610
10583
1.5
15.87
97.45
12/10/2008
9:20
11:15
115
1
197
22655
9382
1.5
14.04
83.41
12/11/2008
16:35
18:25
110
1
197
21670
8955
1.5
13.43
69.98
12/14/2008
17:00
19:05
125
1
197
24625
10176
1.5
15.26
64.72
2r7/2009
17:00
19:00
120
1
197
23640
9769
1.5
14.65
135.35
2/8I2009
13:00
16:25
205
1
197
40385
16688
1.5
25.03
110.32
2/10/2009
11:00
13:05
125
1
197
24625
10176
1.5
15.26
95.05
2005 Crop Cycle Totalel 146765 1 95.28
Page 1

• Irr-2, 3A
•
FORM IRR-2
Field
Field Size (acres) 3.38
Fann Owner Massey Creek Fans Irrigation Operator Garland McCollum
Owner's Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. Irrigation Operators 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madison, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owner's Phone # [phone] Operators Phone # [phone]
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 225
Loading (Ibracre)
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Facility Number 79-2
Date
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN
PAN Applied
N Balance
Start Time
End Time
Total Minutes
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
Volume/Acre
3/9/2007
9:45R10:05200
1
197
31520
9325
2.7
25.18
199.82
8/18/2007
7:30
1
197
38416
11385
2.7
30.89
169.13
6/21/2007
6:45
1
197
39400
11857
2.7
31.47
137.66
8/29/2008
14:10
1
197
31520
9325
2.7
25.18
199.82
8/31/2008
9:30
1
197
32505
9617
2.7
25.97
173.86
9/l/2008
9:00
1
197
37430
11074
2.7
29.90
143.98
2003 Crop Cycle Totals 101466
81.04
Page 1

Irr-2, 3B •
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Field Sim (acres) 4.44
Farm Owner Mang Creak Fenno
Madison, NC 27025
Owners Phone R 910427.7030
Facility Number 79-2
Owners Address
Irrigation Operator
Gedond McCollum
210 Massey Croak Rd,
Date
Irrigation I
Waste Analysis
PAN
PAN Applied
N Balance
Stan Time
End Timel
Total Minutes
R SpdnkWm
Fbw Rate
Totel Volume
Volume/Acrs
3/10/2007
13:00
16:45
225
1
197
44325
9983
2.7
26.95
173.05
6/19/2007
13:10
17:20
250
1
197
49250
11092
2.7
29.95
143.10
6/22/2007
9:00
1315
275
1
197
54175
12202
2.7
32.94
110.15
9/2/2008
10:05
13:40
216
1
197
42355
9539
2.7
25.76
174.24
SM2005
13:10
17:00
230
1
197
45310
10206
2.7
27.56
146.69
9/4/2008
17:00
21:25
285
1
197
52205
11758
2.7
31.75
114.94
9/5/2008
13:00
16:36
215
1
197
42355
9539
2.7
26.76
89.19
2008 Crop Cycle Totalsi 182225
110.81
Page 1

• Irr-2, 4 •
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
One Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Traci # 1 Field #1 4 Facility Number 79-2
Field Size (acres) 6.32
Farm Owner Mass*y Creek Fans Irrigation Operator Garland McCollum
Owners Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. Irrigation Operators 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madison, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owners Phone # [phone] Operators Phone # [phone]
From Waste UBllzatlon Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 200
Loading (Iblacre)
Date
Irrigation Waste Analysis
Start Time End Time Total Minutes # Sprinklers Flow Rate Total Volumel VolumelAcre PAN PAN Applied
N Balance
8/9/2008
14:30
1900
270
1
197
53190
$416
2.7
22.72
177.28
8/10/2008
7:15
11:50
275
1
197
54175
8572
2.7
23.14
154.13
8/11/2008
8:30
13:00
270
1
197
53190
8416
2.7
22.72
131.41
8/12/2008
7:55
12:25
270
1
197
53190
8416
2.7
22.72
108.68
8/25/2008
11:30
15:50
260
1
197
51220
8104
2.7
21.88
86.80
8/27/2008
11:55
1615
260
1
197
51220
8104
2.7
21,88
64.92
8/28/2008
11:00
15:25
265
1
197
52205
8260
2.7
22.30
42.62
2008 Crop Cycle Totalel 368390 1 157.4
Page 1

0 Irr-2, 5
E
FORM IRR-2
Lagoon Irrigation Fields Record
Form For Each Field per Crop Cycle
Tract
Field Size (acres) 6.46
Farts Owner Massey Creek Farms ligation Operator Garland McCollum
Owner's Address 210 Massey Creek Rd. initiation Operator's 210 Massey Creek Rd.
Madison, NC 27025 Address Madison, NC 27025
Owner's Phone # [phone] Operator's Phone # 91"27-7030
From Waste Utilization Plan
Crop Type Fescue - Hay Recommended PAN 225
Loading (lb/acre)
Facility Number 79-2
Date
Irrigation
Waste Analysis
PAN
PAN Applied
N Balance
Stan Time
End Time
Total Minutesl
# Sprinklers
Flow Rate
Total Volume
Volume/Am
8/3/2008
9:15
14:00
285
1
197
56146
8691
2.7
23.47
201.53
8/4/2008
13:25
18:00
275
1
197
54175
8386
2.7
22.64
178.89
8/5/2008
10:00
14:40
280
1
197
55160
8539
2.7
23.05
155.84
11/1/2008
12:00
10:30
270
1
197
53190
8234
1.5
12.36
143.49
11/2/2008
13:35
18:05
270
1
197
53190
8234
1.5
12.35
131.14
11/3/2008
8:45
13:20
275
1
197
54175
8386
1.5
12.58
118.56
11/4/2008
11:20
1 16:00
280
1
197
66160
8539
1.5
12.81
105.75
11/18/2008
9:30
14:05
275
1
197
64175
8386
1.5
12.58
93.17
11/17/2008
12:20
18:45
265
i
1B7
52205
8081
1.5
12.12
81.05
2008 Crop Cycle TotalSi 487575
43.95
Page 1

for
Referral
O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: p egion: %A-)c5126
Farm Name: S�S�P.t / �F�E' (�- VOL-414 Owner Email:
Owner Name: M C 6011 U M Phone:*:�p1% _ 7030
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: V /
^ 1 i
Facility Contact: !� x I a-n-el
Title:
Onsite Representative: I / Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
l> S HWj as o 1
w y
o i
� a. S S 41
&-Ze.JT F o_r w�
Swine
Wean to Finish
Capacity
Pop.
t
I
Wet Poultry
Layer
INon-Layer
Design
Capacity
I
Current
Pop.
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Da+ P.oultr.
Layers
Design
Ca aci
Current
P,o ,
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Q
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Gilts
Non -Layers
Boars
Pullets
I
lBeefBroodCow
Other _
41 Other
a,
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
[-]Yes [:]No
[:]Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes jVNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 0 Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: _10c
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):/
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? .
❑ Yes
t6 No
rL] 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
�/
M No
'Y�
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
fg No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
rVNo
❑ 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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. CropType(s): Fp 5nUe_ PQ.S'EurI e__
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes
LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
®Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
CRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 'Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XIo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Other:
21 Does Arr`e` rd keeping need i provement? I�'r box bel Yes X No
astbA hcatjon eekly Freeboa�astdR a�Fis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
Rainfall Stocking TCA/Ad 120 Minute l�pt�Kions Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? / ❑ Yes gNo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [:]Yes [:]No
Page 2 of 3
❑ NA ❑ NE
Weather Co
Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
�NA ❑ NE
21412011 Condnued

Facility Number:
jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste ap
[cation equipment as required by the permit?V
❑ Yes
[f No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check []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 provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
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?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
T❑
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
WNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes �jrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
X Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes DrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes irNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
comments (reter to question tt): Explain any rr:a answers and/or any additional recommendations or any, other comments y, � * w
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
(QS� 3oi rest r2�9 ? Nont- rP Qvbr 51 r1 eZ Ilo v.rlSke app
1 • !� v �cLs+L aolo ao i (I R01 a.6c. aOoi3 a ►� c.�a,S+� recorci�5� Sof I, a.
.3a wL*rev/Sed?No} ek b�i��lheaci.� t'E tail ►• t `�
0.5k- sPer-ia115+-A& rWi5-P
d Las $urvet,1 o-r sluad . 'Vias aod8. p10-► o
�j � ••y • sai � � �
I Ka.
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3 131 t 131
Cko-ub1ley SIUSG D slUa 17
Phone: % % 1 79 O
Date: %
14110I1

T h n hayr4 - S`f4L4esv( Ile Ca.- In Cre8t* — 70 q. 111 2380
1Divi"sion of Water Quality/ IVIfI Emil
acility Number - Division of Soil an
� Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visi : CY Routine O Comolaint O Follow-on O Referral O Emereencv O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: !D ; ( Departure Time: County: LIYI haek. ws26
Farm Name: M 111 rj ✓ ^ 1 �/Y 2-c17-nn�� r� J Owner Email: 6 t J .n ,Q com
l
Owner Name: /try^ `fl yl IVIC C0 UM Phone: / °?7 —%03 UVM� V MCpM
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: (p (J-r I a l % Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
us 1 "11 a-aO N r,-oln- GSO UI on4-o t.,I 14u.3y76Ge•Ff
D i 0 NIOi S AIL aiI
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
[Layer
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
I INon-Laycr
I
Dairy Calf
eder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dr. P,oultr, Ca aci P,o P.
Layers
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
11
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
I
IBeefBroodCow
Other
Other
Turke s
Turke Poults
Other
Discharees and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [:]Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
DOo CAickAe.,5 AI
Page I of 3 V'7,�� J
isv ship
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
cll a..55 7
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Np ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑'NA ❑ NE
E 21412031 Ceo�n`h ue9
C�OSure

Facility Number: • Date of inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
DKNo
❑ 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: �--
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
y
Observed Freeboard (in): O�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
J Vo
❑ 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
CVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
N(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
OeNo
❑ 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
�/
M Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
ice'
Waste Application
No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[-]Yes
W
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0I0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window
❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): FescUp— r oz+u rE
13. Soil Type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes �eNo ❑ 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
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents d
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? lj
Yes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i rovement? If'Pes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Y G—mr�i G-9tsis' �fcrs ' n ;Wet Freeboard s hrS.Cedr—
Rainfall Stocking E3 — 20 Minute Inspections woonthly and V 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 ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
Pagel of 21412011 Condnued

