820497_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NORTH CAROLINA
Department of Environmental Qua

(3i
Type of Visit: gColiance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
L Date of Visit: �'— Arrival Time: Departure Time: , f5 461 County: 0 /) Region:1`1Z L-)
Farm Name: Cl ea"- w04,- A& ase—y Owner Email:
j
Owner Name: q �ec.t OLM 11y L: Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: CUB rS �awu("[a(� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative:
rr
Certified Operator: A 4 0,4�
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Integrator: N—1
Certification Number: L 8-3 7�3
Certification Number:
Longitude:
x_,:aDesign Gurrent
Design
Current
Design Gurrent
Swine. `*Capacity Pop.
Wet PoWtry
Capacity
Pop.
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
E La er
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
1171 1%5 5
]Non -Layer I
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Feeder to Finish i
Farrow to Wean
Design
Gurrent
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , Poulti
Layers
Ca aei
P.o
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Turkey PouIts
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes E2,96 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance than -made? []Yes ❑ No J3'1'A ❑ 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 [3 A ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes E3<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued
ll

Facili Number: VZ- - Date of Ins eetion:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is stor2tge capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
Q--Noo
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
D- -A-
❑ NE
Structure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure
6
Identifier:
Spillway?. -
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): r2 2-
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
�o
❑ 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
[]l c
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[_jNII'
❑ 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
❑ NA
❑ N E
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
[] NE
maintenance or improvement'?
1 1. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0-Vio 0 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
L',l3� s'G0
i 2. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s): -_ CIO1 %Ve . F-M— -
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes �o [DNA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes C 54 ❑ NA: ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation desigm or wettable ❑ Yes [R-Nr ❑ NA ❑ NE,
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
l S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment`?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes P--Vo^ ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑_ ❑ NA ❑ NE
19, Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Q11o^
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement`? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
[] Yes
[�-�i�lo ^
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
Q-Xt
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
D'IVo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

fa
Facility Number: - Date of Inspection: Z
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Qlo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �lo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
Q-Ko— ❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
E4-Ko--❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
QAlar ❑ NA
❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[�'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[r'No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ilk 11'0 ❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
[E o ❑ NA
❑ NE
34, Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
L_ ,< ❑ NA
❑ NI
Comments (refer to question #}: Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility top he explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
dot} Cy 1 `b✓��
� j
O ILI 77U vta�
70
j
Revi ewer/] nspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
Page 3 of 3
i I 1 phone.7 10 4 q 3
re: Date: { 1 q
21412015

Type of visit: 4e Uomplianee Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit: 40rRoutine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: } Departure Time: ! ,Sf County:
Farm Name: Cliea.c.. to AW4/�- X%(jOwner Email:
Owner Name: D'",vrCh j+�`� f ur/N�j Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: `? *% t�j� P�.Jr �i1 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: W-$ - 5
Certified Operator: �,4Jt�2ELy ��r1 Certification Number: / 7�
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current
Design Current=-
Design Current
Swine
Capacity- Pop.
Wet Poftltr} Pop:
CaEtle Capacity Pap.
yCapactty
Wean to Finish
iryCow
Wean to Feeder
7S v3
Non-1_avcr
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
- _
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
-Design Current
D Caw
Farrow to Feeder
Dr P,aultr " Ca act Po
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Cilts
Non-[ a ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
_
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Turke Poults
Other "'
F-Fother
Other
Discharges and Stream Imaacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
E3-tff- ❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a_ Was the conveyance tnan-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[TN- A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
C:rNA
❑ 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
Ejr o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [;Die-- E] NA ONE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No �A ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 9110
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [g-NQo ❑ 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 E4 ❑ 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
Ea<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[]rNo
❑ 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
E2-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
btrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
1 I. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes �o [DNA ❑ 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): d oil !6 C wig
13. Soil Type(s): Cjp A10
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 ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes CD -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 �o ❑ NA ❑ NE
RRe aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes Ea"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [] Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [�J`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? ❑ Yes [;3INo
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [/]"No
❑NA ❑NE
0 Weather Code
Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Insaection:
24. Did. the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
B-<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check
❑ Yes
oe
[N3 o
❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[3-Nb
❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[R"IGo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
2$. 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.
34. 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 CAW vW.
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 [a< ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ea No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ea"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes QeNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes El"No
❑ Yes [:YNo
[:]Yes [j No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 3 of 3 2142015

