820488_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH { H UAHULiNA
Department of Environmental Qua

-�� poe-D9 ,I
iv' sion of Water Quality
==Ilityumber $Z �8 ('� Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
i
Type of Visit O'Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Routine Q Complaint O Follow up O Referral 4 Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /2 -/9' OS Arrival Time: /D: ri(o Departure Time: County: � rQ^/ Region: j:5-&(,7
Farm Name: P Y C,� o t # �i Owner Email:
Owner Name: 01411 Q Ile, ryI": Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: JJ �A
Facility Contact: A�uG All'eMOf'J d Title: �,rlV, r Phone No:
Onsite Representative: b0 u 9 14' CSN d — Integrator: -7-b 1's-1 S
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =o =' = « Longitude: =0=1 = k
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
Design Current11 �. Design Current
C►opacity Population Wet Ponitryy Capacity Population
❑ Layer
I 51C] Non -Layer I I
Design Current
Cattle Capacity P501.131 an
❑ Dai Cow
Dairy Calf
® Feeder to Finish
735 _:
❑ Dairy Heifer
ElFarrow to Wean{
�z--',
�Dcy Poultry
D
❑ Cow
El Farrow to Feeder
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
❑ Non -Dairy
El Farrow to Finish
❑`La Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
El Non -La ers
s.t
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
Pullet
❑s
❑Beef Brood Coyd
❑ Yes
— . ❑ Turkeys
.
Other
❑ Other
❑ Turkey Poults
t'` ❑ Other
Number of Structures:
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
[:1 Yes
❑ No
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
U No
[TN'
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[--]No
Bf4A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
D<A
❑ NE
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)
[:1 Yes
❑ No
�,/
C] NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
B<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
0 -mo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page.1 of 3
12/28104
Continued

Facility Number:
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: &t A
❑Yes ON.
❑ Yes 214o -
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
Spillway?: N0
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. D Yes
9-mo�
❑ NA ❑ NE
Designed Freeboard (in): l 9
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ;� Date: !z-/9-2008
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Observed Freeboard (in): $
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
El Yes
'
ETINo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑" ]leo
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
B-T�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
if any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[]Tta
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[}N'o-'
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
01q-0-
[INA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Ap2lication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
2 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
1 I.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. D Yes
9-mo�
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ;� Date: !z-/9-2008
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12_
Crop type(s)NNu���
13.
Soil type(s) /1/D /� (nJat�
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
,��
L� No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
L7 �o
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[] Yes
B-T�o
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
❑"5o
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
0-N-6
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refe�ta question #f) �EaplainanyYES answers�and/or�aoy, rernmmadafions or any other comments.
Use drawit�gs�,iiffaciliry to betterexlatn sttnarions. (use a ddEhva°algagres as aeeessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name F_R j�e,✓ %S ", phone; 910. x/33.333a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ;� Date: !z-/9-2008
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: S2 — 88 Date of Inspection /9-48
Required Records & Documents �,/
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes L7 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [3<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ wup ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps [:1 Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 9<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and l" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
B'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
9 -Ko'
❑ NA
❑ NE
25,
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
9'1Go
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
MIN.
❑ NA
❑ NE
2T
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
E'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
ISNo
❑ 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
to
❑ 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
IRNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
tj1vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12/28/04

t
1.31�ws eN4Vcd
1 Z1a7/2oo7
Facility Number g2 $$
0 Division of Water Quality
0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up Q Referral 0 Emergency O Other [] Denied Access
Date of Visit: 3 - D Arrival Time: $:30 Departure Time: //' p , y County: Region:
Farm Name:„Rny-k Ciwo Ait x,- (,oOwner Email:
Owner Name: 1 /,'r,6 t dgL A Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: t/l Title: 6W. f t'l �/
Phone No:
Onsite Representative: &UG W t ci Integrator:
Certified Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
I Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Othcr
Latitude: =0
=d
0 Longitude: = o='=”
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La er
I❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ 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 -trade?
Cattle
Design Current,
Capacity Population
. d_
❑ Dai Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ 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 [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
[} Yes
No
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El Yes
Q9 No
El NA
El NE
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: $Z —
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & 'Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes [9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EX No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Spillway?:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /O Yl— Z6467
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l O lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
Designed Freeboard (in):
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
Observed Freeboard (in):
Crop type(s) cy-m LA ,rc , l�l'11 r& � �l /r►� �llt%4q,�=s
13.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?NA
❑Yes
No
[I NA
NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
0 No
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?
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
I
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
f
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[ONo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /O Yl— Z6467
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l O lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12.
Crop type(s) cy-m LA ,rc , l�l'11 r& � �l /r►� �llt%4q,�=s
13.
Soil type(s) Al- A Q
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes
EjfNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of property operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
b�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #: Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments... 4.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name Rj< Kj ZQV 4t 5 Phone.• 1/0 r f{r3. 3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /O Yl— Z6467
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Z — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [S No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
;8 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28_
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
0 N
❑ NA
[] NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or
12/28104

Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: $-ZZ��(o Arrival Time: Departure Time: S5 County: d� s�"� Region
Farm Name: Pr ll Cp __ Owner Email:
Owner Name:
P//hone:
Mailing Address: __�19, gor .3vv Ab rIAl AJI— Zg.3�fa
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: a Title: Phone No: „ 910, _f vO1 G/3]
Onsite Representative: Integrator: T-2>
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [� e = [� N Longitude: =1 0 0 f = v
11 Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Papula#ion
Wet Poultry Capacity 13opulation
Cattle Capacity Population
to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Dai Co
to Feeder
❑ Non -La er
❑ Dai Calfr
to Finish
❑ NA
❑ Dai Heifer
to Wean
ry Poultry
❑ © Cow
to Feeder
'''"3Non-Dairyw
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
FFeedF
to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
IxNo
❑ Pullets❑
❑ Beef Brood Co
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
Turke s
qNo
❑ NA
❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other
Number of Structures:
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[WNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
EINE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
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)
❑ Yes
IxNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
RNo
❑ NA
EINE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12/28/04
Continued

Z
13. Soil type(s) ,g
A6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
` Facility Number: $Z — Zy Date of Inspection
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
J�I No
❑ NA EINE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[:]Yes
ERNo
❑ NA EINE
-Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
❑ NE
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): � //g
7 !�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
7No
❑ 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
I? No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[2FNe
❑ 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
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
W No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[:]Yes
R No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) _ el7ttlrlt�f .� £ � � I
Z
13. Soil type(s) ,g
A6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
'-MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
�k 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
[51 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
?Comments {refer to questinit #): Explain any YES ansers'and/or anyrecommendations or:any outer comments.
.'Use.drawings of facility to better explain situations {usessdditional pages'asnecessary)
A6
Reviewer/Inspector Name ;
e�t/.,3F
-, Phone: 9/O, X33, ,�13
Reviewer/]nspector Signature:
Date: —9 -oz— zad (o
Page 2 of 3 - 12128104 Continued

P
# t
Facility Number: $Z — sl Date of Inspection 8-ZZ'D
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes BNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes TZ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
EffNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
A No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
Em No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ffl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
�1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
V1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30_
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
�] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
C?No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional,Comments and/or Drawings: ;=
HI
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

ri
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit *Routine a Complaint O Follow up O Referral a Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: LSI Arrival Time: OA a Departure Time: County: — Region: _6cn
Farm Name: P,r f{ t A., H. It _# �l _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: —---1p.'��.'«,r, —PGC1,49 Phone: ---g10- _S�f 4► — t7� ��
Mailing Address: _Qx -1J _ AZ 6
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �� MJ'�..,e. �f _ Title: Phone No:
N �rr•MrI
Onsite Representative: Integrator: T124
Certified Operator: /7.srl : Operator Certification Number: j gY!?
Back-up Operator: _ Back-up Certification Number: 'T*b!fr
Location of Farm:
Latitude: =0 =
o= 6 0 Longitude: =0=1
Design Current Design CurrentYx}
YCapacity
++Design Current
Swine Pop_ulaho Ate:.. Wet Poal 'p
Ca act Po` elation
h 1?
Cattle "� ,Ca aCi Po elation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Dai Cow
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑Non -La et
❑ Dairy Calf
eerier to Finish
�� SR
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
x s Dr►' Pani`r
�"
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder:
Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑Beef Stocker
❑Gilts❑Beef
❑ Non -Layers
Feeder
❑ Boars
t ❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑Beef Brood Co
Other',',
r 7
t ❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
� ❑ Other
Num' -'e of Structufes:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes D<o ❑ 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 discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ) F] yes E No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [21'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State ❑ Yes [2To ❑ NA ❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12/28/04 Continued

