820597_INSPECTIONS_20171231

NUH I H UAHULINA
Department of Environmental Qual

Type of Visit: AEYCompliance Inspection V Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Tecbnical Assistance
Reaso© for Visit: Oloutine O Complaint O Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency O Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time. Departure Time: County:
Farm Name: 24
Z:�!5 Owner Email:
Owner Name: tr t Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Region:
Facility Contact: Title: Phone: /
Onsite Representative:. Integrator:
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[—]Yes X_ -No F]NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[::]Yes We
❑ Yes KA No
❑NA C] NE
[] NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 N 0 N
0 N ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 2141201S Continued
,
w^
Design Current
Design
Current Design Current
Swine
Capacity ;Pop. WetTPoultry
�.
Capacity
Pop Cattle Capacity Pflp.
.
Finish
v La er
Dai Caw
Feeder
Non La er
Dai Calf
o Finish
x' ;
Dai Heifer
to Wean
parrowtoFinish
T
_
Design
Current D Cow
to Feeder
x D oo It
Ca 2lciri
Pop. , Non -Dai
R-
Layers
Beef Stocker
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets;
Turkeys
Beef Brood Cow
tatter
TurkeyPoults
Other
:rvlHMlihiii
iM ,
'uuu-.:ypiuyuemayquyi4AfW f .ma. . N,wN16�C�d�!ffi'�L . ". i � :•'
Other H
:' IE:�M.i¢'t.'k1Y1111�1Y�Y.iF111:44J.••'•': •'•^•••.•. <•••..uliuu4�4SIW
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[—]Yes X_ -No F]NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
[::]Yes We
❑ Yes KA No
❑NA C] NE
[] NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 N 0 N
0 N ❑NE
Page 1 of 3 2141201S Continued

�t Facili Number: jDate of Inspection: —f
Waste Collection & Treatment
` 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes [3-Vo ❑ 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: 3i��
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes fn -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 fB�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes D3 -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes El -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 RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes CENo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land 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 Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): / rt.
13. Soil Type(s): 14510-14-
14- Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes 12No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
1 S. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes 5�_No [:INA ❑ NE
❑ Yes allo [DNA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes CE3No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes allo ❑ 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 allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 ®, No ❑ NA [] NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ,D,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

]Facility Number. - Date of Inspection: /b
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes J�g_No
+ 25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes Eg-No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Jallo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [allo
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 ❑ 0ther:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
drawings of
Reviewerllnspector Name:
additional nal
/,�� al -,:� ��
TY). .. ...
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA F] NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes RLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®-No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 1FLNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes J21 -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VZNo
❑ Yes � No
❑ Yes �- o
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
ts.■.r� r
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,� Date: ��� / /
Page 3 of 3� 21412015

�. art.° _ _ ivi'sion"Tof Water Resources �t = ��
Fa illtF . 'Umbe7 O Division of Soil;and Water Conservation
Other A en
Type of Visit: ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O-K6utine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: i Q ; County: a Region: (
Farm Dame: Re- .s
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: /'76Q/e7 Title:
Onsite Representative:'— j
Certified Operator: �r,,���►� �!
Back-up Operator:
Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Owner Email:
Phone:
ole -1 Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes. notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes KLNo ❑NA 7 N
❑ Yes
❑ No
DQ51111 Current �' `
DesignCiirrent Design Current
❑ Yes
Swine
Capacity Pop. r: _Wet PLoultry
CapacitvPop £Cattle Capacity Pop.
:_.
Wean to Finish
Layer .-f Dai Cow
Wean to Feeder
—�-- Non -Layer
Dairy Calf
Feeder to Finish
toil '
4*�
� ., Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
� Y , _
DesignCo�ren ,. Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
s. DryiP,oult ,
Ca acct Po Non -Dairy
ZN
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
r Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
+=` Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
-
Qther
Turkex Poults-..
», .
Other
"
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes. notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes KLNo ❑NA 7 N
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
[] NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes allo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
2/4/2015 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
17
[allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
� Waste Collection &Treatment
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
Identifier: Fcri7`
Structure 5
Structure 6
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
Spillway?:
❑ Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
,j No
Designed Freeboard (in): ---- V
❑ NE
23_ If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
®Yes
,Q No
Observed Freeboard (in): 2L ` Y
❑ NE
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
f�3-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
LZ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
E�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
5jNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10_ Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
P"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below_ ❑ Yes K No ❑ NA
❑ 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_�lwn �1C/7r-�l
❑ NE
13. Soil Types):
4]00-
14.
] /
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes CR No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [�J No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes J2� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Reouired Records & Documents
❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[allo
❑ 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:
2 1. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
[a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 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
,j No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23_ If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
®Yes
,Q No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Date of Inspection-
24.
ns ection: —31!
j24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [3�No
t 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes RNo
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 allo
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? [] Yes [RNo
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately,
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes fgNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes a No ❑ NA ❑ N E
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes & No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
ents( q ) p y . . - yrs recommendations or=anv other comments
Use drawings, of fac�ueto Bette eY lain. ituat ons Huse addtttonal additional,* M -u
_h'a ( pages�as necessary)p :_
uI IV c> cL It l
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
� e7� (! � - �Z��
Phone:
Date:
21412015

