820579_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H LARULINA
Department of Environmental Quai

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit a Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Fallow up Q Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: cf.,/ Departure Time: O County: ,���"7 z"' Region:
Farm Name: �GJS ` �F �1 Owner Email:
Owner Name: ��% 1 S [ V `� ��J Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: =0
='
Longitude: = ° = = u
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
f❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ La er
❑ Non -La et
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ Turkev Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No �9 NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[� NA
❑ NE
TNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
CP NA
❑ NE
El Yes
El No
0 N
❑NE
12128/04 Continued

Facility Number: gDate of Inspection Z ¢
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Yes ❑ No to NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA [INE
Structure 5 Slltructure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
❑ No[ NA
[:1NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
❑ NoNA
[P NA
ElNE
through a waste management or closure plan?
I
T
❑ ISE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
T
❑ NE
4. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Avolication
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ No NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
EP NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
❑ ISE
IT Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
( ] NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
IONA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 3-33aa
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: / z.� ve
12128/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents ` r
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No fB NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No P NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists E] Design [j Maps C1 Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No 49 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
1P NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
I? NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
T NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
V NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
1� NA
❑ NE
❑Yes
0 N
�NA
El NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
p,r5 art i-01,.)
7 D
12/28/04

0 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number J3 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4§ Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 145AS Arrival Time: Departure Time: Qaounty: S*fK Psi Region: O
Farm Name: Myv' m — D ry Owner Email:
Owner Name: J 41rd I S MC � Phone:(-[ 10) SO— 91,30
Mailing Address: 14D 121 Kal.. Dunn ri C P.S334
tt
Physical Address:
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representai
Certified Operator
Back-up Operator
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =' ='
=" Longitude: = ° =' =
Design' Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder i
Gilts
Other
❑ Other
❑ Layer
❑
Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urk-ey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a_ Was the conveyance man-made'!
Design Curren
Cattle Capacity Populatia
❑ Daja Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Daia Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Co
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No Q5NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No W] NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No �O NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

`Facility Number: ,S'M Date of Inspection 0
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): _
❑ Yes ❑ No �&NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No IP9NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? [] Yes ❑ No F NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes ❑ No [INA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No [4 NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any pan of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes ❑ No [P NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(� NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre detennination?❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[jd 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):
P
Reviewer/Inspector NamePhone: � �133'3300
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
12/28/04 Continued

r '
Facility Number: a, Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No 9 NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ 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 ❑ No ® NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No N NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NL -
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
Cl No
M NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
Pr, f 6+5 t4,,r•Q_ r'Deo Cep �,`'t[c� S •
l/
.
3-ar vi 5 mclatw6 does M+ 0&4- awlcah'�Ac� mow. D�✓Q a e"'I.
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CA WMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Q9 NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
❑ No
§5 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?
C] Yes
❑ No
ERNA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31.
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[] No
NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
Ver Bt�s -- P"��-�- its res u�•o��fl howe,�er �urw� s
V -AS f'1 r f !� D r 0" J�D OCs
Pr, f 6+5 t4,,r•Q_ r'Deo Cep �,`'t[c� S •
l/
.
3-ar vi 5 mclatw6 does M+ 0&4- awlcah'�Ac� mow. D�✓Q a e"'I.
12/2&!04

Y i
® Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit 4b Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint Q Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
ZI
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:
�' 2:� t� Departure Time: Z� County: SDN Region:
t.-
Farm Name: _ Gurn6 Jal�rrl5 L _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: jardIS Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
� tt
Facility Contact:) I $GLQ Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Backup Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 00 ❑6 ❑ Longitude: ❑° ❑, Q u
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er
❑ Wean to Feeder 10 Non -La er
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder 15D0
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
❑
Layers
❑
Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑
Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity:-•pvg61stioi
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy -
El Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
[]
Beef Brood Cowl I
Number of Structures.-
Discharges
tructuress:
h. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c_ What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
0
❑ Yes ❑ No � NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[P NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
T NA
❑ NE
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[ NA
❑ NF
12/28/04 Continued