F\
Type of visit: U Uompuance inspection U operation Review U Structure ]Evaluation U 1reclhnical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: / Departure Time: _ County:_ Region:
Farm Name: rye Owner Email:
Owner Name:e.41i Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: e4 S SA,~Ad _ Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: A
Certified Operator: Y/L Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Design Current
Swine T Capacity- Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wet Poultry
ILayer
Design Current
Capacity Pop.
I
Desiign Cezrrent
Cattle Capacity Pap.
Dairy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Lf
Non -La cr
D . I;uult ,
I
Design Current
Ca aci P.o
Dairy Calf
Dai Heifer
Dry Cow
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turke s
Poults
10ther
Gilts
Boars
HerKTurka
Other I I
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Wlw
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Uq�9A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
[-]Yes
[:]No
6kA
❑ 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
0 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 3 21412015 Cositnued

Facili Number: L4 ty jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[tom❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
[:]Yes
❑ No
2 A
❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
n
Observed Freeboard (in): _' 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
ET1�o
❑ 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
Io
❑ 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
e l�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
g-Ko
❑ NA
❑ WE
(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
[21�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
PrNo
❑ 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 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): c t h (7
13. Soil Type(s): b _ez % V O CrA t1"9
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
ZNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
C?jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
2-110
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
La -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[�/o
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps 0 Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [] Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[—]Yes
eNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of inspection:IV j
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes I`T o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ YesEr-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 1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issuer
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 1 - Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond C] Other:
❑ Yes CalRo ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [,a o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ONo ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? [:]Yes �To ❑ 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 [Z(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ff): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments;'
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�(
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
c
Phone: ~ � i
Date: 91ZA
21412011

AIvt(s 'S-1 —r
(Type of Visit: QComp ' ce Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 `j I Departure Time: County: �1 r q
Farm Name: (,��r �" Owner Email:
Owner Name: �JLiI �e�'l �— t��, I `--U./ L4A Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region q_��
Facility Contact: ai S Li.l t� Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: 0( 13
Certified Operator: (fit "1 Certification Number: f .3 7-
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Design Current : " Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop. Wet+Poultry Capacity Pap.
Cattle
Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
117
Non -La erI I
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design
Carr ent
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
pa _
P,o
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Gilts
Non-Laye
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
riBeef Brood Cow
Turke s
Other
TurkeyPoults
Other
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 ®'11To__[3 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
F NA
EE'i A
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[3NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[Rfito
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - 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
C]-'NA
❑ NE
Structure I 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
[21-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[E-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7- Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
b] 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
[3l�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
E3 Yes
Q<
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[allo
❑ 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): �cM 1%j t) C Gs
13. Soil Type(s): a NS
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
(E[I
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[DX6
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
C No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
E� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
l8. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
2 ""
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
es❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
ONE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I " Rainfall Inspections
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
[-]Yes
Ef_to
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[:]Yes
L.:J
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of ins ection: d
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Q14o ` ❑ NA ❑ NE
25_ Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Q-go_ ❑ 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 k-rr ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? 0 Yes 0-Ko- ❑ 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:
❑ Yes
L:7 o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
EfNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Vo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E No
❑ NA
❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWNP? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? [:]Yes EjlNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3

n:.
1)1tt-j b
i`on of Water Qnab
Faeilita, Number - ®Division of Soil and V4'ater Consen ation
• Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: ompl'ance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: outine O Complaint 0 Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Regiol-5-1b
Farm Name: _IL,�a`L�l� Owner Email:
Owner Name: ',��A KA-A W ralllAf r �� Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Cuy$ l 7 13a(!!yAk te: ::r
Phone:
Onsite Representative: Integrator: . &6
Certified Operator: ,fl e�(��,t/t Certification: Number: ,r iy-3 72
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design C►urrent
b, f Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet;Ptiultry Capacity Pop.
Cattle' Capacity Pop.
...._..
Wean to Finish
Layer
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
=
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
�: r�"Design Current "
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D � �Poattrv,�'=�r,�.Ga ae�h� P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
Other . . _"`
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
P<A
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q4A
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
[] 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 3 21412011 Continued