H
46
Type of Visit: [JCom ance Inspection U Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: CrRoudne 0 Complaint Q Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency Q Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: [j Departure Time: t, County:.rpS@ Region:
Farm Name:Qi��rt %7- y M,�[-�z�r%G� Owner Email:
Owner Name: �+1� �fl _ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 6� fry/' fT_ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: i
Back-up Operator:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:�j1
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at. ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes O_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes X1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 2/4/2014 Continued
Design
C•tirrent
DesigII Current
Design Cilrrept
wine
oultry
CapaciPop.an
to Finish
La er
Dai Cow
an to Feeder
Non -La er
Dai Calfder
to Finish
r$F=ow
Dai Heifer
row to Wean
Design
Current
D Cow
row to Feeder
D , Ponitr
Ga aci
P,o .
Non -Dairy
to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
ts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
ars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turke s
Uther
Turkey Poults
Other
the
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes �Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at. ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes O_No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes X1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 2/4/2014 Continued

Facility Number: J21 - I 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 22 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: % "n"d\
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): >' %
Observed Freeboard (in): (r
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes [aNo ❑ 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 ffi No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7, Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need [:]Yes [!� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? if yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [RNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground 0 Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > I0% 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): :54 e n
13, Soil Type(s): _ —
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes W'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? [:]Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design, or wettable ❑ Yes qNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes L4 No
❑ Yes ,4No
❑ Yes No
[:]Yes No
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes Jallo
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [E No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes allo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑NA 0 N
❑NA 0 N
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2014 Continued

lFacility Number: raL - jDate of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes JNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out ofcompliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check [:]Yes Q�LNo ❑ 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 fZ ,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes K'No ❑ 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)
3I . Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA 0 NE
❑ Yes oNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [&No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 0,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes RNo
❑ Yes jQ'No
❑ Yes ®No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Corn ents_(reft, to quesho 5#) Fzplain anyrYES answers and/or any add�honalareconamendations or,.any.other commends:: ,
Use drawings of facti�ty to better exp...lainisrtuations (use additional pages as necessary) ,. _
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:y"��3`��
Date: I27 �-
2/4/2014

/�z J,,_,H s�
Type of Visit: Q<ompliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: GOW&utine O Complaint O Follow -.up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: r Arrival Time: p a Departure Time: , p County: Region: PVPD
Farm Name: _FXAA ! -r!s t' Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ce / - Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: r Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: .-5,1 .n y►be �, 1.,�
Phone:
Integrator: mrd
Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Certification Number:
Location of Farm:
Latitude: Longitude:
DesignCurrent
❑ Yes
ZLNo
❑ NA
D NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
Design
Current
Design
Carreat
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity
Pop.
Caltle Cap acity
Pop.
Wean to Finish
Layer
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Dai Cow
54 Wean to Feeder o
]Non -Layer
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
Dai Heifer
Farrow to Wean
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
Design
Current
D Cow
Farrow to Feeder
of the State outer than from a discharge?
©, P.oult .
Ca aci
P.o ,
Non-Damy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stacker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
_
Turkeys
OtherI
ITurkeyPoults
Other I
10ther
Discharges and Stream Imoacts
1, Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
ZLNo
❑ NA
D NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
[:]No
[] NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
JR No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
[:]Yes
[&No
❑ NA
❑ NE
of the State outer than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of lns ection: Or — d
Waste Collection & Treatment
1. 4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:
Spillway?: _
Designed Freeboard (in): f9 T
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes. Z No [] NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
Q Yes
[a No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes
CK No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
allo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
RNo
0 NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
the appropriate box.
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
Pq No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
El No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
I I _ Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes [aNo ❑ 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 Typc(s): CajfK
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? []Yes RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [SNo ❑ NA ONE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
I8. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
CK No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
[a 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 �R No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield 0120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [&No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes �LNo
❑ NA (] NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 214/2014 Candmued