Facili Number: Z 1 jDate of Inspection:
•
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
[:]Yes
XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check
IXI Yes
[:]No
❑ NA ❑ NE
ppropriate box(es) below.
T
rthe
ailure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
[—]Yes
;R�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
CR I'o
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ 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 to"'o ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes Nr<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [)klVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
bir<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
XYes
[:]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
to
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
&]�`No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. _ I Use dravvinas of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�aOII or aotvL- Soil i-e5+52 aolo not cokiplea-eJ. Noa ta.s+eor aftvk%12
�Sludse Sur ve.i In Vol I? Not cofk Io_+e_d i h aooq or aolo .
auk by j'une,lto-611CaoitinspecAion�, no+r�
r&dhlon - or R011 or a-ol2_7 Notc_omple.+"ed i n ao 10.1
(PALI re6 -? o r aot act o aola__ 1
��a l( �� e orde d yes I �k a -In V- yOub
wu P revi
For 0. C.r*, $ I AYl 1 fltial� }j p 2 , at.r\ d 1rri " v re
Ro�'St PtpesfF1ushs\4y+-erA at re noIon,ga1er in Qlace�fu>10- or;,r�c
All Plgs on tr`ound outdoors. �Vo>° vloaLvle2 of o.,ni was+ J
? Goml nq �roM Swjna-hou!
No irN o-F St�tne. waS+-e_ in+o 1a5•loo�s
aI P-erp�}orno wQs+e. °-P,pl�ed �s�n�
No Sot l wets+� or �� ao/�.
o-pPllco-iron recorc�S reukre-a
�L45t SIud�2 Surv" wa.S I/aoo 9,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Phone: % ) '.S %$ J
Date: I - / O ,Q O ,—
Page 3 of 3 ffO E N U CQ y N C 1 q' -711- 5600 21412011

Type of Visit: U'Compliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: l( (' Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: ,� t IlD /l I� Arrival Time: Departure Time: a County: (, n hgrkegion: W�StZQ
Farm Name: kestU CA
1re,ek-,tFarmS
Owner Name: 6AI O'Urt'] K C U I U M
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
5•e.y Ox-Q2lL
Owner Email:
Phone: -3 t-i ;z 7. 7 0 3 O
AA/h li_snvt_ QC� _-.�%naS
Facility Contact: 00 &-' r k a_ V1, (d L lut
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Phone:
Th dP.a ex% d eln+
Certified Operator: Certification Number: p ._o��� , U
Back-up Operator: t/ �s' I ( Certification Number:
10—dV2rt�U2
Longitude:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
U5 4 �,aLO . Fran 00 60. .&85i- onto Nt�, l+wy 0 q(,e -i-- on fo
M G55-u1 brezLe- � rfyt ".
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [—]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
OfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: -0 Date of Inspection: 5
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: 1 PP'2 Y ) D Re'
Spillway): i i�`�
Designed Freeboard (in): \ ,
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any tructures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
�]No ❑NA ❑NE
TT❑`` No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes 6 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environment 1 threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes environment
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application per/
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [-)Yes I vp No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, 2 etc.
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes]
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1 yl No
7❑'
❑ NA
❑ NE
T0 Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design [:]Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i provement? 19 Yes [:]No
pplic lion eekly Freeboard7gauge?
s' ❑ Soil Anal is 7TAVastc-Tranefees
Rainfall [JJ Stocking Crop Yield ❑ 120 on i y and 1" R`ai_n�fall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain [��Q /� t �° `E] Yes N
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on igation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No
Page 2 of 3
❑aeatr
NE
ode
Slu
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
21412011 Condnued

Facili Number: -j Date of —Inspection,
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app ation equipment as required by the permit? 14W Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
P�ailure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes XNo DNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. 0
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application) qA
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
J
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CA"P?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any,other comments t,':2f a z°,?
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
—A,; ^t,
�al. ao�o y aot! SotI }es{ resul+S? ��oq r'30 K
as PT
Sl ud e_ Su►-V -7 i n I5+ Gagnon? ao to txnd aLoI aft �a�a,n o
tbroAAor I CoM'P (e-F.5- .tIn aolOm NO Llv5r
urin� n2X t °1PPlicct_•_tov,
3d . Li l{e ►- loas fe ? a too of dhe_ 4*)n"
l• St oct� i n� records ?
I Mal ao PrMio-ctians have; wQSte av\a\yStS ? Mo� 4boo1 I(o ciao!
Dcoo � d outSiS'' (oa-&j-f Ljindoo
i5 l,asF Con�lne� suoint it) aooq. On lots note e,.
�Iu Vr� +3> �doCU_ftems -
ne
k res
tL4rotl40) liniYl�a�S �( m0.hur✓ IvtO II.btadt
cil5 - olo luci e. — oo aoco wa5f� o+ uD1 hod 1
q0
Reviewer/InnsspectorName: NJ 10 <<A Phone: ,1I'4) a� 1
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: A JdA
I� ` Date:
Page 3of3 ShOsPi) ��® 0 ll 5� LWwtuJ j*0 I0.l K211201"
0

• 0
INSPECTION OF RECORDS & DOCUMENTS
I/* Verify current contact information.
19) Permit? XYes ❑ No
19) Certificate of coverage? Yes
26) Operator Certification? OrYes
::�20) Waste Management Plan Available?
❑ No
❑ No Hours needed?
YYes ❑ No
21) Weekly Freeboard Records? �es ❑ No
61..E '� L44 Ipj-
21) Precipitation Records (with initials by >1" event)? Yes ❑ No
--�2) Rain Gauge on site? o 7 V,
21) Animal stocking records? es ❑ No ^aP' - F Q i
'Current Population (including poorly vegetated lots)?
Record details on inspection form
29) How are dead animals disposed of (within 24 hours)?
21) Soil nalysis Results? Yes ❑ o
u: < r5 - 7.0
60ppm OR NCDA < 3,000 Zn: < 120 ppm OR NCDA < 3,000
21) Waste Analysis Results? es ❑ No Dates:
ithin 60 days of applications (multiple test)? N Levels: Bcast: Irrgt:
--�:21) Waste Application Records (with weather code)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Applications within window for crops?l `� M
Were there y commercial fertilizers or other sources used? ❑ Yes ❑ No
hat was the N levels applied?
Does the total PAN match up with WMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No
What crops are being grown (are they in the WMP)?
Are they harvested? Yes ❑ No
21) Crop yield records? Yes ❑No ❑ N/A
24) Has waste application equipment been calibrated?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A
Are gauges & equipment in good repair and working order?
3VWere there any emergency situations that need discussion (date occurred)?
r ❑ Yes 0 No

C�
•
Waste Storage
• n rvf
•
FIELD INSPECTION
(s)
I Freeboard(s):
Free of Woody Plants, No
•�iJo Erosion, mping, or Seeping? /
aste Lagoon(s)�
• Ve etate ee of Woody Plants, No bdrrow
�No Erosion, Slumping, or Seeping? �—
*_Wastf
• Roof intact?
• Rainwater excluded?
• Leaks in block/wooden walls?
*aUs"taeks-
• Roof intact?
• Rainwater excluded?
• Leaks in block/wooden walls?
Discharges or Surface Water Impacts
* Structure (leaking walls, seeping, etc.)
* Drains
MrgtSfeek lnes (atream crossings, water holes, etc.)
(/7t Application Fields
*4fage--Fasilities=
b
Were discharge conveyances man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ N/A

Pc
o7k
Type of Visit (Soompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit ()Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: `�-F•"�f'a-'
Arrival Time: Departure Time:
County:
y CL lY t]QWegion: 6 i •-v
Farm Name: 10S
e.re-e-1, - Fartyt_g
-f C
Owner Email:
�J
/noL5
Owner Name: 00OLCtt_"A
vine- Co(luM
Phone:
336)
1
go27- /434
Mailing Address: a��aQ55
(� ��L IC Gt
• .A�
Iso
Physical Address:
S!t tYl 2
Facility Contact: 06&x
it,y)4. me Co tka'Iftitle:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
62QL ' I aN d
Integrator:
r
e {l+t�
s
Certified Operator: v Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location afFarm: Latitude: ®° ® ® Longitude: ®°
s Prtoy aao N so . e'c-A.* 0-14-u tic " 70�•-
ft:tb n1 a,4*UQ - .>r.J & . QD
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
❑ Yes I�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128✓✓✓104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection (Q •
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:I 44P_r In .0til1�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
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes 4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) Ix
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 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)
13. Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ 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
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
IComments (refer to question #):, Explain any, YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of `facility to better explain situations. (use additional,p°ageslas necessary)
Reviewer/Inspector Name rJOL a = 's � ' (� ° ` ` b "p :"' � Phone:
b> �.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Na 1t &L V0 190 Date: [p 110 1 n
age 2 of 3

Facility Number: - 0 *of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? Yes C9 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 ❑Other
21. D._oe/_q/record keeping need im rovement? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
L��/Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis So�i] Analysis as[e Transfers e*tifiea2iert-
LK Rainfal Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections L K/Onthly and I" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
1(V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
/❑ No
&A
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
� Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[,�&
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other
Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ 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
0 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
P(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
IgNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Ad ' ' 1 Comments and/or Drawings:�I.
at
.
AP kJ1'1)4 A-L
AAte&a 10 .
r
1 •' 1/ I f � 1 • •
�Ys- � c: , � 1 ���J r � � l—t �•I i
1 1 ` 1 � l • �11 /�
• 1 I/ j1 1
1 / �
f. ( (.—
a117116 vast& a s\fs = o, 17 1 bs • N/ 1000
O
Page 3 of 3 12128104

Division of Water Quality
Number Division of Soil and Water Conservation I Q
- - - 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit $ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: a 1�1 Q Arrival Time: 0; o!� Departure Time: d Q County:
n
Farm Name: 1 "lase. f,!, Cree_V_ Far ThS Owner Email:
Owner Name: cmxla�d WCOPhone:
Mailing Address: CZ10MQSs�creey— PdI�s�l..t eey— PC��oji'�1� ,
Physical Address:
Save\ e- '
Facility Contact: ti-� C 0 1 ,Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Region: 0S R_
La 7- 703 0
a�oa"c
Phone No:
Integrator: 61,5
Operator Certification Number:._(�l-� _
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: F340
©` ®" Longitude: °
US y aao N. f7-roM GSd . 6ast on to me 14wy 704. Le F+
orlfo Katss Grl-�e,l- d'0Y(n,W. 0
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
Other
❑ Other
u � urKe s
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made? "
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
ODairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non-Daity
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes L1U No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Num• Date of Inspection �1--�-�+_ . . •
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 I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: _UPDIP_� Lou-) e.,r
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): I o�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ',,,,,,,,,,�,,,,,,,,,,,,������((((((
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes lj(,J,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan? /I ``
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 jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yeso8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ElNA ElNE
(Not applicable [o roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ElYeso ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Apmlication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ yes )No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or I0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes ZI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
DO No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
21 No
❑ NA
ElNE
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
jQNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name ffielisso,b roc IL Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: '7 / 0 9
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — Q DACe of Inspection Tf •
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Doc record Peeping need impr ement? i€ye ekC9�k�t9ie eppmp.iate-bex-ltel , Yes ❑:No
No ❑ NA ONE
�aste A lication eekl reeboard ante Anal sis S/oil Anal sis aste Transfers
11G Rainfall ❑Stocking rop Yield 120 Minute Inspections onthly and I" Rain Inspectioneat Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ElNE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
X,No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ 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
0
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
No
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
,N
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Drawings:AKitional Comments and/or
0_00-1 5611•4ta•
i r oo t
/
n_ - _ -
0
'
upper con -skud3e_ 5Qr\r Or
•• i • 'i �E �I a
•• • 1
K
\ Page 3 of 3 " 12128104