Facility,Number. v C 1 C0 141
- Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4.Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
[ o D NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No ErNX
❑ NE
Structure I 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
EyNo ❑ 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
❑-QO ❑ 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
[3a4a- ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Ycs
d1' ❑ 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
E3,Va-_❑ 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
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): �J _'r- ZjC'- J (d G
13. Soil Type(s): W1
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
GD X6 ❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
NA
❑.NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
o ❑ 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
NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
Lld O ❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
io� ❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspection ¢ ❑ Sludge Survey
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 L1 'V0 ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Ins ection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ED_Na�fl NA ❑ NE
A Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [J_Np, ❑ 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 EE "'o "1_J NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑.Aim❑ 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? ❑ Yes ' No
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 2<0
34. Does the facility require a follow -up -visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes Rlo
Comments (refer to question#) Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other a
;e drawings of
C4,z�
4gwce 'Cu"
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
it situations (use additional pages as necessary).
flo-n p
t�_ �-- 13
V
qt, 1 -7 i 6 __r / f 4?
❑ Yes
D-T"o ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
E3<o ❑ NA
❑ NE
[:]Yes
❑�1Vo ❑ NA
❑ NE
[] Yes
No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
- 16 r,
d-�t 7
�z-� ti 1 J�,
y �y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: 'Zn SA Date:
V—
Page 3 of 3

t ype of visit. k&i c�ompuance inspection v uperanan xevrew �„j acructure c.vaivanon u i eenmcai Assistance
Reason for Visit: OJ Rmpoatine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: Region: F
Farm Name: �� U Owner Email:
Owner Name: L Phone:
Mailing Address: t.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 1.C3 Title: Phone:
Onsite Representative: ` Integrator: F_n44 yru i
T
Certified Operator: 4 Certification Number: I Ur 01
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current :_*" Vest gns Current'
;. Design
Current
Swine
Capacity P. Wet�P.oultry -xCap ''sty P.
^Cattle. Capacity
Pop.
p
s
Wean to Finish
Layer
Dairy Cow
airy Calf
Wean to Feeder
Non -La er
I I
Feeder to Finish
xr
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
. i
DeSvlgn Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
y
D . Poult . _ Ca ace P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
$eef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
-
Other
Turkey Poults
Other
10ther
I'
Dischar es and Stream lm acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes . 10 ❑ NA ❑ NT
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
LffNA
[] NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[Po<A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
❑ Yes
❑.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: ILL- Date of Inspection: Ail I
Waste Collection & Treatment ,—�,�
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes L.Zl4o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: V
Designed Freeboard (in): 5 -
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes LSd i"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not property addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes [B o ❑ 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? ( 'es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ej'5Io ❑ 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 D-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑'Ko-' ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 2 5o ❑ 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. Crap Type(s): _ Ce,5 fa_ i`��. OAZW %'X pf
A",(
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
�o
❑ 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
[r No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
[�fo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[4,3l;r0
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
N
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[]
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
ETNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Eno
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [!I -No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [allo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: - 113ate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes RrNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes �o ❑ 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 lass assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑Yes QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [:4-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 &<o ❑ NA [] NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes [allo ❑ 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
[ ?1q_o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Eg-Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
C;J-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 YEm S answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other coments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
S V
7,
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
t
Phonb:(O
Date:
2/4120I1

I-ype of visit: ty2outine
Rance Inspection U operation tteview U structure Lvatuation U I.ectinicai Assistance
Reason for Visit: O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral Q Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: ;l County:
Farm Name: �� �q[� L-�>`fZ N�R� 1 _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: �) AlZ4i`t�1 1'AtNrt \.r ARt�s_ `f t+C • Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region: FRb
Facility Contact: %J(L-Vq E� _Title: Phone: Onsite Representative: AM Q Integrator: 11RD&I -d
Certified Operator: Anz��� lye, pgtt flI t►l _ _ Certification Number: ^183'10
It
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Bill Desi
ilDesign Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity
Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Cattle Capacity Pap.
Dai Cow
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
%t'l
airy Calf
cXo
Feeder to Finish
_ ` `"
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D , P,oul_ . Ca aci $o ,
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
on -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
-
Turkeys
111Ir
Turkey Poults
Other
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 Eq No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [] No �NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes [:]No Ctr'NA C] NE
[:]Yes [:]No
[:]Yes D3_1�0
❑ Yes [EN0
C3 NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
C] NE
[3 NA
C] NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Sa, - ' Date of Inspection. /
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes [:]No ONA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): I C'I A111 jQ
Observed Freeboard (in), 33�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? [:]Yes E3"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 dNo ❑ 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 [goNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ffNo ❑ 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 Da"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10_ Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes eNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ TotaI 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): MP►Y) .G.b. CoRl1. W1+ a�} �D�I6€INN 5�"01 Pt�n
13. Soil Type(s): 9A
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[f No
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
EDNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
H'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
0 Yes
Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[ErNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists [:]Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers 0 Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [t"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [] Yes ❑ No ETINA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number. - LA 00 Date of Inspection: Qa
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes [TNo ❑ 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 [g�'Vo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [—]Yes [:]No 2!fNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [:]Yes Ej"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
[qlNo
❑ 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
eNo
❑ 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
[trNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
E(T,qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
[F(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Date.
21412011