- Facility Number: j - Date of inspection: Q-- —f
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes jo No
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ® No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes Cg No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes .0 No
Other lssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
F] NA F] NE
❑ Yes g No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes E�; No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes jo No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes 12 No
❑ Yes No
[]Yes No
❑NA E] NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to ques#oQ #) Eaplaw any YES answers and/or any additional�recommendations or;any other cammentsM �
T �� «
Use drawings of facility to tietter eapiain,situatians (use additional pages as necessary):' :,,,;.
Reviewer/inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone:
Date:
21412014

t
rvision of Water Quality
EfficifigNUUMINEWE®-1 4-9 OEM Division of Soil and Water Conservation
© Other �►gency
Type of Visit: o�ce Inspection Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint Q Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: p-- Arrival Time: Q! Departure Time: / ; County: Region: rg�zl
AV
Farm Name: �a,t,t;( S��� �2�y /Ua1 ST—r;rS Owner Email:
Owner Name: 7a' �,� (� Q if'Q_ Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: 63 Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: 4 j ,T L.,.J �-T-
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Latitude:
Phone:
Integrator:
Certification Number:.$�y
Certification Number:
Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [:)Yes C..No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
ll
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes C5 No
[:]Yes ®-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
2/4/2011 Continued
Design Current
urreat
Design Currenne
Capacity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capa
BRY
Pop.
Cattle Capacity A.
Wean to Finish
ILayer
I
ai Cow
ai Calf
Wean to Feeder Q Non -La er I
Feeder to Finish
airy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
D P,oult .
Ca aci
P,o
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -Layers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
rke
Tus
Other
Turke Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [:)Yes C..No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3
ll
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes C5 No
[:]Yes ®-No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
2/4/2011 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection:
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
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
❑ NA
Identifier:
the appropriate box.
Spillway?:
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑Other:
q q
Designed Freeboard (in):
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA
Observed Freeboard (in):
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
C"o
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
S 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
�gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
jg 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
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[:]Yes
29 -No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [—]Yes ®Slo ❑ NA
❑ 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): �jln / ���•c/J��1/1t�i• e
13. Soil Type(s): arpj4
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes PNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes [QNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes F4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
10 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
[K No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes
allo
❑ 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
❑ 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
�KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
C"o
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
2/4/1011 Continued

Facility Number: - Date of Inspection:
l
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [ANo
' 25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes MNo
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 P;:71 No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes [Z No
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 L Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑NA 0 N
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
0 Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes g] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ®No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ELNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes JR No
[:]Yes CkNo
❑ Yes [Z No
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
❑ 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 paces as necessary). =
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: 9 3 33�a
Date:
214/2011

1'ype of visit: (_'C��oLLmphance inspection U Operation Review U Structure Evaluation U Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: O/Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Departure Time: a14DAen County4
Ain j Region: Fko
Farm Name: pAUl- Arr 1 p_,r 1AU195E—X Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone:
Mailing Address.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: &61
:r L15$E( I_ Title: Ot.?LPhone:
Onsite Representative: Z q tri £
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Integrator:
Certification Number: Q ci sa 41
Certification Number:
Latitude: Longitude:
"Current*r��
i
a;
g
DesignCurrent
Desigii Current
Swine
C p ity Pop.
Wet Poultry
Capacity 1'p.y4
Cattle Capacity Pop.
can to Finish
Layer
Da' Cow
Wean to Feeder
9a(5p ©I
INon-LMer
IDa"
Calf
Feeder to FinishHeifer
Farrow to Wean
Design G.
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
Dr Poul
_rrent
Ca achy l'op .
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
La ers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
Beef Brood Cow
Turkeys
C)ther
Turkey Poults
Other
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? [—]Yes [1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (€f yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ 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 G;KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page 1 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