& Division of Water Qualit- n
Facility Number I 7 O Division of Soil and Water onservation 14
O Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 9
Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
tl I �� �� Cv�
Date of Visit: t Arriva Time: �l7 O Departure Time: v r County: l,n Region: _105&
FarmName:'I&55eu C!gS ra.l-ms
Owner Name: 6&r I Q_ii II l e W% I I U m n,t (y�
Mailing Address: a16 fflta Sett Greek-04 Illtj1,`
Physical Address: //�� J t� qq
Facility Contact: (OQYILm � C ojh1 Title:
Onsite Representative: l QOL11- I A
Certified Operator: Ql ar l i
Ow r Email:
hoe.�)ga7.7t:> b
hone
Phone No:
Integrator: 3 1 S
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: F-3-a0
® i 01 Longitude: ®° ` a2�
U5 Id y aaO N- froth �nSb . �as1 do NC *j 6t(. 6n to
Mass tu- 01re-ey— f ar rn ► '4 n'
Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle
OoAe5 gll I so�t5
Dry Poultry
Other
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Capacity Population
E]Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
E]Dairy Heifer
E]Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures: ®I
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the 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.?
� ',�9111s e6 Py
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
El NA
[I NE
❑ Yes
El Yes
QNo
&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: —j — �.'2 10 Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
1
Identifier: )Pp _ c L oLo eat'
Spillway?: No y e5
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats totheintegrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes ( No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? El Yes No El 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
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes �dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.] Yes [ Io ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Pending ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. CroPtype(s)
13. Soil type(s)
P
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or l4gd apolira� ite need improvement? Yes ❑,,,((
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[--] Yes lCI
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
a ao01 so;I sa*LP-s 1 .�1-�i u,- k k, at Vet_- aoo"!. -
Reviewer/Inspector Name I Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
V 12128104

33
Facility Number: — • ate of Inspection ``i' 'lam •
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 appropirate box. ❑AUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other A
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
gYdt o [INA [INE
.t.
21. D mg need 9 f yes, c ck he appropriate b if'� ❑Yes []No ❑ A ❑ NE
ste Applica ' ree d Waste Soi al si Waste Transfers
Rainfal S[ockin Crop Yiel 120 Minute Inspections Monthly and I" Rain Ina ectoo Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? , ❑ Yes ❑ No VNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? OC4 �$ ❑ yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facik fail to conduct a sled a survey as required by the peryiit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA El NE
NAs 11 ZAN.31SF or U �couea5
26. Did the facility fail to have an active y certitietl operator in charge? ❑ Yes tXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 156o ❑ 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 El NA [I NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes XNo ElNA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? )Ayes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
' ,,,!Lonal Comments and/or Drawings:
1 ,
1
S*4k; D002
it i!, •;.
:. ,Y
12128104

Facility Number I 1 -1 I-
Division of Water Quality)
Division of Soil and Water
Other Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit (Routine 0 Complaint 0 Foljow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 11
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Departure Time:
Facility Contact: DIf (AY)J r W V Yi[ 0 Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: on I e)
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
vs
©n�
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Feederto Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Other
❑ Other
Latitude:
A,
Back-up Certification Number:
o ®' rr Longitude:
st ort 6 NC, Rwr
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Cattle
egion: QLS 0
2
MOM,
I �^ 7f!y
7 , Ce. +
Design Current
Capacity Population
E]Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: - • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment ,,.�,((
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes I�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. I -owe f
Spillway?: ��0 4 e5
Designed Freeboard (in): J'
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes $,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? Yes Ll No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks) v✓T��TTT
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? III
i
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Kill
o ❑ NA ElNE
maintenance/improvement? �
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. El Yes Ij� No ❑ NA El NE
El Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground El 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 Windovf ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes tNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
kNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
l�U�
CM
m
Reviewer/Inspector Name r
t
Phone:-61,94
Reviewer/Inspector Signature
Date:
T. - 12128104 Continued

A
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection ITS , •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ NA ElNE
;1020. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑-Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Do record keeping need imm ovement? I c c e bex b ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
VRa
aste Applic ion L`1 We ly Freeboard aste Analysis SoilAny�lysis ante Transfers iiGinfall Stocking Crop Yield " 120 Minute Inspections �Mon[hly and 1" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 6 C4 , 04 . ❑ s
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? no . Dip ? 52 Yes
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
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 of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
N ElNA ElNE
❑ NE
NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑l
VIA
❑ NE
/N/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
,LAM/No
1QNNo
LV
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
ElNA
ElNE
;[)�NNoo
o
❑NA
El NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
r I I 1
't �� �1 •� i t . 1
• psi �, P
I
.0023)07
0
? I 1 / I I l�
i AKP
�' LA . b1_e'_U V -f -7
L
�A"
12128104

•
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790002 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS790002 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Rockinaham Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 09/14/2006 Entry Time: 12:30.PM Exit Time: 02:00 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Massey Creek Farms Owner Email:
Owner: Garland F McCollum
Mailing Address: 210 Massey Creek Rd Madison NC 27025
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farts:
Phone: [phone]
Latitude:36°23'05" Longitude:79°49'52"
From GSO, take US Hwy 220 north. East onto NC Hwy. 704. Left onto Massey Creek Raod.
Question Areas:
Discharges 6 Stream Impacts Waste Collection 8 Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Garland E McCollum
Secondary OIC(s):
Operator Certification Number: 16783
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Garland McCollum Phone:
24 hour contact name Garland McCollum Phone:
Primary Inspector: Mkks a ((IR i sebrock Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
7. Continue efforts to control broadleaf weeds on dam.
21. 2006 soil test results look ok. Several fields needing a little lime. The 2005 anlysis was not obtained (nor in 2003). NOV/NOI next
time soil analysis is not completed.
21. Other records look great!
"A total of 1296 pigs are allowed per permit due to conversion.
9/12/06 waste anlysis=l.9 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page:1

11
Permit: AWS790002 Owner - Facility: Garland E McCollum Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 09/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
O Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,205 1,225
Total Design Capacity: 1,205
Total SSLW: 521,765
Waste Structures
Type
Identifier
Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard
Observed Freeboard
-agoon
LOWER
14.00
40.00
-agoon
UPPER
12.00
Page:2

10 •
Penult: AWS790002 Owner- Facility: Garland E McCollum Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 09/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Vialt: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0
❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0
❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
01111
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
0
❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑
IN
❑
❑
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?
❑
0
❑
❑
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 properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management ❑
■
❑
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
E
❑
❑
❑
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?
❑
0
110
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

•
Permit: AWS790002 Owner - Facility: Garland E McCollum
Facility Number:
790002
Inspection Date: 09/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
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
. Fescue (Hay)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
❑
■
❑
Cl
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? ❑
■
Cl
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Page: 4

•
Permit: AWS790002 Owner- Facility: Garland E McCollum Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 09/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents Yee No NA NE
Checklists? ❑
Design? ❑
Maps? ❑
Other? ❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after> 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
■
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑ ■
❑
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■ ❑
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■ ❑
❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
❑ ■
❑
Other Issues
Yes
No NA
NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■ ❑
❑
29. Did the facility fail to property dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those
❑
■ ❑
❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air
❑
■ ❑
❑
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

Permit: AWS790002 Owner- Facility: Garland E McCollum
Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 09/14/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Otherissue9 Yee No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection fy_(� y_i &*
Waste Collection & Treatment �'�
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: U$QA Lo LUP.r�
Spillway?: N Es
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
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ElYesNo El 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 enviro mental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? wYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes LVo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? ,((
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop 'ndow ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes,
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑NA ONE
Jo ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments9 '
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
IV Wes -eyia re -a /re
DSh" o�� dam ?
elm
0 e*vbcw.�.�
• � L �I I � � Fi t
IReviewer/Inspector Name I IV Q Qrocv_- / 1 Phone: .)I, S aZ-6 I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. 10 I Id A — AAA 1 b A? .It � Date:

Facility Number: — 'Pate of Inspection 0 •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. D,oeWrrecord keeping need, im ovement raeppwpxia Ij�Yes ❑ No
U //Waste App--lic//ation �y Wee y Freeboard Waste Analysi Soil Analysis
ERainfall Stocking Crop Yield 120 Minute Inspections onthly and I" Rain Inspection
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permits (J -mot
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? o?DDlo
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
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 of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
El Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes /TTT!❑' No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 0
❑ Yes �(No
❑ Yes �..P/ o
EllXl Yes No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
;1t1ir%5
n
Weather
Cori
[3 NA El NE
0 NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
N%NA ❑ NE
El NA El NE
El NA [I NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
kdditional Comments and/or Drawings:
a l a0o5 / OR C, 0 5 o i 1?&F reS L) ? goo(,:, aril -
( c;o63 , also) p Nov / NOS rt4� `l- 'him e-
a9(e- P%Duo 1�
e
Wasder t atk5 -0.9�1a-/o(o = 1.9 al310
a iglos= a.s
Page 3 of 3 12128104

❑ Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 790002 Facility Status: Active Permit: AWS790002 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Comoliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Rockingham Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 07124/2005 Entry Time: 09:30 AM Exit Time: 11,15 AM
Farm Name: Massey Creek Farms Owner Email:
Owner: Garland F McCollum
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant
Location of Farm:
Phone: [phone]
Integrator: Cargill
Latitude: 36.38 Longitude: -79.83
From GSO, take US Hwy 220 north. East onto NC Hwy. 704. Left onto Massey Creek Raod.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Garland E McCollum Operator Certification Number: 16783
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Garland Mc Collum Phone:
24 hour contact name Garlan Mc C m Phone:
Primary Inspector: Mary M Rosebroc Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
7. Operator has fencing for sheep and plans to install by Aug.1,2005. Sheep to be off embankments by that time.
15. Soils were limed about a month prior to sampling in 2004.
18. Operator has irrigation equipment but needs pressure gauge on gun. Some of the hoses have cracks and small leaks. Need to be
repaired/replaced.
21. Went over new permit requirements with operator.
11/19/04 waste analysis=2.2lbs. N/1000 gal.
Page: 1

� \I
Permit: AWS790002 Owner - Facility: Garland E McCollum
Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 02/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Swine
Swine - Farrow to Wean 1,205 1,313
Total Design Capacity: 1,205
Total SSLW: 521,765
Page: 2.