type of Visit: t:7Uom pi iance Inspection U operation Review U Structure l✓valuation V l echntcal Assistance
Reason for Visit: tine O Complaint ( Follow-up O Referral O Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Timer Departure Time:County: Region:
Farm Name: _ Ownn'e—r`EEma�il:
Owner Name: _ p PG(t i l—U7rw- , tsc,. Phone:
Mailing Address-,
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: B.:L-7wi U4. Title: _ : Phone:
Onsite Representative: zt Integrator: '' 6
Certified Operator: �iC3e C]lhf S_ POL -OfCertification Number: �� �VD
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Longitude:
Design Current ` Design Current `=
Design Current
Swine
C*apacity Popes "wet �Poultrj Capacity Pop :_
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
La er
Daffy Cow
Wean to Feeder
i Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish—
5 ' j'
Dairy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
-_ :; Design Current _
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D . l?�oulk . Ca aci P,o
Non-Da'ry
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
Other
Turke Polllts
Other
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 pan 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 �oKo"' ❑ NA ❑ NE
[:]Yes ❑ No [ ❑ NE
❑ Yes [:]No [g4K ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NE
❑ Yes P-116' ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes P-Tqo— ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Ins action:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [911t o ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No [aNA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 0 Z� _ #3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes R<o ❑ 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 t—"o ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate publie health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
©,<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
2-<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
KKo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Ill- o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
2-N'o
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):(_9-V
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Q o
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving Crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
[j�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
[9' o
❑ NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Ea<o
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[ijoI'Qo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Reauired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [:]Yes [B "o ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [D,? rt — ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0-<o ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis [:]Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections ❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes ED-w ' ❑ NA NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili .Number: - Y77Bate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? 0 Yes g-Ko 0 NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check Yes g-Ka NA NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
0 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
& o NA
[] NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Yes
[] No [] NA
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
Yes
E34W— [] NA
NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
[] Yes
®'No NA
NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
[:]Yes
0;].M ❑ 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
[9-Ko' [] NA
NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
NA
NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
Yes
r4 o NA
NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Yes
03 ie NA
NE
Comments (refer to question # Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other, commentsWA
Use drawings of facility to.lie&r explain situations (use .additional pages as necessary):..
Reviewer/lnspector Name:
Phone: (�
Reviewer/Inspector Signa e:i�
Bate: 7J7 /
11
Page 3 of 3
41201

type of Visit WoCompliance Inspection U Operation Review , U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I /p Arrival Time- 17 Departure Time: County: Region:
Farm Name: �gu�a�� �Gtf�'V Owner Email:
Owner Name: TAg221 aZ r u! ?i zrre- 5I Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
FacilityContact: _(fiGm U2 , G G Title: _�r11eltC If— Phone No:
Onsite Representative: ('�✓�>✓C /�0�7"G- Integrator:
Certified Operator: �,I 7%� — t e-- rC Operator Certific ion Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: E=1 O a u Longitude: =° = 6 = W
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
ii'et Poultry C+opacity Population
Cattle C**opacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ DairyCow
Wean to Feeder
❑ Non -Layer
❑ DairyCalf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ DairyHeifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ La ers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑Non -Layers
El Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turkeys
L?ther
JEJ Other
❑ Turkey Pou Its I>
❑Other
Number o€ Structures:>
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?
❑ Yes (-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
El NA
❑NE
❑Yes
❑No
❑ Yes
J&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page ! of 3 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 Eff 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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): j
e
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes 9-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 C&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 El 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 RNo ❑ 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) .._./ /f�r��•I�YBf
13. Soil type(s) Alin
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 acre determination ? ❑ Yes 23- No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 2 -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments {refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations REMORSE other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better egpiain situations. {use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Dame �I _ lam.. r Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /'9
Page 2 of 3 - P- 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
i Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes J�jNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design b El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
8.t4o
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
L.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
J.No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PEAT) certification?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ 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
BNo
❑ 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
E.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
951 No
❑ NA
ElNE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
JZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