Facili Number: ga [Date of Inspection: /O /a
❑ Yes
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Collection & Treatment
[] Yes
[D44o
❑ NA
❑ NE
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
E30/No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. Ifyes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[9"No
❑ NA
❑ NE
structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
❑ NA
Identifier:
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections []Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
Spillway?:
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[D"No
[DNA
Designed Freeboard (in): 15 19
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[] Yes
dNo
❑ NA
Observed Freeboard (in): e-4 _7�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
[2�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 DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the pennit?
[-]Yes
C31Na
❑ 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
[TNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10_ Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
Evf No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. [] Yes [ErNo ❑ 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): lrC7���,. 3csy bLooas
13. Soil Type(s): ter,
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes E41No ❑ 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 ff No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
❑ Yes E�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
["No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
[] Yes
[D44o
❑ 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
[vrNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ 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
[D"No
[DNA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
[] Yes
dNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/4/2011 Continued

4
Facili Number: - °[ Date of Inspection: IO
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes [+^No
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes [r, 3o
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey E] 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 [2r'No
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes efNo
Other Issues
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document [:]Yes "No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes E31N�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
0 Yes
[fio
❑ 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
[R'N!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
Ct -lglo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
[P,'90
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[:]Yes
E!rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers .andlorw any additional recommendations or any other comments
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary). 3-'
cep\I 51Ue�c`£. S ui%,,j j - tx acrd- L-PSaon 4&1 ck-a O , yq d
-Aa b,< mor-.pl�+trb =zv�a �c�cz Lo'% own �-
- ��tr�,pr��T CAu1DI � ori r��t�s fob e Q1�+v-P:Ev\ QC31a
Reviewer/Inspector Name;
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
_A�-'�- e �-
Phone: C l U -30F5 Cha l
Date: to 1101 I a
2/4/ZOl 1

Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation, 0 Technical 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:3aA ounty•Ant. Region- 1�
Farm Name:_ V;%u)— A� 1�., t�� SZ �C � 5 _ Owner Email:
Owner Name: P(4 J% SApti\tij Phone:
Mailing Address: 1 04) -)2 1 l,) I- Act�O (1 6.
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative:
Integrator:
Phone:
Certified Operator: dR _ l'� _ Certification Number: ca9li5 214
Back-up Operator: _ PA„ 5A ,,I L Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: Longitude:
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1A No E] NA [] NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other:
T�
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [:]Yes ❑No [ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[—]Yes ❑No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
NA
Qesign Current:, - = Design Current
Desiga Ctirrent
Swine
Capacity Pap. -Wept Po100
ulfry Capacity Pop.
Cattie Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
�_x La er
airy Cow
Wean to Feeder
Sats Non -Layer
airy Calf
Feeder to Finish
airy Heifer
Farrow to Wean
1 `K6. �
Design Current
Dry Cow
Farrow to Feeder
} :A�c;D : ->Poult Ca acitF Ptio .
Non -Dairy
Farrow to Finish
Layers
Beef Stocker
Gilts
Non -La ers
Beef Feeder
Boars
Pullets
L 113eef Brood Cow
Turkeys
other
Turkey Poults
Other
t Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1A No E] NA [] NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure El Application Field El Other:
T�
a. Was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) [:]Yes ❑No [ NA ❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
[—]Yes ❑No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
NA
❑NE
❑NA
❑NE
❑NA
❑NE
Page 1 of 3 2/42011 Continued

Facility Number: 7j A - Sc' 7 jDate of inspection: // yv;
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 j�,Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
(�: (3{IQn 0,��n•e�o`l,
Identifier: a��
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): I±. y _ I Cj
Observed Freeboard (in): a9 oho
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9_ Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive 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): 0CL f% W, \ 'prt k 50-1 '\
13. Soil Type(s): Q (+ rr
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 ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [j No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes [� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP El Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall [:]Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes [Q No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes $0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Sludge Survey
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 2/412011 Continued

Ficili Number: - 7 Date of Inspection: I I
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No
25. is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes No
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ FaiItire to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non-compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
24. 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.c., 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 CAWNP?
33. Did the Reviewer/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
[:]Yes [ No
[:]Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes q No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
C—] NA 0 N
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [N No ❑ NA ❑ NE.
El Yes ToNo 0 N 0 N
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
[—]Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
_
Comments re er to question#�-Explain any Y answers and/or any'additional recommendations or any otlher�c�omtnents.
Use drawings of faeilityto.better exp lain, -situations (use additional page§ as necessary)
0 � C OC ,6c, 0 t g1 vci � �'Ak Nj ,
1 a i � 0 � f , ���. �� � '5 FfZo►.r%
11-`10- &.35 -7 3&d
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ' Phone: 33' 3 33 3
Reviewer/Inspeetor Signature: Date: t ,qa a4111
Page 3 of 3 114/2011