Permit: AWS790002 Owner -Facility: Garland E McCollum Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 02/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Structures
Num Desc Close Dt Start Dt Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
LOWER Lagoon 14.00 20.00
UPPER La oon 14.00
Page: 3

Permit: AWS790002 Owner -Facility: Garland E McCollum
Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 02/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Diseharges A Stream Imnsg Yea No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? 0 0 0 0
Discharge originated at:
Structure
0
Application Field
0
Other
0
a. Was conveyance man-made?
0
0
E
0
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
0
0
0
0
c, Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
0
0
0
0
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0
0
0
0
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
0
Yns
0
No
0
NA
0
NF
Waste Collecting Stnrage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
0
0
0
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
0
5. Are there, any immediate threats to the Integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe erosion,
0
�
❑
❑
seepage, etc.)? '
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑
0
0
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or Improvement?
0
❑
0
0
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
0
0
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
0
E
0
0
improvement?
Yam
No
NA
NF
Waste. Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or Improvement?
0
E 0
0
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
0
0
0
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
0
Hydraulic Overload?
0
Frozen Ground?
0
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
0
PAN?
0
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
0
Total P2O5?
0
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
0
Outside of acceptable crop window?
0
Evidence of wind drift?
0
Application outside of application area?
0
Crop Type 1
Fescue (Hay, Pasture)
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Page: 4

Permit: AWS790002 Owner- Facility: Garland E McCollum
Facility Number: 790002
Inspection Date: 02/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Yen No NA NF
WactP. Iicg_.ation
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? 00
0
0
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
on
0
0
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
0
0 0
0
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
0
0 0
0
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
0
Vac
0 0
No NA
0
NF
Records and Dncuments
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
0
E 0
0
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
0
0 0
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
0
Checklists?
0
Design?
0
Maps?
0
Other?
0
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
0
0 0
0
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
0
120 Minute inspections?
Weather code?
Weekly Freeboard?
0
Transfers?
0
Rainfall?
0
Inspections after> 1 Inch rainfall & monthly?
0
Waste Analysis?
0
Annual soil analysis?
0
Crop yields?
N
Stocking?
0
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
0
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
0
0 0
0
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
0
0 0
0
24. Did the facility fall to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
0
0 ❑
0
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
0
0 0
0
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
0
0 0
0
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
0
0 0
0
Page: 5

Permit: AWS790002 Owner - Facility: Garland E McCollum
Inspection Date: 02/24/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 790002
Reason for Visit: Routine
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 those mortality
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the Inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air Quality
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yen No NA NE
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 6

Type of Visit (k Cpmpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑l� Denied Access
,C
Date of Visit: a. Arrival Ti'm/e: Departure Time: Ft 1 '. 1J County: a-W rM{_OQOegion:. J
Farm Name: r F— /t5 Owner Email: �J ���vJJJ
Owner Name: Q.N et, I �LIY� Phone: 33 � • i°� 7 • % 03
Mailing Address: .11 b
Physical Address: �p►ahQ
C
Facility Contact: C9Qt' 1C?.VYI "` Co 11 U m Title:
OnsiteRepresentative: l2t r_(oinA 19'041um
Certified Operator: arlA F.. ke-collum
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
from 650- US
Swine
0 as
Ph�onee No:
/� 1
Integrator: (fJ{J / l� {S t, PD
Operator Certi—�ficatiolln Number: 167 6 1 -
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ago ® •
,Zab hor`ih Ea,�} i,n is IuL
rt,rm Pei.
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -La et
❑
Wean to Finish
❑
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
I at 5
3
El
Farrow to Feeder
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. 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)
Longitude: UT e 7 E..
)y ?oV . L.e4 onto
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
0
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes xNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — • Date of Inspection a a
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑YesNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5 Structure 6
Identifier: l2 �JWPi
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
No ElNA ElNE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
�(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
A Yes
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
Cl Yes
KNo ❑ NA 1-1NE
(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
X�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If 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 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drill ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination.,[:] Yes
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? es
i
d O lF /
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name `�� `lY i?" ' ya ''a`, Phone: Atp • 13
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date: Z

6
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �No
Facility Number:, Def Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design ❑Maps ❑Other
Ptr_
❑ NA ❑ NE
El NA ❑NE
21. Doc record keeping need_.i nfirr vement? If yes, checkk le appropriate box Clow. A Yes L Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
4aste AlplicaC I_J'�Veekly Freeboard/❑ Waste Analysis box
Analysis aste Transfers 7=�4arw.al 2ettifieatiou
'Rainfall Stocking 0 Crop Yield L]4 120 Minute Inspections KMonthly and 1" Rain Inspections f Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment'?
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 phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification'?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP7
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 of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No 4NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No P(NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
40
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
ko
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
• 1,,
III r.� • /
1
•
12128104

jechnical Assistance Site Visit
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 7g - Date: 6/2/04 Time: 8:50 Time On Farm: F 90 WSRO
Farm Name Massey Creek Farms County Rockingham Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 210 Massey Creek Road Madison NC 27025
Onsite
Representative Garland McCollum Integrator ICargill
Type Of Visit Purpose Of Visit
Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
Technical Assistance
Confirmation for Removal
Operating below threshold
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Caoacitv Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
l@ Farrow to, Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
1205
1205
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes OR 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
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (Inches) 12 21
CROP TYPES lFescue-hay IFescue- raze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PaD PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes OR 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
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (Inches) 12 21
CROP TYPES lFescue-hay IFescue- raze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PaD PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes OR 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
Structure) Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (Inches) 12 21
CROP TYPES lFescue-hay IFescue- raze
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PaD PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

•
Facility Number 79 2 Date:
6/2/04
PARAMETER
Q No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8.
❑ 9.
Waste spill leaving site
Waste spill contained on site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 10.
❑ 11.
Level in structural freeboard
Level in storm storage
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
®
❑
❑
❑
❑ 12.
[113.
Waste structure integrity compromised
Waste structure needs maintenance
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
[114.
[115.
Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30. 21-1.0200 re -certification
❑
❑
❑ 16.
Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
❑ 17.
Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
OR 18.
[119.
Late/missing waste analysis
Late/missing lagoon level records
33. Organize/computerization of records
❑
❑
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 20. Late/missing soils analysis
[121.
❑ 22.
Crop needs improvement
Crop inconsistent with waste plan
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124.
Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
- ❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Reaulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
El Other...
Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
43. Irrigation system design/installation
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
El
❑
❑
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
MADE BY OPERATION
45. Operating Improvements (pull signs, etc.)
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage worklevaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
❑
❑
4.
55. Waste operator education (NPOES)
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
❑
❑
b.
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - Date: 6/2/04
Naste analysis: 10-8-03 ALS 2.5 Ibs.N/1000 g
*Remember to get your 2004 soil samples in.
# 18. Mr. McCollum has sent in a waste sample, but it has not come back yet. Some applications were
lade in March.
The sheep have not been taken off the lagoon upper slope to date.
Continue efforts to get rid of the weeds in the application fields.
# 25. Mr. McCollum wants to get an additional pull added to the waste plan, that goes down toward his
constructed pond.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 6/4/04
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

Date of Visit: 1/30/2004 Time: haciliq� Number 79 2
Not Operational O Below Threshold
E Permitted E Certified 13Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold- - -- -- -- -- -- _-
Farm Name: Massey.Creek.k'arms............................................................. County:Rogkingham........................... 3YWRQ•.....
Owner Name: GaC1a0d-_-_---_'-.-.-._ MC�QUILOL_.-.-•------------------ Phone No: 33�=427:7A.39.QLGCE._--._.-._._._•-------
MailingAddress: 2lQ.MaSSCy.GrI;E.It..R ed.................................................................. MadismIX...lVC.......................................................... 2,710.25 ..............
Facility Contact: Gar.laud.W.CgRum ...........................fine:............................................... Phone No:......................................
Onsite Representative. Q>t[lBndMt GAUUffL_.-.-------•.................. Integrator:
Certified Operator:{grialld.E............................ McCollum ....................................... Operator Certification Number:16.7R3 .............................
Location of Farm:
From GSO, take US Hwy 220 north. East onto NC Hwy. 704. Left onto Massey Creek Rand.
® Swine ❑ Poultry [3Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude F 36 ° F 23 05 Longitude F 79 • r 49 52
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated Flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & "treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: ....... Rduawy ....... ....... ecanday...... .......................... ........................... ...........................
...-.
Freeboard (inches): 6 28
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes OR No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
12112103 Continued
'�• q a a q zr,�/

Facility Number: 79-2 • Date of Inspection 1/30/2004 •
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
® No
closure plan?
(Ifany of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
®No
elevation markings'?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12.
Crop type Fescue (Hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
W.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
®No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
®No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Odor Issues
17.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
®No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No
19.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
❑ Yes
® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
o t efer to t o # : xplain an. S en and/or any ecommendations or an. other comments.
wing of fact o better ex lain situation . u a ditional pa es a nece sary : ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
Mj
7. Must pull sheep off the upper slope of the lagoon to allow vegetation to establish. Check next visit.
8. Suggest trenching near the breeding bar. Runoff from gutters appears to be getting into the pit and may be adding extra freshwater to
e lagoon.
15. Check for weeds in crop next visit as there was snow on the ground today.
3. No soil test results for 2003 and none yet for 2004. NOV for failure to obtain 2003 results.
10/8/03 waste analysis=2.5 lbs. N/1000 gal.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Me I' Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: )
12112103 Continued

Facility Number: 79-2 1) I' Inspection I/30/2004 •
Required
Records & Documents
21.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available'?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ® Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
®No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

• eam
Type of Visit Q%Corrpliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 4Routine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notific n 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit•. Time:
Facility Number _
0 Permitted Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: /1 F County: j2 iQC
Owner Name: l l%I9twr Vl� N-C 1..��IU Phone No: n� %� 3 a(�
Mailing Address: �� mQSS2.V1 ?i2 1V I Cl l 1 5 017 0
/�
Facility Contact: � e" lA 1,.1.7�r.4 Phone No:
/� �/j �r :
Onsite Representative:/0 CQc� CIV1I ��/� V t l e- W I U m Integrator: _ �7 �{
Certified Operator: 1 n nt-t� Q..1/1C7 (Y IC, ��.� U (� Operator Certification Number: I l7
Location of Farm:
,2ao ft 700 east
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Lam* Longitude �0 �' ©••
Design Current
Design ,Current :Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultr
Caaci Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ La cr
❑Dai
eeder to Finish
JLJ Non -Layer
1 ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean Z 0
❑ Other
Farrow to Feeder
_
Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity AQ 0a
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW 1 5-2. 2, 00011
of Lagoons
i / Solid Tra
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
�/ Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field El Other
P p a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
Area ILI Spray Field Area I
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
rite Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
Structure I eture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Idenli tter: Pr QCO
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
❑ Yes Wo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes UrNo
❑ Yes pdN0
❑ Yes 'X` No
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — Z
Date of Inspection o2 0
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32. Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ Yes
/` ,1.�/No
P�1 No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
ElYes
No
1
i i
0
I