f'acii-ity Number: Date of Inspection
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? [] Yes
❑ No
1�NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
❑ No
T NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
❑ No®
NA
El NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
`
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
❑ No[
NA
El NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
1
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
❑ No
® NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
❑ No
[p NA
❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
❑ No
� NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
[:]PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s) -�
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
❑ No
C NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE'
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ? ❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
❑ No
TA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes
❑ No
A
❑ NE
C omments (refer to question#): Explain any -YES answers and/or any recommendations.or any other commentsh'�
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):,:
Yah l`-5 y n loner �n p a �1 n0 HSS S
✓oma �� ��'��S•
7
� 1 r
�a.rw+ er 5 r Ji C tki o bio S s raw- Ack �ipO s
5
�04onk
__ _
Reviewer/Inspector Name Phone: 117 3�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Page 2 of 3 1212$/04
Condnued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Re aired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ❑ No UNA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAW M P readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No® NA [INE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUp ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other t
21, Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No r 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
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
23.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fats to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
2&
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
71 NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
[X 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
❑ No
[id 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
[91NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
QaNA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/,or ©raydngs ;," F b
Page 3 of 3 12128/04

i Q Division"of Wawf.Qualtry
�Fakdltty Ntumber ; S 0 Division of -
Sort and Water Coacervation r.'
..Q Other Agency
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: y' S Departure Time: County: ,Sr�.•yo_Sa�_ Region: `20
Farm Name: /Yiea.d .�_l'�r.e.n 1_04�, Lo}- Owner Email:
Owner Name:—_,TCYGv� 5—/?�c%: Phone: a
Mailing Address: moo/ G_ ee � Pc> z'! ._ oFar,� Ot�r�!? SVG _'2RZ3_!;� _
Physical Address:
Facilitv Contact:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Q Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Other
❑ Other
Title:
Phone No:
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certificadon Number:
Latitude: 00 =1 Longitude: [=0=4
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ La Yer
❑ Nan -Laver
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
El urkey Paults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Daia Calf
❑ Daia Heifet
❑ Da Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocket
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow,
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State:' (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system`? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of -the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 2<E
[]Yes
❑No
[INA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
9<
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
B<
12128104 Continued

r
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
Facility Number: a — S-7`71Date of Inspection
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Collection & Treatment
ONE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
Q<E
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
ldentit ler:
[:1 NA
,1NE
014h
Spillway'?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate -threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
2ivr.
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
��,,//
IrNE
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 DWWQ�
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
if
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
NA
El No El1d
,O,
'NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
LD15r
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
1210-
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No ❑ NA
ErNE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge
into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window [:]Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside
of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
l-}<
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination:
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
L3NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
El Yes
❑ No
[:1 NA
,1NE
014h
Reviewer/Inspector Name /rfq, ..µ F 1.". ;J Phone: _ L- 4ft4- l c�,f73a
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:Date: 7-[/
12/28/04 Continued

A
Facility Number: a — rf 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 appropirate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps ❑Other
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
R
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
ONE
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0 NI:
❑ 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?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other- Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
0-9F_
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
2E
❑Yes
❑No
El NA
9-N F,
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
E3<
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ N A
0<E
E
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
SNE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA D -IgE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA 0<
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA Ml E
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA [3'NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA<E
ElYes
ElNo
ElNA
L'/Nt~
Atdattional Comment§"sandliirDra
r4 C �Pr X -A Aa v! l0ee'7
TZe'l e p� / /'vw Lro�o F� Q �cl
12/28/04

MIM
Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit • Routine O Compfaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other [i Denied Access
Facility ltiumber grz
Date of Visit: 0 Tune:
- O Not rational Q Below Threshold
E3 Permitted 13 Certified Q Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farnm Name: .• I ► Cl QwZ C1 61-4- Let - - County:. -'�2 0,P_srtrs ---- ...
Owner Name: _ �c k , _ I ymb 'Phone No:
-Mailing Address:
Facility- Contact: ---Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: _ , _ Operator Certification Number.
Location of Farm:
M -Saline ❑ Pouttry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude r��0 �" Longitude • �' �a
Disc es & Stream
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in galimin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse unpacts 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:
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
Structure 5
Freeboard (inches):
1.2117103 Conrnued