'' 1A15 1z -09- wa` 44_ .
Type of Visit (j"O,,ompliance Inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit Er outine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: V2 Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: S� T�; .�/ Region:
Farm Name: Aou 4%r T Fare..._ Owner Email:
Owner Name: ��'^' p- f�i a rc Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: f re e-r MQC- S­ _ Title: Ite C Phone No:
Onsite Representative: 5 .- r e.. r mz'c r t__ Integrator: Id ati u
Certified Operator:,, &.*+�� Krwt Operator Certification Number.
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = i = fl Longitude: = ° 0 1 = 1i
Design Current
swine G•apacity Population
WeE Roultry
Design C=urrent Design
Capacity Population Cattle Capacity
Current
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑Dai Cow
® Wean to Feeder
' 4
❑Non -La er
❑Dai Calf
❑ DaiEj Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑Beef Brood Co wl I
Number of Stntetures:
❑ Feeder to Finish
Dry Poultry
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑ Farrow to Finish
Non -Layers
❑ Gilts
❑Pullets
❑ Boars
❑ Turke s
❑Turke Puults
❑ Other
- _
-Other
❑ Other
Discharees & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
�/
2 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
ElYes
❑ No
�
O NA
❑ NE
b, Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
B<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)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[3'1�1` A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
0 Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
12128104
Continued

ry- "-/
Facility Number: 92 -f 97
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment Er'
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ErNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?: _ A�MF2
Designed Freeboard (in): S 4;dse fo 4Q_ a P-,; _,cj
Observed Freeboard (in): 30 _ 30 _ 2.0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes LI�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 [3 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 I,� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes IJ 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 LI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ET/No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? �/
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [I Yes L 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) $eefa t ata Ktt-y 16 ;xer� 5_,wg 7.5.
13. Soil type(s) IVAS
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? ❑ Yes
fNNNo ❑ NA
1Y No ❑ NA
<o ❑ NA
GTNo _❑NA
[]TVo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
Reviewer/Inspector Name � lG... i/t. S Phone: `?/V, �/33'.33 of
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: f Z -O q - ZVO `1
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: Date of 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 appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists El Design El Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes dNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes EYNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual
Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1"
Rain Inspections ❑ Weather
Code
22.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
ffN
❑ NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
''No
El NA
El NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
El NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
El Yes
,[7INo
U' No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26_
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
[I NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
7-No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
❑
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[/NNo
❑ 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?
ElL1 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
9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
LJ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12178104

f SGitlS /- o 6- D S 2e-
�vislon of Water Quatity
==i19umber T� ,L 7 ROOM of Sail and Water Conservation
- - 0 Other Agency
Type of Visit ()Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit outine O Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral Q Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /2 Arrival Time: Departure Time: Z : es County: Y-2tZe20-1 Region:
Farm Name: . Ocu-We- Z-. l"" a tr t., Owner Email:
Owner Name: —Q'L- Pi �tr`c cam- Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �r`-�`'r ocr+r�- Title: Phone No: Onsite Representative: � C •�� Integrator: 4&_�4 R/_jCP.JA1
Or
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number;
Back-up Operator -
B
ack -up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = o = ' 0 Longitude: a ° = ' = u
Design
Swine Ca aci
p ty
Current
Po ulat"on
p
�' Design Current
Wet Pool ` ,
. Capacity Population
Design Current
@attle (capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Dairy Cow
® Wean to Feeder /17 5
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dai Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish "" -
❑ Farrow to Wean U
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish ❑ Layers
❑ Giits ❑ Non -Layers
❑ Boars ❑ Pullets
-- ❑ Turkeys
Other ❑ Turkey Pou Its
❑ Other ❑ Other
Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stacker
❑Beef Feeder
ee f Brood Co
IQurnber of Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
BNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8WA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
[INA
❑ 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
[]No
[3'17A
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
El NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El Yes
,[�7V0
L� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
12128104
Continued

•
17seility Number: 72—#
Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes 30 o ' ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural frceboard? ❑ Yes 0-1 o' ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier _ L-a Lt?
Spillway?: 1 AI V Al 0 N O
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 30 3 0 3 G>
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes E'Nro ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [319o_ ❑ 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 8 Rio ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ff—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 [3 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 0<6 ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
L3-<o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 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) K�S Gre tl G M4 r.J (0- $' •
13.
Soil type(s) 6 RJ
-
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from these designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
Mo
❑ NA ❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
❑' Flo
❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes
2 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
ffNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Colmments (refer to gnon #) Explaut anyY)✓S�swers and/or}any recendations or any other co en
Use drawingstof�facty tojbeiter,�ea`ptamssituahons�(use, addthoeal�pages as�neeessary):
7
Reviewer/Inspector Name F -/ -S Phone: 9lfrr�.33. 3 3 3en i`c.�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: /2--045" 'zoU +
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: TZ, — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes E 150 ❑ NA ❑ N£
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [No ❑ NA ❑ NU
the appropirate box. ❑ W`Up ❑ Checklists ❑ Design
g ❑Maps ❑Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
PIRo
❑ 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
[3No
❑ 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
[R�o
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
I"'hio
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[a<
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[2"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
2& Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes 2'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
B 5o ❑ NA
❑ NF
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
❑, ]qo ❑ 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
[31 —oo ❑ 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
Ej1ro-_0 NA
❑ NE
aditioualrComments rir�gtl/or Drawutgs = � ; :� .
Page 3 of 3 12128104