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
l )f No
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
❑ Yes
�lo
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
WO
9.
Do anv stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
ElYes
'
No
Waste .Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
.o
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN El Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
eNo
12.
Crop type P 5 C Uel Q/
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with thos�etesignUdln 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
_Reouired
Records & Documents
'
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the C,ertifted A mal Wapte Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ R'IJP, checklists, desi¢n. maps, etc.) J
❑ Yes
No
,//
$
I
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & �i sample reports)
❑ Yes
o
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑Yes
le No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems. over application)
❑ Yes
>(No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
gNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
�
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
o
Q
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit
1
{ G .L.tYMhr^!,.`„q.'�.
Comments (iefer to gties0on f7 .E=plain aay YES answers an and/or atry recommendations or anyJ other rnmments ,t g i n, p
Usie
d.re{ w.tn of
,a. cd, tL_ty. n..t. ,o.better ,�a _laam �.s+.itaa-havonts®„(.use additinal a —`C"o eas necessary): ...Fieldpv ❑Final Notes
IReviewer/Inspector Name S:.xrVn"ea.ntIR14�u'�ij9`�.,-}
Reviewer/Inspector Signature /% 0 �r del /_ / i I A.. Date: l /
05103101 Z V / Continued

Technical Assistance Site Visit
Natural Resources Conservation Service
Soil and Water Conservation District
Other...
Facility Number 79 - �2 Date: 10I8I03 Time: 9:00 Time On Farm: = WSRO
Farm Name Massey Creek Farms County Rockingham Phone: [phone]
Mailing Address 210 Massey Creek Road Madison NC 27025
Onsite
Representative Garland McCollum Integrator lCargill
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
1205
1205
Purpose Of Visit
Routine
Response to DWQ/DENR referral
Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Response to complaint/local referral
Requested by producer/integrator
Follow-up
Emergency
Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dairy ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
reouirino 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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (inches) 12 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -ha
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PcD2 PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Dairy ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
reouirino 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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (inches) 12 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -ha
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PcD2 PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03
❑ Other
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
reouirino 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
Structural Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Primary Secondary
Level (inches) 12 30
CROP TYPES Fescue -ha
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES CdB2 PcD2 PaF
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

• 0
Facility Number 79 - 2 Date:
1018103
PARAMETER
0 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
❑
❑
❑ 10. Level in structural freeboard
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan wlproducer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
® 13. Waste structure needs maintenance
❑
❑
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
[115. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.2H.0200 re -certification
[116. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 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 removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. Irrigation Calibration
❑
❑
❑ Referred to NCDA Date:
❑ Other...
43. Irrigation system design/installation
El
❑
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45.Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
Wettable Acre Determination
El
El46.
Mr. McCollum has gotten approval for cost -share
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
• to add additional application fields and
48. Crop evaluation/recommendations
❑
❑
underground irrigation lines.
2.
49. Drainage work/evaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5.
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 - O Date: 10/8/03
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 4-30-03 ALS 3.2 Ibs.N/1000 gals. I, 12-30-02 ALS 2.2 Ibs.N/1000 gals. I
# 13. Continue efforts to control the polk weeds and establish grass on the bare areas around the lagoons.
# 19. The freeboard records need to be current, as required by the General Permit. Record freeboard once a week.
Provided Mr. McCollum with some freeboard forms.
Mr. McCollum has sent in a waste analysis to cover the Fall applications.
Continue efforts to get rid of weeds in the application fields.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham -71
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/10/03
Entered By: IRocky Durham
03/10/03

Facility Number 79 Date of Visit: 5/15/2002 'Time: 0920
Not O erational O Below Threshold
0 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: M.amy.Cxct.R.k'arms................................................................................. County:RQ.l;kjKlgbAm ................................... NYS.RQ........
Owner Name: G.aXland................................. llcCull un0................................................. Phone No: 33.6-427.:703.0-Earm............................ ......... ........
MailingAddress: 2.10..Ma5sey.Cxc k.Road.................................................................. madison... iN..C......................................................... UN5 ..............
Facility Contact: G.aXland.11cC.0111A110..................................... 'ritle:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Onsite Representative:.Cxs1:1,A0.d.M.c.CA.11unt................................................................. Integrator: CAr.pill.......................................................................
Certified Operator:,(,`Arland.E............................ KrUllu ill...................................... Operator Certification Number:1.6.7.83. .............................
Location of Farm:
7 miles E. of Madison NC off of hwy. 704 1st farm on left on Massey Creek Rand.
N Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle [I Horse Latitude 36 • 23 ° OS (f Longitude 79 • 49 52
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑
Wean to Feeder
❑
Feeder to Finish
❑
Farrow to Wean
1200
N
Farrow to Feeder
1000
❑
Farrow to Finish
❑
Gilts
❑
Boars
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity 1 1,000
Total SSLW
Number. of Lagoons L� 2 J❑ Subsurface Drains Present 11❑ Lagoon Area J❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 0 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges &e Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of die State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes N No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? N Spillway ❑ Yes N No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structw e 5 Stricture 6
Identifier: ......... PXimary......... .S -conch y.Stage..................................... ...... ............................ ................................... ..... I............ I................
Freeboard (inches): 10 30
05103101 7* j-d/ y`' Continued

Facility Number: ;9-2 46 Date of Inspection 5/15/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the; waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 'Z 4)
❑ Yes
®No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
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?
15. Does the receiving; crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the CertifiedAWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
■vdm r�4m
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #f: Explain any YES answers and/or,any recommendations or [any other comments:
Use drawings of facility to better explam,situations. (use additional pages as necessary) Field Copy ®Fina] Notes
7. As mentioned on previous inspections and reviews, the upslope of lagoon #2 needs to have some vegetation established. Fence was
still down and sheep were still grazing around the dam.
15. Fescue hay to be cut in next two weeks.
16. Suggest measuring diameter of taper bore nozzle and/or pressure at the end of the gun just to check..... record in records as well.
25. Operator has cleared several new fields for fescue hay/pasture. Will need to add these fields to CAWMP prior to any waste
applications.
Reviewer/inspector Name Melissa Rosebroe
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date:
05103101 r � vV 1 Continued

Facility Number: 79-2 0e of Inspection 5/15/2002 6
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes []No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
05103101

Type of Visit 1 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: O Time:
rO Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
0 Permitted Certified Q Conditionally Certified , 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: of I rUIE�sUA k -ee}, &-Q. 1 IVI
Facility Contact:y[/. rlaJ Ire- Co� �uMc:Fitl
Onsite Representative: `U ar I anA {, 1pe�, �ol I Um
Certified Operator: Onarlana L I`rlC, �d�lUiYi
Location of Farm:
County: �-Ftr
Phonc No• 33(4,
tjism Nc, a
Phone No:
�
Integrator: jI l l (n
Operator Certification Number:
[Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude MV' E97, Imo.-
Design Current'- Design Current Design 'Current. I
Jwrlle
fAFarrow W to can 6LO
Farrow to Feeder
Boars
Paul tr Capacity Papal Cattle Capacity Po uI tion
❑ La er I I ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I 1 10Non-Dai
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW 5, O(j
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originatedat: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the Stale other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? LEI Spillway
tructure I S ructure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: r
Freeboard (inches):
05103101
J Spray Field Area I
❑ Yes XNo
ElYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
El Yes No
Structure 6
Continued
r kQ
W. e.,

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
B Yn $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
o
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?
El Yes
���,,,,,,(((
I�,No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fans) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
/
or broken fan bladc(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?
Aaanwnin commenis anator urawmgs:
l
05103101

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
YV No
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
El Yes
No
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
. )6 Yes
❑ No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
l Yes
XNo
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
KNO
Waste Aoolication
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
)f No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding [IPAN ElHydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
40
12.
Crop type /l �,n I�� A d it
13.
Do the receiving cr ps differ with those designid in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
9
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
XNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
W No
Rea_uired
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Cc ified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) / ✓
❑ Yes
XNo
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irriga ion, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
*0
20.
i
Is facility not incompliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
El Yes
XNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Xo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑Yes
10
24.
Does facility require afollow-up visit by same agency?
❑Yes
o
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.
Y, ,....�. t:
ht +. [. orb^ z 6 any
Comments (refer to question #) 11p anyY ES anstVers,and/or any+recommendations or aoybther commentar: ' ti
iJ
i drawings of.facility to better explain situations (use addihonel page's as necessary) '' ,�� ,h.
r4 Fteld Copy ❑ Fatal7Notnes',�';}
a
Reviewer/Inspector Name r • Q�� a� : •,/� � ��, -„� 7 �,
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Dater a---
O5103101
Continued

ision+of Soil and Water Conserva'
Other, Agency
¢ ,
(Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0• Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 79 2 Date of Visit: 3/13/2002 Time: 12:30
Q Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted M Certified [3 Conditionally Certified El Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
Farm Name: IY asscy..C.r R.FAr.ws................................................................................. County:R9.gklltghAoi................................... W..S.RQ........
OwnerName: G.atland................................. McCollum ................................................. Phone No: 9.1Q.4.27-ZQ3Q...........................................................
Mailing Address: 2.1Q.M.awy..Cxt<els.RQad.................................................................. lYladis0.0...NC......................................................... 2.7.Q2S..............
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: .rrarla0.d.Mc.G011uM................................................................ Integrator: Czar:gi0........................................................................
Certified Operator:..Garlalxd..lay........................... lY rUlluni...................................... Operator Certification Number:1.6.7.$3 .............................
Location of Farm:
1 miles E. of Madison NC off of hwy. 704 1st farm on left on Massey Creek Raod.
M Swine ❑ Poultry [I Cattle [I Horse Latitude 36 • 23 05 Longitude 79 • 49 S2
Design Current
Swine C'anacity Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
1200
® Farrow to Feeder
1000
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons 12
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps C
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,000
Tota1.SSLW 522,000
Subsurface Drains Present
No Liquid Waste Manager
Discharees & Stream Imaacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes M No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? M Spillway ❑ Yes M No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .........Primary.................Secondary.....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 14 25
05103101 Continued

Facility Number:Date of Inspection 3/13/2002
5. Are there any immediate threats to the int ity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ treewere erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay) Fescue (Graze)
Jt t.'T
❑ 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?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
■wv=:nwn'
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
E3 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
efer to j y other
�r question # : E?,�P Y, Y
)
Use drawings of facility to better e ( P g y): al Notes
y xplam saituatio sanuse addition o/nala pages as necessartonI , Field Copy
Il py FiRsaT,
19. Remember to get a 2002 soil analysis. Mr. McCollum said he had already sent in the soil samples for this year.
A
# 7. Would like to see grass established on the slopes coming down to the lagoons from the hog houses. May need to limit the goat access
in this area.
# 15. The 2000 soil analysis was calling for one or more tons of lime on the application fields.
The facility has changed from a jarrow to feeder operation to a farrow to wean operation. The new WUP is written for 1205 sows and
it also has an option for grazing the fescue. The fence around the lagoons and hog houses was down today and the goats were grazing
the application fields today.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky, Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date,
05103101 Continued

Facility i umber: 79-2 Df Inspection 3/13/2002 •
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 ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments anorb rawtnga '� ( lI � I' � r'�f�l� `41Si,�,.. whd..`.�r Ili,, . icli�eiwl ,
Waste analysis: 2-18-02 ALS 3.5 Ibs.N/1000 gals. I
10-25-01 ALS 3.2 Ilbs.N/1000 gals. I
Overall facility and records are in compliance.
05103101