c.
Facility Number: g.Q — 52411
Date of Inspection t.
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10- Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN E]Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12- Crop type
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? O Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16- Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Odor Lwues
IT Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
19- Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional
Air Quality representative immediately.
�] Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
� or>any atter E90.; '_"
'(il�C [d grttL�Qa #x4—My-
- .yam `` -. - �.;z.. x•+.--w:-�;-= -ra .,_ r�s-�'�.,.:._.�„'�
a–
;ems arstwmgstfay:a > : {,tee p k Field co to
--� ❑Fie PY L']J Sinai No
7'4e- e:. Ip J1u� 4re.f 7 tir„ eel
r
leo
r'n a lt7w 000
,
Reviewer/Inspft-Wr Name Nf , J l a uj "�' y � _, . —• y � "_
µ
Reviewer{Inspector Signature: Date: i - -2 a y
1282/03 Continued

Facility Number. — Date of Inspection
Required Records & Docamenu
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
❑ No
27. Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss reviewfinspecton with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ No
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
❑ No
31. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a ram gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Foam ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
12112(03
12112(03

Q Division of Soil and Water -Co— servadon -Operation
tj Division of Soil and Water:Conseri
vadon _Compliance liis mid' '
j f
cX ` 1)i V> -on of mater Qltallt� r rAt�]l11811CC Ltspechon
U.0ther AgencyO eiat�on Reviw' �'� P �"
Q Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DW9 ins ection Q Follow -tip of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number Date of Inspection
Time of Inspection O p 24 hr. (hh:mm)
E] Permitted PfCertifeed Q Conditionally Certified Q Registered 10 Not Operational Date Last Operated .
MM .....
Farm NName:S4rvlS (►IC4 0% � County: .............. ................................. a'.r...............
......
Owner Name:. .............. a,f3f.1... l ►CL evtyl'..... Phone No:.......... /.L� .`...(p.............
�^� ...../.......:. ..............
Facility Contact: ................. qnL ........LClGL�1!N+��..... Title: Phone No:.. ................................... .............
MailingAddress- ...........
.... ............_ ;7/.f�A7C .......... .... ............ 11/ ........
t#'1_........ _ .� >'tlr...... C. �33q
Onsite Representative: cbrV lS Integrator: rator
p Q....................................................)............................'t.�......................
Certified Operator:_ ........... �l,•lC. r"tikllt,Y`�............................ Operator Certification 1\`umber:..........................................
.-.1..... ......
Location of Farm:
r................................._........_...........__..._..............._....................... .................................. ...................... .......... ....................................... ........ ......................... .......... ........._..t t
Latitude �� �� �•� Longitude
-
Design
Current ;.
Desigiti
"Curi etatw'; _ :z :� ,_ Design Current -
Swine
Capacity
Po ulatioli.. `.,Poultry
Capacity
.Po ulation ; Cattle Capacity Po ulson
`.
[] Wean to Feeder
❑Layer
' '
❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish_
J
❑ Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
:_
❑ Farrow to Wean
_
❑Other-
` } -
[j Farrowto Feeder
:Rffarrow
to Finish
a
`
"'
Total Design Capacity
Gilts,
r
❑ soars
Total SL
w
Number of Lagoons:, d t❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area :
Holdmg,Pofi&I Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste ManagementSystem _
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes jo No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes O'No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [b No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flour, in gal/min'! / J14
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systcin'? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑Yes ,� No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? E] Yes ` No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment A/
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ElSpillway /-❑ Yes No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (inches): ......
S. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ❑ No
seepage, etc-)
3/23/99 Continued on back