�ra.r�y � S GnV'k1 ' : 1 Phone 910 �!8 - IsyIexlVb
Reviewer/inspector Name ; lYb�1(.,�4 < ` ,
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: ,? - 9-05- _
12/28/04 Continued
Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
No
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
O
❑ 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?: /70
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 4201'
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
PNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
ErNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures tack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Q'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
[I2 Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
I0. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
[3'No
❑ NA ❑ NE
mai ntenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ YesrNO
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% ori 0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable CropWindow ❑ Evidenceof Wind Drifl ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop types) y LJ�rnfNO[l.� /lay Bee/"VQA- , 6jrA7 P_ _ W.'ajSLLi1J1a/
4
13. Soil type(s) _ Ci/a<7i W IS/0IT- _
__,�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
[__1 Yes
LTJ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
DIN
❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination, El Yes
DNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[ZNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
L/J No
❑ NA ❑ NE
�ra.r�y � S GnV'k1 ' : 1 Phone 910 �!8 - IsyIexlVb
Reviewer/inspector Name ; lYb�1(.,�4 < ` ,
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date: ,? - 9-05- _
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records S Documents
19. Did the facility fail ^to have Certificate of Coverage R Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Ej-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ yes P<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.[:1[_1 �.r
❑�' , fs El Ct�'sts
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.S _> a o ❑ 'Yes [-�-N- ElNA ❑ NE
12-tv y v,/G .4 -0 �o vs R- 7
❑ Ww4c. cation ❑ d ❑ ' . ❑ -,* psis ❑ ;zwA• -r ❑ tion
❑ Rainfall ❑ &tect g ❑jCR -Yield ❑ _ , ❑ ns
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 flail 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 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
E3 -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
H'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
aNE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
9'1t1E
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [TIE
❑ Yes 2No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ORo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2 -leo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 21 o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2f4o ❑'NA ❑ NE
Addltioinal Comments and/or Drawings:
i) / -r L t�oa4�
/�O �eiM%�,�� 'f�If �een dOn� D+s -14.'5 ra, �ill`f y�Gtr 4! �a.5 yCp/`
FGr�
led
12/28/04

7 Facility Number II)ateoffisit:Es-72-�vv(+Time:E�
O Not Operational O Below Threshold
Q'Permitted Q Ceertified © Conditionally/�Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ........ �i.. ...�!!...... ...G! !`_S�'' ......»............ County:
Owner Name: '1 #4'r+ Phone No: 9�a" 52f — 0A
?Mailing Address: f °�.». X NC Ae
Facility Contact: ......71)pNi�d ... �._ Title:...»"'". Phone No:
Onsite Representative:.._.... ---- L� ! �^'�a �� .w .. .... Integrator:D�+'1 _ _ ......____--
Certified Operator:___ __•_ Aevw+b0J _ _T ^_ Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Orlslw_ine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 46 Longitude • Z "
Discharges & Stream 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 State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow ingal/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 0f4o
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ❑allo
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3
Identiter:......... _.... I ................. .................. ....... ..__---
Freeboard (inches):
12112103
❑ Spillway
Structure 4 Structure 5
❑ Yes Mfio
Structure 6
Continued

Facility Number: — `tom g Date of inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
2,90
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
[H'Fio
closure plan?
��-�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: SZ21 d
(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
['To
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
2'Ro
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximurn and minimum Liquid level
❑ Yes
B�So
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10_ Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
MggQ
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[Er<0
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type qq a 0 W srzj
13_ Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
&, rNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[•RNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
2No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
311' 0
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
©'No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[IIo
Odor Issues
IT Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes 2fto
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
I8. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes Dlfio
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes [bio
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.
Com {ref s toaL
use drawer f$o7q�euyestho betterpanFnss wnaaeyedons tauyoemr
s situsdoasf(use sddst:ona! 1eCPy 0 _ g N
-p-a.ges a-`sn-ec-e:s --y
�'_fix--__.:=_•_x=:x-"- "c'.sr '.�-=
�r�1 `k;C ids ++t rte I n tat `ii+ t.rttc t F., wilt �t &4-
Reviewer/Insp eCtAr Name x
��-�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: SZ21 d
12112/03 V Continued