(Type of Visit p• Compliance Inspection O Operation Review p Lagoon Evaluation I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 79 2 Date of Visit; 2/23/2001 Time: F 0945
0 Not Operational O Below Threshold
13 Permitted ■ Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ............
Farm Name: Massey..Creek..lArw................................................................................. County: Rocki.Ugham.................................... .WSiif?........
OwnerName: Ga,rletsd.................................MCCAUM ................................................ Phone No: 3J6-9V-.7.Q Q..........................................................
Mailing Address: 21Q.Massey.Creel-Ralld.................................................................. Mathsoxt- NG......................................................... 27.Q2S...............
Facility Contact: fxAdAad.M.1;QJ.Um.....................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:....................................................
Onsite Representative: G.arlaAd.WC..Q11 mt................................................................ Integrator: Garglli...........:............................................................
Certified Operator:(.alflatld................................ MC.C.Q11JAM ....................................... Operator Certification Number: 167$.3............................
Location of Farm:
7 miles E. of Madison NC off of hwy. 704 1st farm on left on Massey Creek Rand.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 23 05 " Longitude 797 • F 49 11 F 52
¢
Design
Cu rent ', i ,: FRI ign Cu"rre"nt Design+^ �Cu rent
'Pynn�cry�4,'` ';Ca acit Cattle t '
Ca acit
P,o ulatton., k�P,o ulation• Ca tact[ P,o ulationa;
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Layer ❑Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
F,
`
❑ Farrow to Wean
1200
"'
® Farrow to Feeder
1000
❑Other
es
Total Dign Capacity 1,000
� Total SSLW' S22,000
4+
1
❑ Farrow to Finish
i .
❑ Giltsj
❑Boars
�
Number of Lagoons I 2 I❑ Subsurface Drains Present IIo Lagoon Area I❑,Sprav Field Area11 `
Holdint; Ponds / Solid Tiraps F ---- --- �❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharecs & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes M 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 Slate? (If yes, notify DWQ) . ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a L•tgoon 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
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: 79-2 • Date of Inspection 2/23/2001 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity I freeboardplus storm storage) less than adequate? R Spillway
❑ Yes R No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier: ..........PIIt[talY.................SKGOndaTY....................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(inches): ................ 12................ ............... 2,4................ ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes R No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
® Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes R No
11.
12.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pondmg ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
Croptype Fescue (Graze) Fescue (Hay)
❑ Yes
R No
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
R 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
R No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
R Yes
❑ No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
R No
17.
Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required
Records &Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
R No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
R No
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
R Yes
❑ No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes.
R No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
R No
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
R No
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
R No
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
R No
27. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes R No
Odor Issues
28. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below R Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'? ❑ Yes R No
O1/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: 79-2 1) c of Inspection 2/23/2051
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift du10 land application? (i.e. residue on neighboringvegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon'?
32. 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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
Printed on: 2/23/2001
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
•omments e e to uestion # : lain any answe and/or any a mmendatio s o an other mmen .
U d awin o ty t fnuillette explaiMfuWti -onsWuseTa—dHitionall1im es as ne essay : ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
9. Marker is to be re -installed within 30 days. NRCS/SWCD to assist. Marker has been temporarily removed to make dock repairs.
15. Lime may be needed on fields #1 and #2 as the pH on the most recent soil analyses was 5.0 and 4.9.
Bare spots in the fescue have been re -seeded (drilled) this past Fall. This has come up pretty well. Still has small area that he is trying to
get seeded/established.
21. Waste sample collection is better this year. Still have some applications in 1 1/2000 and 12/2000 that were as much as 90 days from
the date of sampling. Operator calculated nitrogen balance on fields using the waste sample (02/19/01) closest to the application events
eventhough the analysis showed a slightly higher N value (2.6 lbs./1000 gal.) so that he would be on the "conservative" side. He
suggested to me that he would start sampling waste every three months so as to stay within his 60 day window.
28. Not a concern or problem on this farm.
Pee �.lzs/o1,) c+�c�mi�ro �o�/J� is IdoS
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
01/01/01

of Visit Ja Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit IQ Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Dale of Visit: W.A3A Time:
10 Not Operational O Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified ❑ Conditionally Ce�rttified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above (Threshold: .........................
Farm Name:....../�y�a5.�5....QA4........v�./rye.GN./►�:......I.�Qrm .......... County:.at���..y�...t11.1.am....^...2.........................
Owner Name: ....00a- ..I�.t..1.tY...........1 V...L,@....._1. .I..L:.0. ............................ Phone No: .._3 .6. •,,, ,:2 7...'.. 703 0..................
FacilityContact: d4 o n.J.....� Y.l.. ...C..d.u'i n............................................................... Phone No:......................................................................................
Mailing Address:...._a`10{.. "`.Q....TS.... ......free-1�.-......Rd.............Mrs....o/n....,....N.�I-....................a2 7&aS
Onsite Representative//:'�..v.Q .�ar4...e...............................��..``................................ Integrator: .... 01.1gr....l,.l1................/.._....—.......p......................
Certified Operator:,liT.0,r.-...Ia...n.4........ E l......WL. r..._..C�I_IUrn............ Operator Certification Number:.�.�(!,...(..O
.................
Location of Farm:
1 M t 25 ,Q4.5
w y 70V • N r5 t Ra-an on
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• ®• ®11 Longitude ®• EM' C�"
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine - -Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle - Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish I [] Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
arrow to Wean 20 00
Farrow to Feeder ❑Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity J QQO
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW J�- �� b0�
Number of Lagoons ;'® ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑Spray Field Area
Hol---------------
ding Ponds /Solid Traps ❑ No Liyuid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. Irdischarge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �(No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
01/01/01 Continued

6acility Number: • Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? X
Spillway ❑ Yes VNo
Atructure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: .....l..rll ... ......... ......................................................................
Freeboard(inches) ............. L?............ ....................................................................................................................................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes No
seepage, etc.) TT
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ��JJ
closure plan? ❑ Yes f No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an 777777```"`
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes VNo
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? )J Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes O(No
11. Is there evidence of over app cation? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes No
12. Crop type f Q�L liter � Y-4zA
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desygnated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ElYes ANo
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 �p No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?] Yes /❑` No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No
17. Are rock outcrops present? 'B iQ0
18. Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfreld boundary?
. ❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required Records & Documents
19. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? B Yes E9iio
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? `
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) El Yes, o
21. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) Yes ❑ No
22. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑YesNo
23. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes VNo
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
j No
25.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
XNo
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
D6o
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
�No
Odor
Issues
28.
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?
((''
29.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
�(No
01/01/01
Continued

Facility Number: — e of Inspection IE1o1/aZ, i/np
30. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (ire. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
32. 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.)
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
34. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
printed on: 1/4/2001
❑ Yes ` 7p�t,�,vN'o
❑ Yes 't,yo
❑ Yes /I )(No
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes [XNo
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Field Copy M Final Notes
NOks : d' ra55 on emboA K tvievi+s 7
rescue. — weed s/ bare S po+s ?
Lv� nciol.� ti(ar. —sec . ?
wastes ,1� a/ig /off N= 2. 6 I b s -AX)O C"
15, -6�unF 5 Pars
.0,
Pa O. Nts
44)o-+- hz'1 s
reseeded 4-'ItO)4- )ts p5 -
eomV UP p; ey�, �e IV 5i,I1 hC5 Small
�1o,v- ►�•��- i s 44 toe,
r-e 'i v) A,) W
w I4-�'l V1
30
d a�t�.s .
c,s/ s wCb
io ass l ! -.
M,'+-k�
..s
Removed
urf'�an�-1. -For doc,'refair-5,
a$. N0tQ 6611eerf'n 6r Problem om4411 5.�a�r�.
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signal
Date:
SO
q.9.
01/01/01

ivision of Water Quality
ivision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O. Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Uouc id' Visit: ti/23/2000 'Time: 13:44 Printed on: 2/15/2001
79 2
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted 0 Certified U Conditionally Certified Registered Dale Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ................................................................................. County: liockllugham................................... W.S.R0........
OwnerName:G.attalesA................................. RAcGotluln................................................. Phone No: 9tQ.:.27:.7.OJQ...........................................................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 2,tQ.MA$AeY..Glt'.cck..R.uad.................................................................. 11A idiso.1t..IN.C......................................................... 27.025 ..............
Onsite Representative: Gatl�ttd.MS.CAII.um................................................................. Integrator: Cargill .......................................................................
Certified Operator:..GadAlttd..E............................ M.rC.Q.110 t...................................... Operator Certification Number: ,l,(,7.&3.............................
Location of Farm:
7 miles E. of Madison NC off of hwy. 704 Ist farm on left on Massey Creek Rood.
® Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • F-23--1, F0571, Longitude F 79 • 49 527,1
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
1200
® Farrow to Feeder
1000
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds/ Solid Traps
Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Other
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Total Design Capacity
No Liquid Waste
Total SSLW
Discharges � 'beam Impacts
I. 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 Stale? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galhnin?
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 K Trealment
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: ..........Ptirnary.......... ....... Senondar........ ................................... .................................... .................................... ....................................
Freeboard (inches): 12 43
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 79-2 Date of inspection 8/23/2000 Printed on: 2/15/2001
5.
Are there any immediate threats to the grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre ., severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6.
Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ 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 ADDlieatlnn
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 Fescue (Hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes to 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?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reuuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
3Niwviolatiotis;or ;deficiencies were noted ;d ifing this visit::You:wil.l receive ito fti.rth;e'r
eorresnotideht e: about. this.vtstt.:: ...... .
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
7. Need to get rid of polkweed and establish grass around the lagoon embankments.
15. Fescue looks good for the most part. Continue efforts to get a few bare areas established and some weed control in couple of
places is needed.
Records are in excellent shape and overall facility looks good.
Facility has switched from /000 furrow to feeder to /200 farrow to wean the WUP needs to be rewritten to reflect this change. This
was mentioned last year, however the steady state live weight has not increased. Application windows on Fescue may be
questionable ( March to Dec.).
Reviewer/Inspector NameRocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facitity Number: 79-2 nl' Inspection 8/23/2000 • Printed on: 2/15/2001
(dnr Ices
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters; etc.)
❑ Yes
®No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover'?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the Flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Odd tttona •ommen an or aw ng
5100
5100