i
Facility Number:g� — 5 Dale of Inspection t!==
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes 1 No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenaricelimprovement? X//� ❑ Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? l� ❑ Yes ❑ No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ONo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN Al`d ❑ Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes Q�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? jt%f ❑ Yes (:]No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? rJ-)%1
(j
[]Yes
❑ No
Required
Records & Documents
9.A.: . 1 ... =-s. ; ::t`r _ --.2 _. -`i Y•, -r t: -:'-.?i•-
No farm, iS r h ou �K5'i h tS. FOn.m /16m (a 5
6art� rt �'r�t'J
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
t8.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name {�_ :r i
0.x
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z2_ -r�
(ie/ W UP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
❑ No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any appticable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
❑ No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?.
❑ Yes
19 No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
VNo
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes]
No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by sartie agency?
❑ Yes
No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
No
: N6 •vigl'atigris or- defI ciencies were pi�t;ea Burt itag this:visit. • . tk :wiil•reeeiye iiti fuft. hi t
C6 res' oiideince: about: this visit. : ::..:.:. .:: : ' ; ' ;
Comments (refer twques bn #) Explain any;Y.ES answers and/or any recon men dations or any -other cotuniertts
Ilse drawings of facility to better explaan-Atuatidns (use adcLhonat pages as necessary)
9.A.: . 1 ... =-s. ; ::t`r _ --.2 _. -`i Y•, -r t: -:'-.?i•-
No farm, iS r h ou �K5'i h tS. FOn.m /16m (a 5
6art� rt �'r�t'J
Al ( -#IV s� ;� ,,vim
nQ
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name {�_ :r i
0.x
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z2_ -r�
l/ �//, f 3123199

Date of Inspection L ^
F_ Facility Number Time of Inspection •` D� 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Registered Xcertified 13 Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not Operational Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Name:..C.G...1.../r�.........>.. .............. County:.�................ ....... ................
Owner Name:......... !f . t . ...............I. y (.. .. rv!. ........................... Phone No: ....... ��. :.. .�t'.. �J...................................
Facility Contact: •, a r,✓.. t•,•S,- 4...•..... Title• t44 Phone No
G''?�' .....,. ...................... -~..
Mailing Address ..... (.Y.�r . ,,p. .... .......•..I .............. ..... uh..n' j...... ..................... 2�.� `
Onsite Representative:.... 1/'t.6tJ................ ....................... Integrator ...............
Certified Operator cJ t1�i5................. CL ........-.-_-- Operator Certification Number...--• ......... ...._..... ........ ........
Location of Farm,
Latitude
Longitude �• 0` �"
.Design Current" .1€7
Ponitry `Capacity,'Population Cattle 4" �rt_Ca
I rM I
a,k
❑ Other
.. 4Z
1
_ I ILl Nott-DairyI
k1jiQgif Capacity'
k
-,ToW SSLW
c
"c
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovernent? ❑ YesNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon- ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
mai nten an ce/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the Facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes O(No
❑ Yes 1� No
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes 0,No
❑ Yes [X_No
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
=
❑ Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
El Boars
Longitude �• 0` �"
.Design Current" .1€7
Ponitry `Capacity,'Population Cattle 4" �rt_Ca
I rM I
a,k
❑ Other
.. 4Z
1
_ I ILl Nott-DairyI
k1jiQgif Capacity'
k
-,ToW SSLW
c
"c
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenancelimprovernent? ❑ YesNo
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon- ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
mai nten an ce/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the Facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes O(No
❑ Yes 1� No
❑ Yes kNo
❑ Yes 0,No
❑ Yes [X_No