IType of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance I
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:p�rl/Arrival Time: : `� Departure Time:
Farm Name: , I'd 1� /"25P.n 1�s _
Owner Name: r e C
Mailing Address:
Physical Address: /
Facility Contact: +'14 614', O/ Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Region:
Owner Email:
Phone:
Phone No:
Integrator:� �r—�-okaft 0 LLC
Operator Certification Number: _ 16989
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: Flo ='=" Longitude: = o E__1 I = "
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
[PNA
Design Current
WEurrent
Design Gnrrent
Swine Capacity Popuiation
Wet Poultry pulation
Cattle Capacity Popttiation
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Da Cow
Cg Wean to Feeder S�Li0
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Dai Calf
LI Feeder to Finish
❑ Yes
❑ Dai Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ D Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
❑ Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Co
wl
❑ Turke s
Other
❑
❑Turke Po [Its
❑Other
Number of Structures:
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?
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
[PNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
M NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
JONA
/❑
[INE
ElYes
§5 No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number:
Waste Collection & Treatment
Date of Inspection
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Q Yes PRNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ NoNA C1NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 tructure 6
Identifier: A
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
sr7 y
Observed Freeboard (in): ,J� 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
S. 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.)
❑ NE
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ NA
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
S. 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)
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
❑ NE
Waste Application
❑ Yes
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ YesNo
ElNA ElNE
mai ntenance/improvement?
H. . Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
[PNo ❑ 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 ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
,W[indow
12. Crop type(s) arm [
13. Soil type(s)
Reviewer/Inspector Name - — — –
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
MNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
[P No
ElNA
[:1NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
EJYes
d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ NA
❑ NE
-- :. '. '' soh' -3.� �I' b
Comments (Wer to question #) -Explain my YES answers and/or atiy recommendations or anya othei commeents �
sfRz­
Use drawings -of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as ecessaryj":
Reviewer/Inspector Name - — — –
Phone: %6 -q2 3,3OD
Reviewerllnspector Signature:.
Date:
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Z Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes (ANo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes BNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps [I Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes EjPNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly f=reeboard ❑ 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
M No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
SNA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
10 Yes
ER❑
NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
"mNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
1j3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
❑ No
WA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
M*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
R-� 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
Eallo
❑ 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
1PNo
❑ 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
1!�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
ml
❑ NA
❑ NE
f►ddihonal�Cotnments andlor Drawings:
f- 1.�� WlPty` YJirQ T h ��C� s TD ip— coi,'p I j .
P
12/28/04

DateofVisit: HiQ Time: �3d
Facility Number 7
Not rational Belowreshold
ElPermitted O Certified 19 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: �6 -AwS e -p es County: _
Owner Name: �a wi s �� Phone No:
Mailing Address: 1
Facility Contact: �a� I s tnr► ItA.rTitle: [ilyn e� Phone No:
Onsite Representative: rfQu-� 5 4an le':j Integrator: i�LL t
Certified Operator: Jct � � Operator Certification Number: i la gy
Location of Farm:
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ horse Latitude a • " Longitude & ' 0~
Des rlraetinotit, CurreaDeJim r>
.
_
.0 -POP'-
iloa Po uaP0013 ationSKiAeQi aMvtu .
Wean to Feeder
�Nonlayer = ❑ Daity
Feeder to FinisFt=
t ❑ Non -Dairy
Farrow to Wean-
❑ Farrow to Feeder
m ❑Other - -
❑ Farrow to Finish
Tnta1 Desi C8 actt
P 3'-
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
- r
E
- Total SSW
1Vtamber of Lagoons® ❑Subsurface Drains Present ❑ I a oon Area ❑ S ray Field Area
HoEditig Pt<AdS /.Soisd:T
4 ; ❑ No Liquid Waite Management Svstem 3
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes 1� No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Laaoan ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes 5 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes C$ No
Wa to Collection & Treatment
4_ Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes (p No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 5
Identifier: , r
Freeboard (inches): r
05/03/01 Continued