gloms ,_N� d of/ov/Zoos
ertivision of Water Quality
Faculty Number O Division of Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit
Inspection
0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
��Commp�pliance
outine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: �Z "l7'0'7 / Arrival Time: Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: �Ot1 l� e J /.�, ��'s1 S Owner Email:
Owner Name: �a ^r' �- Pc rc y Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region: 1--AV
Facility Contact Gr«-i— XrUY{_ Title: % ��r . s��-� ` Phone No:
D
Onsite Representative: areer /floe r` Integrator:
i
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ao=' [� Longitude: =o=, =
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
/ 7 i 7 �% ❑ Non -La et
❑ Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
El Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
El Farrow to Finish
El Gilts
[I Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
ElNon-Layers
El Pullets
ElTurkeys
El Turkey Poults
El Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
El Dairy Cow
El Dairy Calf
El Dairy Heifer
El Dry Cow
El Non -Dairy
El Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures:
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?
e
❑ Yes ILI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
5n No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
m No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

1! �
Facility Number: gZ =7 Date of Inspection /Z -/7'A 7
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:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): r _
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
[X 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 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? [I Yes V] 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 14 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes Pfl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Q1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Apfplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) FeyM %J�' r�a S ys Sr•�srl (v �;,tl [ D, S ,
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes [0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?[:] Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/inspector Name )?i G r Re,%0-s" Phone: 9/O• y 33. 334 V
Reviewer/lnspector Signature: Date: /Z-/7 -Z 607
12128104 Continued

6
Facility Number: 72- —Y'77 Date of Inspection iz-y7-O7
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 appropirate box.
❑ Wi TP El Checklists ❑Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ 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
[Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
P9 No
❑ NA
❑ 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�Z No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
Pn No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[ffl No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments and/or Drawings:
12178104

- — Gr.+f-tr e�C7 Ord' &+-1 U-J
i
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review U Structure Evaluation V Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other El Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: %; /S' Departure Time: ; Qr County: a Region: /r
i0,, Ai
Farm Name: bDLe 6�C •jywr Owner Email:
Owner Name: A 4Z Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title: /e-le_ Se �- Phone No: pp
Onsite Representative: MIM :' e _ Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e = 6 ❑ « Longitude: 0 ° ❑ 6 ❑
gg
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La y er ❑ Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder 7 ❑ Non -Layer
❑ Feeder to Finish u "
El Farrow to Wean
El Farrow to Feeder
❑ ❑
Farrow to Finish El Layers
❑ Gilts µ�= Non -Layers
❑Pullets
wl
❑ Turkeys
her
Ot❑Turke Poults
❑ Other El Other Number of Structures: El
❑ Boars
El Dai Calf
El Dairy Heifer
El Dry Cow
El Non -Dairy
El Beef Stacker
❑ Beef Feeder
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: El Structure El Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA
El NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
El 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
( No
❑ NA
[I NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
PO No
❑ NA
El NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
PdNo
❑ NA
ElNE
other than from a discharge?
Page l of 3
12128104
Continued

W.

r
Facility Number: — 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: Z/ G Z Za_3
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): 7-0 Z o 27
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
0 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
EN 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
irs l No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
C9No
❑ 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
El NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
001
Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11, Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
"No
ElNA ❑ 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) 6 vxft .e__ _5;y4//
13.
Soil type(s) 14
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
$] No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
[;R No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
Da No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
efer toquesao#): Explain anyYES a sw e�rs and/or any recommendations o� any other comments.
Comments (r55
Use drawings offacility to better explain situat►ons. (use additional pages as necessary):
r
Reviewer/inspector Name j1 +� T " Phone: q/DJ �_33-3330
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: jDate: %%' Z S — zoo
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: $2 — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes [;ffNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑Other ,�q
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below, El Yes 2 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers ❑ Annual Certification
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rain Inspections ❑ 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 [yNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Q?No ❑ NA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes [INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
[;DNo
❑ 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 property 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
5VNo
❑ 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
kci No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12128104