Facility Number:
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoons.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4
❑ Yes L(No
❑Yes �No
Structure 5 Structure 6
goil No:vioiations.ox deficiencies: were, noted;iltiririg this;visit:: YoU'W receive_Ro further
:.•cyrrespbndei�ceab;oi>rithis'.vis>Ei:-:•:•:•.-:•:: . -:--: :-: :•: .-:•: , :�::-. : .:•:.�. .. .•�-:-
Comments (refer to gnestatiitt #Explain=any,YF,S answers anllor any enaat�ons or aay other comments.
'r.�`� :`5 `� "4°°nr. 3` wa"' '+£„ `�� �.k$� "fir .� Z' A �as M <q�, 9 , "'�+^� �" ..�
�'
Identifier:
15 iira�fi#n 'g�4fi tii'bttE'RP�II SrtlEBtiflA�S.nS� add[tlflnaaCS aS �eCe5S8j'} s r
�-'� •"%.�Re�`�"` f�,zn .:ai7b` �u ; ;�t5sx`?�pt, ; � k.`�'t `4 $ AL3.-';< .E. ^i��.i'.'O'""��. X' ..3�s a'�. • ��N�„-'%hu,,..ccc^�.'-'x�,'� .R''i',��e �z” .��.'�' ,'i�5. _����. x x: r�
Freeboard(ft):.................................... ...............
�iirl►� /QO S vL./ �G[ �J�! /hQ[�I'i Ind.
�
10.
Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
qNo
11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
(KNo
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
Pt No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ef,
� ` �"
�.'. � u. Y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13-
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
gNo
w
(If in excess of WMP or run ff nt ng wat is of the State, notify DWQ)
15.
Crop type 'L/ . ......... .ted.......... ...........
........................................
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those esignated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
❑ Yes
V No
17.
Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
18-
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
ANo
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
KNo
20.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
0, No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
10 No
22.
Does record keeping need improvement?
❑ Yes
MNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
4No
24.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yeso
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
❑ Yes
o
goil No:vioiations.ox deficiencies: were, noted;iltiririg this;visit:: YoU'W receive_Ro further
:.•cyrrespbndei�ceab;oi>rithis'.vis>Ei:-:•:•:•.-:•:: . -:--: :-: :•: .-:•: , :�::-. : .:•:.�. .. .•�-:-
Comments (refer to gnestatiitt #Explain=any,YF,S answers anllor any enaat�ons or aay other comments.
'r.�`� :`5 `� "4°°nr. 3` wa"' '+£„ `�� �.k$� "fir .� Z' A �as M <q�, 9 , "'�+^� �" ..�
�'
15 iira�fi#n 'g�4fi tii'bttE'RP�II SrtlEBtiflA�S.nS� add[tlflnaaCS aS �eCe5S8j'} s r
�-'� •"%.�Re�`�"` f�,zn .:ai7b` �u ; ;�t5sx`?�pt, ; � k.`�'t `4 $ AL3.-';< .E. ^i��.i'.'O'""��. X' ..3�s a'�. • ��N�„-'%hu,,..ccc^�.'-'x�,'� .R''i',��e �z” .��.'�' ,'i�5. _����. x x: r�
4:
�iirl►� /QO S vL./ �G[ �J�! /hQ[�I'i Ind.
�
7/25197
Reviewer/Inspector Name Ef,
� ` �"
�.'. � u. Y
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

0
Pivision of Soil and Water Conservation [] Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
WRoutine 0 Complaint O Follow-up of DWO inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other I
Date of Inspection
Facility Number p '65 24 hr. (hh:tnm)
Time of Inspection ,
Registered 13 Certified 13 Applied for Permit 0 Permitted 10 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: .....................
Fartn Name: County:.. - ........�..ar—n......................................
..1.M �.,.�..... ..5....t��.r...r'^................................................
Owner Name:�.�.��.5................. ...M.'a... ��........................... Phone No- ......�t!a.�.r..�4..�p..43-0 ......................................
Facility Contact:.V..l........PCL.P k—m.b.... Title:...{l�..Sr.Ay1'!P1.f . `............................ Phone No:... Q.,,.............
Mailing Address:...1..�.0.1.....6jCe.e ....a�-...,l�d � �. �, .1•, .n. IVC ............................ zT 3.3..`i
Onsite Representative:.. __r\,..t.5....... - ................... .. Integrator:...... .... Sr3
Certified Operator................................................................................................................ Operator Certification Number :........... ... ...:...--------- -----...
Location of Farm:
Latitude • 1 " Longitude • =` ="
tn
` ret
�,
ep a�s
C
. '-
1we4 tionw
ra
11Z^Po
�latttln'
C ulation
eP
yh„ ft'�Ca acty PopCatlRh
Wean to Feeder
�Poultr
[] i ayer x Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
r,-
[] Non Layer " ❑ Non Dairy t;
❑ Farrow to Wean
•'.; k-=-: �.qw'. k'A.?%.r•"�i. YA b.W Mpy "c4 .
a}iz
❑ arrow to Feeder
,t D` - x An h�iv - (
a. ❑Other r, s�
qh
Farrow to Finish a�
yxt.ri)'W
. .��;.° Dt gn Capacttty ` 2S4a
Gilts.>�"`
� y#Total
❑Boars
uy�m�ber�vfyf_Q�ADons /Hol Ponds Subsurface Drains Present ©Lagoon Area ❑A Spray Field Area
�
�h�¢
i �R q'a w fr [] lib Liquid Waste Management System ¢
xen-^ f S �. �
N.,. M. , k.: ."sk. ('ArF� 3:.
y i.. d "a ; .:� ..,. $,�"Nµ. +'s✓... t. '�.<�a.:5�'£�
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvernent?
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: [ILagoon [ISpray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If di,ch:urge is observed, did it reach Surface 'Vater? (If yes. notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in eal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
3. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5- Does any part of the waste management system (other than ]agoons/holding ponds) require
main tenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7125/47
❑ YesNo
0] yes No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
fi� No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
J No
❑ Yest
o
❑ Yeso
Continued on back