Facility Number 79 02 FDate of Inspection 3/8/2000
Time of Inspection 1040 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified E3 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: IY.T.assey.Crt:ckYarms................................................................................. County: PQckjggham ................................... kXS[iQ.....:..
OwnerName: Garland .................................. 1C.C.01lum................................................. Phone No: 33.6 427:.703.Q...........................................................
Facility Contact: GaClauil.klC_GOlIuOG...................................Title: Cerl'I.Ced.Op..prMaA....................... Phone No:
MailingAddress: 2.tQ.MAsscy_Crgrk.li.0ad.................................................................. 5bdisan..N.0 ......................................................... 27.025 .............
Onsite Representative: GuCLadd.. c-Callum............................................................... Integrator: C,a[gill.......................................................................
Certified Operator:,(qLr.lAUtd..E............................ KCCQIIUM ...................................... Operator Certification Number: 4,b.7.83.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude F 36 • 23 05 " Longitude E 79 • 49 F 52 '
Design Current Design Current r DeslgoEy'
a racituP,o ulatioq Poultry Ca acit P,o tulation Cattle ' Ca acif; P,'o ulationo
Wean
FrFeeder
1200o
TotaTotal SSLW 522,000
Feeder
1000
0
o Finish
� ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management S
Feeder Finish ❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
Discharges $t rem Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑Yes No
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon El Spray Field ❑Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑yes ❑ No
- c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑Yes ®No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑Yes ®No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑Spillway ❑Yes ®No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Primary Secondary
Freeboard (inches): ................ 3Q ............... ................ 1.4
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
9 7 Printed on 3/9/2000
Z'�I't

Facilit Number: 79-02 1 ate of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which not properly addressed and/or managed throt�waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4.6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue
3/8/2000
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0 No yiolatiotis or:defciencies were:noted:during this: visit::You:will receive -no -further
corresimideh& about this.vlslt.::....:: .
19. Last waste sample was 3/10/99. Sent off sample on 3/4/2000. Last soil sample was 4/19/99.
A pipe is above liquid level but is not a problem. No odor complaints.
❑ 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
Permit is in house for review. Has not been issued yet, however. Farmer wants to go to 1250 farrow to wean. Will send
m after receiving permit. Kevin Moore is doing waste plan update.
Reviewer/Inspector Name !Melissa Rosebrock David Russell I
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
on

Facility Number: 79-02 ate of Inspection 3/8/2000 •
91
Odor Issues
26.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge allor below
® Yes
❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
® No
t tone •omme tr or aw n
Printed on 3/9/2000
Printed on 3/9/2000

Facility Number 79 02 Date of Inspection F 3/8/2000
Time of Inspection 1040 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not O ¢rational Date Last Operated; ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Farm Name: Massey.Creels.Faa'.rrts................................................................................. County: >;iackiagh mt................................... WSRQ........
OwnerName: Garland ................................. mc.CbUunn................................................. Phone No: 33.6. 4,27:.7.030...........................................................
Facility Contact: Gat'laud.HoCoHmm................................... Title: .Cerlified.Qp.eralar....................... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: 21Q. M>AsseY..Cret lt.liarxd................................................................. Madison..N.C......................................................... V.025 .............
Onsite Representative: GarlAad.All.CAIlum............................................................... Integrator: Cargill .......................................................................
Certified Operator:GarlAtttd,E............................ UrCallunL...................................... Operator Certification Number: 16.7.83.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36]• 23 05 " Longitude 79 • 49 52 "
G Desifip'j Cif ret f
3LL Out Po
! Desig"ti Cu�rent� s# l ,, Design? Current�i.,,
Poultnys_',' k,Ce acit ulettonmatde, _+ @a iacttl?o
w�me [serf , ultihon
.P,o ulaGon
❑ Wean to Feeder
IE1 Dairy
i
❑Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer ❑ Non Dairy x,
k
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder
1000
1200
0
❑Other `, * -�:� ,� % ;
r
❑ Farrow to Finish
'
„ , Total DeslghlGapacdly 1,000
SSLtW`a 522,000
❑ Gilts
❑ BoarsTotal
--- --
:•., v,.r ,7. t
f LagoonsSubsurface
Drains Present ❑Lagoon Arca ❑Spray Field ArjW,,NumIer
i.i g,Ponds /Solid Tiraps
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System ,
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the Slate? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Primary , Secondary
Freeboard (inches): ,,,,,,,,,,,Q,.,,,,I...
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of -any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 3/9/2000

Facility Number: 79-02 Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site whichOnot properly addressed and/or managed throt* waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Applicalion
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Fescue (Hay)
3/8/2000
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Reuuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
U. No'yiolations:ot. deficiencie0vere;n6ted:during this; visit N6u:will rec$ive no further
correspotideh& about this.vlslt' . ": .
9. Last waste sample was 3/10/99. Sent off sample on 3/4/2000. Last soil sample was 4/19/99.
A pipe is above liquid level but is not a problem. No odor complaints.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes IN No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Permit is in house for review. Has not been issued yet, however. Farmer wants to go to 1250 farrow to wean. Will send
m after receiving permit. Kevin Moore is doing waste plan update.
Reviewer/Inspector Name IMelissa Rosebrock David Russell
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
on

Facility Number: 79-02 •Uatc of Inspection 3/8/2000
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
® 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
Printed on 3/9/2000

11: oo q/n
I Facility Number I
review
Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection
Permitted 0 Certified [3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not O erat
Farm Name: .....M^rel�..ae ...... Cre..e(A�K--....Far...o ............................... County:
Owner Name: ....... d _.qr ..gn..d......1''t C C'.01.1.9m ............................... Phone No:
.................. .
O Other
O
24 hr. (hh:mm)
Date Last Operated: ...
>.(<Y,.i..rn�.�..}._ha.1n.
Facility Contact: ......� IaY..I.. !i.�.....1 !�� Q.�..I... t ��T • O �Qt Q�r
..................... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address: IO �Q55ey dre-e- k— / � NL
....................................................................................................... ...... ......................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative:...&((,dogn J(� /
.C%..... ............. fE.t.C.._� � I..S:'..•..J................. Integrator: ....... 1.r..Qt�..Q..1..�J••.............../.............�.j................
Certified Operator: ... 1.rd�,d.._,_,(.,�, a...�•,r0JJJT,A........................ Operator Certification `•/ Number:.... /,.67Q
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®•®° ®" Longitude ®• ®' ®"
" Design H Current Design ;Current Design Current "
Swore l... Ca aeit Po ulation Poultry Ca acit iPo 'ulahon , :Cattle Ca acit ' Po oration'
r ❑ Wean to Feeder 1 ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy ,•'
❑ Feeder to Finish ';.. ❑ Non -Layer .'i ❑Non -Dairy
' Farrow to WeanWOO I AD:,::. ..:.•,a ,`�: ;.;, ,..;,, ..
❑Other
Farrow to Feeder
°`= ❑ Farrow to Finish +
Total Design, apaclty
❑ Gilts Cul'r2ni e "
;,;❑$Wars •, si$)000 TotatssLW': Saa o00 -'
Number of Lagoons �s+� ,(}® ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑Lagoon Area I[] Spray Field Area
;�.
s' Holdin [Ponds / So'I Tra s i0 No Li Liquid Waste :;i
g, p ❑ q e Management System i4
din
G1. .. Sol ' , S • ' ,
Discharges & Stream tontine
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. II' discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (II' yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes WIo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes WNo
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 // _ /"
....
Pr Id..........entifier: i M..................................................../
•
Freeboard inches): i
................................................................................................................:..................
5. Are [here any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Ye,/
seepage, etc.) ,
3/23/99 rominr

Facility Number. Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site whicTl""Sire not properly addressed and/or managed thre a waste management or — TT
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 XNo
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 E(I No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes & No
11. Is there evidenceofover application? []Excessive Ponding [I PAN ❑ Yes XNo
T
12. Crop type — MoLrA — e-C • V
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?
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?
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, Freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have-aactively certified operator in charge?
i
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
• ' .. violaiiQns:oi ilgfjciencies�v$re.hOed.00� iOgthis:visit,'.Y:o(t'Witi•ec$ iyetip;fut•th¢r:•: •
:•correspondence:about:this:visit..:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:•:.:•:•:•:•:•:•:•
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes PfNo
[]Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes [)(No
❑ Yes O'No
,Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes YNo
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes XNo
L QSf u_-A54'e, 6aAAP1e. 3/iOM o Szn+ 0-Tr Stele (CorrRYO-org
on31 y/oo, La,S-F 56•11 Sa Aflle 4/I9/99 .
P•<cm� IS I n I�06e, F rr t-e�l e �J QS hO�f" �� -1 1 S5 U(ej
lack I1 *� hOs 3'en. k) ()Lp r ` 66U� h
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signai
Date:
I

P-7, * . 'Fac lity Number: Spate of Inspection O
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below [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 XNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, El Yes /II�yNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property) /,
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes �No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes $No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes KNo
32. Do the nosh tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?. ❑ Yes (Qi No
Additional Comments and/or Drawings: ta,; �' �� �'I 11, 1r J 4 n �� Iii7nt
Ts �o; n� laSb -FarroJ ttweg0 !,Gill sen
re ce) J i n � P-a rm i + . Ke n Moo re-
C C0� �� �S Diol►'i� WetSt� U PAOL-Jq.
put E, 3 ( �g �, S-P-P -
Idol Sows
Q
, QIp� �s
Pro
alo0VP_ l; vid
N o bo r
�aI b u no+- a-
ce KP I a4, r) +5,
W hVA) ��m(� IS l ecel ( I FPJrm 1TJ"2.e— w i Gl t,-bre
OP
G'e��lec �c,rt�o� �o w pan o P-er-at�-,bo �f laoa
E

10 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number 79 2 Date of Inspection 9/27/99
Time of Inspection ]0:00 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name: Massay imelk.Fat:ms................................................................................. County:RmkittBttatnt................................... WSR0........
Owner Name: Garland ................................. 1.!'IcC011um................................................. Phone No: 91.0.92Z.-.7.030...........................................................
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Mailing Address: 2.10..MAnry..Cr.."k.RQad..................................................................5Udj&QJL..N.0 ......................................................... 2.7.025 .............
Onsite Representative:.G rlutxd..Mr,Cullttm................................................................. Integrator:
Certified Operator:,(, WAnd..G'............................ M&WItilm....................................... Operator Certification Number: 1.b.7.$3.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude 36 • 23 05 " Longitude 79 • 49 52 <.
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
® Farrow to Feeder 1000 1172
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ❑Dairy
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 1,000
Total SSLW 522,000
Number` of Lagoons ' '1 2 1❑ Subsurface Drains Present IlU Lagoon Area JU Spray Field Area
Poldtag Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges $t Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 19 No
Discharge originated at []Lagoon []Spray Field []Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: Primary 12" Secondary 36"
Freeboard (inches):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 19 No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
❑ Yes ® No
Continued on back
ft PASUt

Facility Number: 79-2 1 D f Inspection 9/27/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are not uperly addressed and/or managed through a w management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
-'1 immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
8.
Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
9.
Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
®No
Waste
Application
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Pending ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
® No
12.
Crop type
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
®No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
Nti•viol'atititis:ordeticienaies•iver'e:noted:du�iitgthis:visiY.::You:will..... no..........
eorresnotideitce: Abiif this visit. ............... .
curent waste analysis.
Reviewer/Inspector Name jDavid C. Russell
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number: 79-2 D;& Inspection 9/27/99 •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge allor below ® Yes ❑ No
_1 liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
®No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
® No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary, cover?
❑ Yes
® No
excessive odors observed.