C
of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number EEZDgate of Visit: l0-/3 Time: .'30
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Ml_rmitted [9•Certified C] Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: ......!................ ............ _.................. County: .....S,e2Sdes.........
_
Owner Name:..._ sc.t-s a,�t ..- - - ... P;.�.r � . ..W ..._ _......- -- Phone No:.. 9/9Q
Mailing Address:..... S�rs.�.�a -- �r�a �........ �auZ--- _-
rr�r
Facility Contact: ... l �CRf.._._Afte-o... .Tntt��eu. ...... Title :................................................ Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
G•«. _ t✓!'1�r1!G_
----- ------------_ _�......�__� _..
Integrator: f i�tre 4 yr.WZArA . eA
Certified Operator:.,_ -.914a/
-------- -- __
��� „ „„„ _ „ _ _
Operator Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
❑amine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude �• �� �«
Dischames & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [Q'go'
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes Q�n
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: ... ......I .......... ............. ---_ - - ................. -. ...
Freeboard (inches): LIP. P
❑ Yes GNb
❑ Yes ❑moo
❑ Yes 9No
❑ Yes MXo
❑ Yes M4
Structure 6
12112103 Continued

Faci'Iky Number: 9 — Date of inspection a• �- o
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes M416'
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or ❑ yes 2Ro
closure plan?
(if any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, nofify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenanceJimprovement? ❑ Yes G-Nro
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes G-119b
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level [] Yes 2-to
elevation markings?
Waste Aoelication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenancerimprovement? ❑ Yes C ITO
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [ENO
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type r3 li �.r vein .�ir,a �/ G ✓a .'rs �a (��� G r� ti e w.� H� �.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes G-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 MNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes a -ND
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge attor 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 aRfo
I9. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e_ residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes 8-Ido
roads, building str-ucv=, and/or public property)
24. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes 2 No
Air Quality representative immediately.
—
Usedraw atllaa�it9 ta. S esP3�^: _Cam 1 1 P �Yk EWreld Copy ❑Final Nates
..'...,.�...�-,:p.--w.:..._»:...s�:�u�_...�.�.:.. -"�-5,...,�+_��•—�m.�.,.='f.�1._...- �.x-:.e'',-°s�i' �Y"' :. - _ art R �u
T7 �+
`�1[rL art ,Gc 7FGG✓ gr�aS of a/as;.� 0,+� f�t �'�S.�e wr��ls v� fit
10leo54 re�ogr GS 4e Bess y
r
755
Reviewer/Inspector Nauae�-= =sue - wry''BOX
ReviewerAnspector Signature: W,, Date: 0 - a
12/12103 Cautkued

Facility Number: _ Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
B Yes
❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oe/ W�ch� ts, dz ,_;4's' etc.)
❑ Yes
9-No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
0'5-0
��piictniva ❑'� ❑ �'��Y� ❑ ��g
'7 -� a y - �� �/ .d
24. Is facility nMn an omplice with any applicable setback/L criteria ineffect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
Q-Aio
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
M-?Oo
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Yes
❑ NO
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑
27. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss reviewrtnspwtion with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
ONO
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
allo
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
[4}
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
M-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?
2-Yes
❑ No
34, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
2-Yes
❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate
box below. B'Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After 1" Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
Z No violations or deficiencies were noted diming this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
tonal C.o ir3/az Draw_ -
_
i Z!_ Air, /�,'i'947i �,4e Tpr�+� y /y1.t�eh o! �ti07 Cjvt �ra f na� r�lr.;,r
44,e
3 S
Sale t o t4eck opt e Pe 'f
�<
12112103