Facility Number: n—j 7�
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes j� No
Structures (Laeoons.Holding Ponds. Flush Pits, etc.) )
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft): ........1:1!..........,.....»...................................... ... ..... ...... . .....
...... __.. .... ...... _.N...__._.
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
❑ Yes
❑ No
11. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
❑ No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
V,
Reviewer/inspector Name, � �� �, 5t � � -�.. �' ��x � �§ ��ri�""= ; � � ��� <��
°�.� .r ...... � ., `r`.
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
❑ Yes
❑ No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(If in excess of WMP,� !or "off entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ................ �v................. . ....... . .......
16, Do the receiving Crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)?
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Nn;violitions'or deficiencies, were -noted during this.visit.- :You_ .will receive ir`further
. correspi)hdeinre about this'visit:. .. . • .. :
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes • 51NO
❑ Yes'"140
❑ Yes gNo
❑ Yes $� No
❑ Yes 'No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[] Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Commettis3{refer toGquesttort #1)'Fxplata�wy YES answers and/or�aey� }rer�mmdtttions of any athet'�
Use drziwtngsoffattlltyYto better esplatiissttuutto additional pages as:necessatryV -�
1c, v,+ e It n VgCo. r.�' �4f ra in; e ti D e r 5c; r Offer
r'ec-6 a. ►� a ,ti A-- S`\ o �St 1
�a r r-ot,O 1,n)P enS arc Scrc. �2� d- '� 5 S� rea sP re_aj e -r-- p e r
1
+er
( ;J recowo-ewda��o►.s.
Q✓era,4� -'� �ooKS oc.4 iS t,�ork1•��
h, 5 15 c� � r� (c) o pe 7/25/97
V,
Reviewer/inspector Name, � �� �, 5t � � -�.. �' ��x � �§ ��ri�""= ; � � ��� <��
°�.� .r ...... � ., `r`.
Reviewer/inspector Signature: C 64 Date: % Z—S—
�y I v

7-0
State of North Carollna
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 • •
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor ■ _ F%
%%J B. Howes, Secretary !— 7 V R
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section
Jarvis McLamb
1401 Greenpath Road
Dunn, N.C_ 28334
November 27, 1995
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation
Jarvis McLamb Swine Farm
Sampson County
1 fes' W��1�1�
On November 16, 1995 an inspection was conducted of your animal operation by the
Fayetteville Regional Office. Please find attached a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operations Site
Visitation Record for your information. It is suggested that you contact your local NRCS office
at (910) 592--7963 to obtain guidance in establishing the necessary vegetative buffers to prevent
waste or sedimentation from leaving your property and entering into surface waters.
If you have questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me at (910)
486-2541.
Sincerely,
TP�aulE. Ra 1s
Environmental Specialist
Enclosure
cc:Wilson Spencer, NRCS, Sampson County
Facility Assessment Unit
Wachovia Building, Suite 714, Fayetteville, North Carolina 28301-5043 Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention•
Fac�ity No. _8z -5--79
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEWNT
ANIMAL FEEDLOT OPERATIONS SITE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: // , IM
Farm Nr
lWailing
County: 6C,,-, ►r2so,1
Integrator: N!/A Phone:
On Site Representative• Phone:
Physical Address/Location: !:�rssm ChRoo d
Type of Operation: Swine —j. Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: _ 2LT ?
Number of Animals on Site: sb sow e
+ F=dr a� '100r,* 900
DEM Certification Number: ACE DEM Certification Number: ACNEW
Latitude:— Longitude: •
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm evert N,D
(approximately 1 Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Frxboerd: Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No Was any erosion observed? �o
Is adequate land available for spray? Yes or No Is the cover crop adequate Yes or +�A
Masi
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback criteria? <Z20eet from Dwellings. or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes or94@1
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or No�i
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man-made ditch, flushing system, orather
similar mars -made devices? Yes or i� If Yes, Please Explain. � "100.4 •6 "o
Does the facility maintain adequate waste management records (volumes of manure, land applied,
spray irrigated on specific acreage with cover crop)es or No
Additional Comments:-- — -- _ _ qmmr��_
Thi2 was a very brief inspection. a more thorough inspection, will he GnndUcted in the fsLture.
Please contact DEM should any condition arise that poses a danger to surface waters.
* This farm was not located on a USGS TWO map to determine °Blue Line" status.
If you have suestions concerning this report please do not hesitate to .contact the inspector
at (910),486-1541. Please contact the inspector if the above information is incorrect.
/-5
tnspec+n* Name
sigmtum
cc: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.