Facility Number: ,-� — rjej7 1 Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Aoolication
❑ Yes D[No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes [P No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes MNO
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑JExcessive Ponding PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload Yes ❑ No
12. Crop type COreN l W�ea I Saar �eans
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ❑ No
I5. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
[$ No
Required
Records & Documents
a5 - �u� nee�s 6e c�rnmerolecl� . ��u P i�n �n w� 3e, ac.
IT
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
M No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
�N
mct n
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
W No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
N[No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
[� Yes
❑ No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
�awsGomiliints-(eto'C'*fi #) Explas-'Yatdor.anyrrnenns:oanv,other eozlitiEieiits:` � _
y
Use drawings of facdity to.b tter enplam situs#tons. (aw i ddid6hal pages ss necessary) - - -
_ . _ Field Cory ❑ Final Notes _
�I- 51,5 a����l;cc�rbrl On ` tAl r 16-D CtIrn crap o .�? I� cc,
a5 - �u� nee�s 6e c�rnmerolecl� . ��u P i�n �n w� 3e, ac.
Sp ��e�cQ� Z"rr-� nr.►tis lt`r pwljs I_r7 _�_W
�N
mct n
Reviewer/inspector Name
Reviewer-Anspector Signature: ly f Date: lieD-1
05103101 Continued

Type of Visit is Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine a Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: I Arrival Time: Departure Time: „w County: c. LAe� Region:
l
Farm Name: Owner Email:
Owner Name: male (_"fYil ' Phone:
Mailing Address:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: Title:
Onsite Representative: e k
Certified Operator: 7 C
j__
Back-up Operator:
Phone No:
Integrator: myc
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: = e =I
=" Longitude: =0=6 = 4f
Design Current Destgn Current Design Current
�.,.
Swine CapacityPopulation WetlPoultry Capa qty Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish ❑ La er ❑ Da Cow
Wean to Feeder atm ❑Non -La er ❑Dai Calf
Feeder to Finish ktA z"";W,: _ ❑ Dairy Heifer
D
ElFarrow to Wean , �`
Dry;�Potiltry� ❑ Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder❑Layers
La ers ❑Non -Dai
El Farrow to Finish ❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts ❑ Non -Layers ❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars ❑ Puliets
❑ Beef Brood Co
❑ Turke s
Other -
,, - ❑ Turke Poults
❑ Other ❑Other Number�of;Structures:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
b- Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (I f yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
e. 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
El NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
El Yes
No
!❑ NA
[:1 NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
El
No
❑ NA
C1 NE
other than from a discharge`?
Page 1 of 3
12/28/04
Continued

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection
[] Yes�j
No
❑ NA
Waste Collection & Treatment
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
4. 1s storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
1�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
(PNA ❑ NE
Structure i Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
S1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
H
Observed Freeboard (in):_
5, Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA LINE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
Wo
❑ 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
tp No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
19 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
0 N
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
[] Yes
gNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? 1f yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
'A No
❑ NA LINE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN [:1PAN > ]0% or ]0 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�j
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
l 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
S1No
❑ NA
❑ NE
"'L
Reviewer/Inspector Name.1 Phare: 0 ! 2al
41 Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:Qq 1-10 VV I
Page 2 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: IF 70_— Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes TNo ❑ NA EINE
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 ❑ ChecklistsF
❑ Design El Maps El Other
21.
Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
JP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Annual Certification
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ 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
tlNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23_
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes
J9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
Io No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
JfjNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
Tfi 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
0 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
f9 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
$LNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number '$a sq'7 0 Division of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
�1V
Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit • Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
fr�S
Date of Visit: Ja DI
Arrival Time: ` Q►ti Departure Time: (� S County: ON � Region: Fk
Farm Name: Paul .94u fet, Ahtrsu-ti es Owner Email:
Owner Name: Ito- 2 N Phone: 10 .2L3'3r7/'j
Mailing Address: 100-93 0 t 1 Ict! Q le • I W1%11" d C -;Bq ?$ - f/d L�"aD��
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: t L41
Title: Phone No:
tt
Onsite Representative: f Integrator:
Certified Operator: o�n �! Operator Certification Number: ri6q
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =' [--] ' =" Longitude: = ° ='
= u
Design Current Design Current Design
Swine r' -Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity.
❑ Wean to Finish
Weanto Feeder 200 1 44160
El Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
❑ La er
❑ Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑
Layers
❑
Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turke s
❑ Turkey Poults
❑ Other
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Covq
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?
M
❑ Yes [P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes �F No
[:INA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
qNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
❑ Yes
15 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
1P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
0 NA
❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
O Y aK
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes[
No
❑ NA
El
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
II
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat,
notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement'?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes[�No ElNA El 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 1�,No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes M No C3 NA [__1 NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes P 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
15 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'?
❑ Yes
[9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?❑ Yes
1p No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application'?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a Iack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0ANo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
i
Reviewer/Inspector Name Q Phone: f0 �3'33C�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: f
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: U-- Date of Inspection
Re uired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes FINo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? if yes, check ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropirate box.
❑ WUP El Checklists ❑Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1�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
No
[INA
❑NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
JP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
O No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes [RNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document ❑ YesNo El NA [:1NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? EF
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes H No ElNA [:INE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
r-
3 1. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes ®.No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative? ❑ Yes P -No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104

Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 0 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: /l Arrival Time: 4"iu1�Q.�. Departure Time: County: S rt Region:
Farm Name: . Pau( 5411,, e44 M urswi "e s Owner Email: B��)1
Owner Name: 1 it�M I't& ! j Phone: )
Mailing Address: I Q Q; � r iQ+'� P 1�C- a� }'7� (11e5_10-9050 CW
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: & Ste, 1,o, Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: PW s4aA Integrator:
Certified Operator: 's I(n B Qperator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =0
= = Longitude: =0=1 = u
Swine
Design Current Design
Wet Poultry
.Current Design Current
Cattle
❑ NA
❑ NE
Capacity Population Capacity
Population
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ La er
❑ Yes
❑Dai Cow
YNA
❑ NE
Wean to Feeder
SR—COiTy
y
❑ No
Calf
❑ NE
ElFeeder to Finish
- _ 2. == ❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
llry Poultry'# -
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder;
❑ No
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
[%No
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Nor -Layers
❑ Yes
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Boars❑
ElPullets
❑ Turke s
other than from a discharge?
Beef Brood Co
•.. -
Other
1 y,� j�..
❑ Turkey Poults
Page I of 3
[E-1 Other-
❑Other JNumber
of Structures:
a
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Ycs
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
❑ No
YNA
❑ NE
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
IT NA
❑ NE
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
MNA
❑ NE
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
[%No
❑ NA
❑ NE
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
❑ Yes
EpNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
12/28104
Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
❑ Yes
IS No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Waste Collection & Treatment
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
[] No
® NA
El NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure
5
Sfftructure 6
Identifier:'
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in): IV u c} t
Observed Freeboard (in): W, 15;"
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
q 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
tA 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 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 [YJ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes ® No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ;Q No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > ]0% or 10 lbs []Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/SIudge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) W hLa
_
q&l S nS e Ca --r n
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
IS No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
f3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
IN No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
.:; fl
Comments (refer to question #). Egplain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other'comments
Use drawings of -facility to better explain situations: (use addrhnnal pages as necessary): ..
r,Py 6 e -+e . -fes
L'7 i6n,w 14 4)tx'k5 Pot r
Reviewer/Inspector Name �� - -- T Te Phone:IF IF
�9lD) �%✓��"3��
q
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: J9
rage -e o) s rliravtr4 uonunuea

)E'acility Number: ;2 — 9 Date of Inspection
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 [R No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes D9 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 [4 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes P No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
t4 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
[,3No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27_
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
EP No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
[3 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
Q 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
P No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:`''. R� �u
A.
H
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

Type of Visit *Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ® Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other © Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: '- Tone: O
=Not rational Q Below Threshold
El Permitted [3 Certified 13 Conditionally Certified 13 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: C...-.-_-_
Farm Name:_,.- -.�4 ... { a,. G....-. L� k e a �r ! *.»! .-...._._ County:
Owner Name: ...........Phone .........................Phone No:
.........__............... .ti..`.�.��....5. F ..'..............
Mailing Address: LC2 Q ....S.l� 3.....!�1 a v . , .9 � :
Facility Contact: - .___._ f�......_--.-.-.-.--- Title: ............. _ -- — -- - ----- Phone No:.. _-�_...------ ..._......
Onsite Representative:...-.. _L . .. �.......S.t" 5.---71�4 .........._,_....-._ .. Integrator:-,-.�+!�r �? �+� ~....� rover ._...
Certified Operator:_ :��L _.� .�?C, _ ._..._ Operator Certification Number: � 16 S 9
�. ... _
Location of Farm:
I&.
(%Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • 4 « Longitude • 6 di
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes [3f No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? [-]Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gaftin? _ /v �±
d_ Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any pati of the operation? ❑ Yes [%No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes jA No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes [& No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: .-.+ Jr 3 ��_,..„. _
Freeboard (inches):
12112103 Cont0wed