Of
Routine O Com taint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-u of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection 0 24 hr.
C1 Permitted x
Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Not O erational Date Last Operated:
Farm Name:.......)V[4..7........�r�QL'.........._/a'h], ,r............................ Countv:... O.
5
�x',t�C?ll .d /77e C33b SF 1=703o tFA�a��,
Co /�u
Owner Name:....../..^. ,, / 1........................./.............._�................./.f................... Phone No: ��.� ....lit-1.�� -�i:7��•'-•���.(�, A,ix.y�
Facility Contact: 1 fi/�f%i/1JALP....%�.� ./A...,.,..�.....Title./.tJl...�/.J�A...................................... `P'hone No: (412.QLr�..�.......................
Mailing Address: ... I Q....l./..1/dJ..��Qf��......... /G .....C.v0.'._.................. � ct •/ � ...�Y..t. C........ Z�. o25.........................
OnsiteRepresentative: .6.2A �1A1VX.... ZW.C.L,£t.//U-fn......................... integrator:................................................
Certified Operator:,,,,,,( AAJA/,! ,Q4,,.....1„'!,C,{,,.,o,,,, G,t(. ................4...... .... Operator C rtitication Number:....... 4............................ n.
Location of Farm:`% y„ Zoe- Q,,r tt .W- M/LAi sn..l A Ai4eab,
Latitude Longitude l /7 1` M27,"
Design
Current,,'
Design Current ,,;,; ' ' ; ': Design Current ';•
Swnne , Capacity
Population,
lCattle " Capacity Population"
❑ Layer ` ❑ Dairy
';".;
❑ Non -Layer `�, ❑ Non -Dairy;
%Ode dyyiew tlR�2,!
❑ Other
Il ' ,j ',� ,,'Total DestgnCapacity'�I
�. ; x , I'_,. F Total SSLW $-�-2 0 00
Number;,of Lagoons
/Jj
❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area
g ❑Spray Field Area
-
HoldmgPonds / Solid Traps
�
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
❑ Wean [o Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
7 L
[]Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharges & Stream ImuacLs �/
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? []Yes 'RI No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other L`
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 ycs, 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 ycs, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes 'RNo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identi Fier:
/ fa � 4
Freeboard (inches): i�/�.I..MSI@lf....... L..� ............. .0 !� N..../.J...............................................................................................
/
5. Are there any immediate threw to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes XNo
Continued on back
A
3/23/99

Facility Num• 0 ol'Inspection
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any sluctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? []Excessive Pending ❑ PAN
12. Crop type r9je-4
13. Do the receiving crop differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? fie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes �0Io
❑ Yes �6lo
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes �DNo
❑ Yes >a No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes �No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes �YNo
❑ Yes �91No
❑ Yes �No
a
❑ Yes Po
[:]Yes �9 No
❑ Yes tNo
o
❑ Yes
❑ Yeso
3/23/99

Facility Number: — 4i I*f Inspection ® - •
•Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage ponp or lagoon f it to discharge at/or below WYes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? 0 CS ,A -ha Ve i ja f + Sur -flack `
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly w ' 2- ours1k'J0w U sq,V'y<Jk- ❑ Yes o
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes Yo
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 �lo
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 o
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? P.t.,,p (�, j.� Pfi� UV Plz& Yes ❑ No
A/O -2�c'Qssi de Jop-s- akeleuj
fc7f3cRX

Division of Soil JJM Water Conservation ❑ Other
Division of Water Quality
Date of Inspection 0 2
Facility Number
Time of Inspection 2 3 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered Wertified 0 Applied
for Permit E3Permitted JE3 Not Operational Q Date Last/Operated:
Farm Name:.....ie ......!c`e.......e5............................................ County: ...............
Owner Name:... I r�Nlk:•............. ....... F.I....!till............................................. Phone No-.� 4t.2 �.. ..8.;!.464
Facility Contact:. ( a!1' V..... E! iA n' .... �Title: ....... ©W. ..........�..../n................... Phone No:...................................................
MailingAddress:.;Q0 1� 0............................................................ f........................... ..........................
C
rJ, d�
OnsiteRepresentative//......._�................n....................................! ......................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:..... I?.r ° M� �..� ............................ Operator Certification Number;.........................................
Location of Farm: r4; �CS 2,g SJ" o� %YlAdfis oN ever 1Kj 70K /�aJ249, 0,V fo N �.(;
............................................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude ®• ©' 00" Longitude ®• ®' S5 «
Destgn," `, Current `k ,» Msign „-, Currents s "Design_, Current
Swme Capacity Population ; Poultry!^- Capacity Population Cattle =Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder <W. ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
' ❑Feeder to Finish ILINon-Layer 1 10Non-Dairy
[]Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
f
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacityjff
-
❑ Gilts
otal
❑ Boars n
TSSLW�
Number oitagoon6Holding Ponds 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area i
.•.-,a' ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
General
L Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ 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 gaUmin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)~
❑ Yes
No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
*0
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
�� No
7/25/97 61,� //',g,

Facility Vumber:j— • ll
8 Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? • ❑ Yes o
Structures (Laeoons.11oldinp Ponds. Flush Pits. etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes fi%No
S�cture I y7ict re 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
//
Structure 5 Structure 6
�1'
Identifier:
...` .t...................
iill,,;, i...............................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard(ft):......A.1...............................`............................................................ ....................................
.................................... ....................................
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ YeszNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes WNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes Po
(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 A No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
'yy��
❑ Yes )6No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
L
15. Crop type ... ......!i?Q..:....................................................................................... ......
.
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 I0
' 18.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
70 No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
'JNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
XNo
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
INo
l❑
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
For
For_
Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
Certified or Permitted Facilities
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
KNo
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
OJ No
0
No.violationsor deficieitdis.wem h6tedd6ring this:visit. You:will receive ito ftirfli6
correspotideikO aboitt tbis visit::
7/25/97

Facility Number I Date of Inspection 71
Time of Inspection
0 Registered 0 Certified 0 Applied for Permit [3 Permitted [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ,
r GG a�
Farm Name: .��..��..5�..�.......... `�.EEK.......� County: ....�c..Q.....�..%...........fr�A.l..tt......
Owner Name:
Facility Contact:
Title:
Phone No:
Phone No:
MailingAddress: ................../..................................................... r........................................................................................................................................,
OnsiteRepresentative: ....... Cm4t.�-�1:[4�P �.........��-V'A'"1.....,. Integrator:......................................................................................
.......... L............._L
Certified Operator: ..................................................
Location of Farm:
Operator Certification Number, .........................................
Latitude Longitude
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
/0 No
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
Discharge originated at: [I Lagoon [I Spray Field [I Other
lIg
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
t6No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
J!fNo
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
PNo
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ONo
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
,�No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
/EfNo
maintenance/improvement?
1
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
,l'J No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
❑ Yes
['No
7/25/97
Continued on back

facility Number: —7,1
40
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on*which need to be properly closed?
❑ Yes QA�o
Structures (Laeoons.Holdine Ponds Flush Pits etc.)
1/
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
❑ Yes XNo
{{ppSt��ructt�ulyr//e� 1 Structure2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .11..F�l%!.1./.16/.........�l..Tr..`!.M..!.!..y. .................................... ...................................
Structure 6
Freeboard(ft):............ f.................. .... ......... 3..... j............... ................................... .................................... ....................................
....................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes E'No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes VNo
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
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 VIYes
T
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes 1�10
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ��?...(,..L) ... (;......... ............ .................................... .................. .....................................................................................................�.....�...
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes I ro
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes ONo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ No
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
/nes
❑ Yes No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes No
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes 0""No
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 9N0
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? (yYes 2No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes No
0 No.violtitioitioc deficiencies: we re noted during this:visit. You.-wiil} receive no further:
correspondence dh"out this:visit.
2H, A)LrE_0 to%TZs 6
J
DNL UEZ-/aS wed 4au,;x4X.6EV C)O
d, R ES m e- 1:) 117 .
F4&57-/2.S 61-1- t% 6
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /1 i 1, Cfit y*lt/0 ( r _ — Date: A

Facility Number v
❑ Applied for Permit
❑ Permitted
❑ Not Operational Date Last Operated: .................................
Farm Name:.... la3SQGt....S ! ?!......... 1!k$..__...._.......__....._........._......,
County: ..... .1N�7 ` �............
Land Owner Name: .... 5, QiQ�[}M _� lu!h ...... ................ ..... Phone No:_. ?� b4.
jJ ��,�a ��i� �,o Z7 sZ�y
Facility Conctact:.�? ./ ......................... .................._............. Title:....... W^�e2............... Phone No: ..................... _...................................
Mailing Address:._6z ..... f..._`-5 r..fib.._................................ /..° G/ f..............// v`C
�_7..o.ZS
Onsite Representative: .06`114"1.........................-
Integrator: ........................... _............ 4... _................................
Certified Operator: ...... �`IX G�YgwYl. ......, Operator Certificatin u!Oer:....................................._..
Location of Farm: pjle1 %�% %SO�J IV,`.
Latitude EUIOE`L`FVYJ°` Longitude IM10®,77-111
Veneral
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 gaVmin?
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
4/30/97 maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes 04NO
❑ Yes NNo
❑ Yes,.6No
❑ Yes )dNo
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ Yes
"No
❑ Yes
)gNo
❑ Yes
No
Continued
on back

Facility Number:..,. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
6. Is -facility not in compliance with any a0able setback criteria in effect at the time of On? ❑ Yes *0
7l Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes )<No
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes KIo
Structures (Lagoons and/or Holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (11): Structure 1 .Str1i� p 2 Structure 3
.........�............ ..........._JJ.............. ..........................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
)(Yes ❑ No
Stricture 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structur�e ^lackapeqqq to min' um o maxi um liqui levjI markers?
Waste Application HA hf/T � ' A_ �eVz/�C IUW Gr��IC �eU�
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type_.e.f................................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
For Certified Facilities Only
22. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
23. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
24. Does record keeping need improvement?
............................
❑ Yes )<No
❑ Yes VNo
❑ Yes )� No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes tQ No
❑ Yes VNO
❑ Yes �6o
❑ Yes *b
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes o
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
'Comments (refer to gdesstion #) E,xplam`any YES aasweis and/or any reeomrnegdahons or any other comments
Use,drawmgs,of facility to�better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary)
04ke'�,"�� /t
IP J(L iAl St Coe/e�o��_ is /�Q01C. (� k Ablue. Q
JvSI >J e�c �et,tl,. rs (jv b�=�0/4Lak btu ��r-A 00 w612k�
Oereo�, 3y Acxf5 AeCI, /)
��\ A.i(:lv�i�e tq�5
`i�►`}� LLN
0 rL 6
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: ?(70 70 k
cc: Division of Water Quality, Water Quality section, Facility Assessment Unit
4/30/97