Facility Number: .Z _ Date of Inspectionee
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Bf4o
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
Q'flo
23. Does record kee ing need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
f
❑ 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
2No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ff &o
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
[kf4o
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
[�lo
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
2 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
eNo
31. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
dditional Coirkmeats andltar Drawings
aco���
`how t,>�
4
Hz
12112103

❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Reviews
DW Q Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection .k.
A Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DIVO insutction 0 Follow -un of DSWC review 0 other
Date of Inspection 115, O
Facility Number Time of Inspection FILMgj 124 hr. (hh:mm)
1; Applied Not Operational Date Last Operated:
� Registered Certified � A lied for Permit . (] Pettnitted
..-... + C,
•.••
County:....... Farm Name. ....... ----- ...........................................
J f
Owner Name: ,.........TPA ...... �S.t':.............- .. Phone No: L1.LQk��.�.",,'���8�? .....................
Facility Contact:...s!a....1.lJ.t..1!!A.tt.4..................... Title :............ .................................................... Phone No:...................................................
'Mailing Address: ...... C.._Q...�.d..ae.....� PQ ................................................. ....... ,............ ...A.1Gt►►��?✓!.......���?vY-..�.�1�.......... __ 3�.a..
Onsite Representative: ....... atv --..1 - ..+✓t o, .......................................---.... Integrator: -,..--•.c• .................. - ..- - ------ _.
Certified Operator: ....................-------....- . - Operator CertiEicatisrn Ntentber;-- .. ........
Location of Farm:
ME0
Latitude • L t' Longitude 4 "
Design - Current Design 'Current Design
Current;
Swine:.Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Populatio l`
'.:.
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Layer 1❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -hairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder 10 Other I
❑Farrow to Finish Total sDesign Capacity .
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars , Total SSLW•.
Number of Lagoons HaldingPonds U ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ t.agoon ,arra ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System �
General
L Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement'?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge ori fi}inated at: ❑ Lagoon 0 Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, wa: the conveyance man-made?
b. if discharge is observed, did it reach Surlace Water? (if yes. til?tltV DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galfmin?
d. Duvs discharge bypass a [s-aon system? (If yes. notify DWQ)
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
5. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility tail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125197
❑ Yes
QrNo
❑ Yes
bio
❑ Yes
Ef No
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ Yes
1--
❑ Yes
0
Q�No
❑ Yes
(a, To
❑ Yes
LI No
❑ Yes
ll—No
❑ Yes
El -No
❑ Yes
KNo
Continued on back

0 � t
F facility Number: — LIS
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be property closed'?
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds. Pits, etc.1
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ?::S-
. .........................................................................................
Freeboard (ft): .......... Z,, .5
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
[] Yes ® No
❑ Yes K No
Structure 4 Structure. S Structure 6
1 I. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
12. Do anv of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
IVaste application
14. is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMP, orr runoff entering waters of the `State, notify DWQ)
l5. Crop type ...... LeL�N V.i`� V......... , r.........� �.z.pl..........................................................................................
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 reviewrinspection with on-site representative?
22_ Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
® No.violations or d6 icier' cies we're'noted during this:visit..You".will receiveno ftirther'
correspondence alight this. visit'.-,.,;
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes © No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [0 No
❑ Yes 1O.No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes P No
❑ Yes 4h No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [1] No
❑ Yes [P No
❑ Yes 51 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Comments (refer to question #)-,.Explain any YES answers and/o'r an} recomn endations or any,otlter comrneastr.' -
Use s of iacil_ity to, better explain situations: (use additional pages:asnecessary):
t
Ua tkS t,, �(�s�n P► h-vC 6e.e. - r-efr,Y'4
�. Qta.rJe `6 c,!>Awoe_ egor i 43 .4eag la4vo^
7/25197
- F
Re viewer/nspectnr Name
Date: Signature: C
10444 2
C- ,