Site Requires Immediate Attention: fl
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONN ENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANEMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 9-s- -, 1995
Time: 11
Farm
Name/Owner-
Mailing Address:
0
County:Sa r%p6nn
Integrator:_' .re�1�,S �o� __-n�` _ Ph
,On Site Representative: ,,,.,a..,d C"'v'l_S
Physical Address/Location: Q too{Q t .•'At_ "30
Type of Operation: Swine X Poultry
Design Capacity: Number of
DEM Certification Number: ACE
Phone:
Cattle
Animals on Site:
DEM Certification
Latitude: 3s a ate' " Langitude:a$ ° ga, 12"
Circle Yes or No
Number: ACNEW
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm event
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) 11Qor No 3 k"V" ""Actual Freeboard: a2 ` Ft. inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? Yes orE
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate? Yes or No y ^0�
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? WP or No
100 Feet from Wells? for No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes orqLD
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No n,nL c,,Z 14
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or Igo If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or Now
Additional Comments:
_ 1 ►� : S �� �_ � bri �� ] � S Lit c_ �-i itvl _ � fhe�G 'i� n toy�Y,�LtI S�1f='�1tit?+� tad �,� �o � _ r � � M!�
Inspector Name tk Zg.*r.Al o C�-� Signature
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facility No.
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: 7.�3T, 1995
Time: i 2 : "1
Farm Name/Owner:
'Mailing Address: R© ;?S-o 1,•.°31rs�••� �LG
County: 6a pn b.Snn
Integrator:__ C,'-'MW& F_ 6.5 .�^c._ Phone:-,
On Site Representative: &, ' bse., . Gmonlls Fn.A�, Phone:
Physical Address/Location: _�R Z6o(,, I ,yj lt-
Type of Operation: Swine X Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site:
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude: 3E O -ga-' !M " Longitude:a& ° "
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Q)or No 3''Y"Actual
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No W
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the covet
Crop(s) being utilized:
of l Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm
Freeboard: A Ft. Inches
as any erosion observed? Yes orq—k:)
crop adequate? Yes or No ^�
event
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? 200 Feet from Dwellings? ?e or No
100 Feet from Wells? J�e or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or(f@
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No P01.
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or T� If Yes, Please Explain.
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)? Yes or No t-�t. —eL ,.v *4
M.
Additional Comments: s P ct %A o,j
T:s ..ate 'U yrfS 1nSL]rr`:w, . A Mote- �L.t,lrva� �n �►�C.r�Q�L..si�_�i]rrf.�rt�c�_
Inspector Name -0v tkkN:ftt i?c��..�1 a CCxc Signature
%=aY e.���:rft rvc �83a r
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

_ t _
I

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
Mr. Dexter Edwards
Production Manger
Carroll's Food, Inc.
Warsaw, NC 2639E
Dear Mr_ Edwards:
�EHNF1
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
March 31, 1995
SUBJECT. Compliance Inspection
Carroll's Farm #22
Sampson County
On Monday, March 27, 1995, an inspection of your animal operation was
performed by the Fayetteville Regional Office (FRO). Please find enclosed a
copy of our Compliance Inspection Report for your information. It is the
opinion of this office that this facility is in compliance with 15A NCAC 2H,
Part _0217, and that Animal Waste Management is being properly performed.
Should you have any questions regarding this matter, feel free to contact
me at [phone].
Sincerely,
Ricky Revels
Environmental Technician IV
Enclosure
CC: Facility Compliance Group
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer W%recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

F
f
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT, HEALTH Sc NATURAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Fayetteville Regional Office
Animal Operation Compliance Inspection Form
All questions answered negatively will be discussed in sufficient detail in
the Comments Section to enable the deemed Permittee to perform the appropriate
corrections:
SECTION I
Animal Operation Type:
Horses, cattle, swine, poultry, or sheep
SECTION II
1. Does the number and type of animal meet or exceed
the (.0217) criteria? [Cattle (100 head),
horses (75), swine (250), sheep (1,000), and
poultry (30,000 birds with liquid waste
system)]
2. Does this facility meet criteria for
Animal Operation REGISTRATION?
3. Are animals confined fed or maintained
in this facility for a 12-month period?
4_ Does this facility have a CERTIFIED ANIMAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN?
5_ Does this facility maintain waste management
records (Volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with
specific cover crop)?
6. Does this facility meet the SCS minimum
setback criteria for neighboring houses,
wells, etc?
OEM
nNION101

40W

I
SECTION III
Y
N
CdblMBNTS
X
Field Site Management
1. Is animal waste stockpiled or lagoon
_ construction within 100 ft. of a USGS
Map Blue Line Stream?
X
2. Is animal waste land applied or spray
irrigated within 25 ft. of a USGS Map
Blue Line Stream?
X
3. Does this facility have adequate acreage
on which to apply the waste?
X
4. Does the land application site have a
cover crop in accordance with the
CERTIFICATION PLAN?
X
5. Is animal waste discharged into waters of
the state by man-made ditch, flushing system,
or other similar man-made devices?
X
6. Does the animal waste management at this
farm adhere to Best Management Practices
(SMP) of the approved CERTIFICATION?
X
7. Does animal waste lagoon have sufficient
freeboard? How much? (approximately 2- 4 ft)
X
S. Is the general condition of this CAFO facility,
including management and operation,
satisfactory?
SECTION IV
Comments
This existing non -expanding facility must have a certified Waste Management
plan by December 30, 1997. This farm appears well managed and operated, as
observed at the time of this inspection.