r
State of North CarolinaIT
Department of Environment,
Health and Natural Resources 4 •
Fayetteville Regional Office
James B. Hunt, Jr„ GovernorH N
Jonathan B. Howes, Secretary U) F-=
Andrew McCall, Regional Manager
DIVISION OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT
Water Quality Section
November 27, 1995
Jarvis McLamb
1401 Greenpath Road
Dunn, N.C. 28334
SUBJECT: Animal Feedlot Operations Site Visitation
Jarvis McLamb Swine Farm
Sampson County
Dear Mr. McLamb:
On November 16, 1995 an inspection was conducted of your animal operation by the
Fayetteville Regional Office. Please find attached a copy of the Animal Feedlot Operations Site
Visitation Record for your information. It is suggested that you contact your local NRCS office
at [phone] to obtain guidance in establishing the necessary vegetative buffers to prevent
waste or sedimentation from leaving your property and entering into surface waters.
If you have questions regarding this matter please do not hesitate to contact me at (910)
486-2541.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Ra is
Environmental Specialist
Enclosure
cc:Wilson Spencer, NRCS, Sampson County
Facility Assessment Unit
Wachovia Raiding, Suite 714, Fayetteville. North Carolina 28301-5043 ietephone 910-486-1541 FAX [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/ Ia% post -consumer paper

Site Requires Immediate Attention:
Facdlity No. _re -s-75
DIVISION OF ENVIRONlu¢.NfAL MANAGEMENT
ANIMAL FEEUL4T OPERATIONS SriE VISITATION RECORD
DATE: / hl� IM
'Time: r;;l�•'vo -
Farm N,
34ailintg
county: L5amawf)
Integrator:_ r9,( Phone:
On Site Representative: Phone:
Physical Address/Location:
Type of Operation:- Swine ,g Poultry Cattle
Design Capacity: Number of Animals on Site: t �- nnc�goo
DEM Certification Number: ACE_ DEM Certification Number. ACNEW
Latitude• Longitude: •
Circle Yes or No
Does the Animal Waste Lagoon have sufficient freeboard of I Foot + 25 year 24 hour storm even
(approximately I Foot + 7 inches) Yes or No Actual Fraeboard:__„_Ft. Inches
Was any seepage observed from the lagoon(s)? Yes or No'Was any erosion observed? o
Is adequate Iand available for spray.) Yes or No Is the cover crop adequatelkYes or&(;�h
Crop(s) being utilized:
Does the facility meet SCS minimum setback
or No
100 Feet from Wells? Yes or No
Is the animal waste stockpiled within 100 Feet of USGS Blue Line Stream? Yes orlsik
Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 Feet of a USGS Map Blue Line: Yes or
Is animal waste discharged into water of the state by man -mads ditch, flushing system. or -other
similar man-made devices? Yes or Ijo 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)?(es or No
Additional Comments:
No�i s•.�:»�
veXX hrief inspemore thorough inspection vLlj be GSMdMcted n the fjLLure.
Please contact .DEM should any condition arise that poses _a_danger to surface seaters.
* This farm was not located on a USGS TOPO map to determine 'Blue Line" status.
If you have questions concerning this report please do not hesitate to .contact the inspector
at [phone]. Please contact the inspector if the above information is incorrect.
In-spector Nun
�,? J_s
Signature
ec: Facility Assessment Unit Use Attachments if Needed.