Facility Number: — 07
Date of Inspection
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 pian?
(I€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 3 No
❑ Yes Q No
❑ Yes J3 No
S. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes 7 No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes No
31este Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes [t] No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes 5g No
12. Crop type CO r ,•� rJ Es �, b e c � s �w j h c a'f-`
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes (9 No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes M No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes W No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes ® No
Renuired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
]A No
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc_)
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
(9 No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at tate time of design?
❑ Yes
[P No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
n No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
M No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
[8 No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
[A No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Goritnenft (refer to quesison #) ¢Exw plain aay l'ES aaxvfers andiarxany reeomu amens `dr anw otfrer eamcnents -
Use drawings of facdrtr tobetter explain sitieatlwns. (use admen al pages nes ar}) ®F3eld COPY ❑ Final Notes
Reviewer/Inspector Name m:.x: _ :_. . _ i , v ., -,, . s :;•
Reviewerllnspector Signature: Date: ^
05/03/01 Continued

Type of Visit 0 Compliance Inspection d Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit & Routine O Complaint 0 Follow up 0 Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: LILA Time:rQ
Not O erational Below 1hreshold
® Permitted ® Certified [` 1Conditionally Certified [3Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: J TGi Ik" AlVrS-er&,S County: ys' + O
Owner Name: d / _ S deley Phone No: (O � t -L _
Mailing Address: /&43 U'. j1Ar4 /VG 7F
Facility Contact:
Title:
Onsite Representative: / r -d 1 J7 41e v n
Certified Operator: r1e V
Location of Farm:
Phone No:
Integrator:t//D�v'�/PIp�1pq
Operator Certification Number: ! !O
Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude
Design Current
Swine Capacitv Population
Wean to Feeder aQ�
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
Number of Lagoons
Holding Ponds I -SW Traps
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acity Po ulation Cattle Ca acity Po 6U1246
❑ Layer I Dairy
❑ Non -Layer Dairy Ell . I
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
Subsurface Drains i
No Liquid Waste Al
Discharges & Stream Ire act
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b_ If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
e. 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 Colleectign & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure ? Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:A
a
Freeboard (inches):
05/03/01
Continued
No
❑ Yes
❑Yes
0 N
❑Yes
[:3 No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
EQ No
❑ Yes
[4 No
❑ Yes
KLNo
Structure 6
Continued

Facility number: Date of Inspection
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do anv stuctures lack adequate. gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markinns?
%Taste ADDlication
❑ Yes K No
❑ Yes R] No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes M No
❑ Yes [) No
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenanceiimprovement? ❑ Yes EM No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessiive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes �+ No
12. Crop type ort -fo Zeaw fft& bYLfrjs
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
b) Does the facility need a .vetrable acre determination? ❑ Yes M No
c) This facility is pended for a v ettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ' No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes W No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes W No
Ret rt_ired Records S DQgtments
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes W No
18_ Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps. etc.) ❑Yes r%A No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes O No
21. Did the facility° fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes ®No
22. rail to notify regional DIVQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge. freeboard problems. over application) ❑ Yes UK No
23. Did Reviewergnspector fail to discuss reviewiinspection with on-site representative? ❑ Yes ® No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ®No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes & No
Q leo violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visiL
-::,._,r :,-. �•�. ..� _.. s:�+?;..:�-.... ..� ..�w.�"r y ; .,i,� ,F ._....����'.�•a q'.. �..a.'.
Commenti;(refet M gtdestton : -Eizp6-m amy YES answefs nndlorany re=nmenditinns or any atheie cammeiutts.
Use drawings of facility to better explant sifiatiom (use additional pages as uecesary) - w"� r
�: ,'a � a ;....�.:,�:�. z=�... ��.: _����.: _..� ..� '•� ��;���� L1 Field Copv El Final NotesY�s
��.r.. �.
Reviewer/Inspector Name .d. r..�Lk .. -:eJ9—� •�rw�
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:^ Date:
05/03/01 v Continued

aOF W A T�9Q Michael F. Easley, Governor
�G William G. Ross Jr., Secretary
0
07 North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
> Alan W, Klimek, P.E. Director
Gy Division of Water Quality
July 18, 2003
f
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Pagle Corporation
10023 Willard Road
Willard, NC 28478
Subject: Rescission of Notice of Violation /
Issuance of Notice of Deficiency
Paul Stanley Nurseries
Facility Number 82-597
Sampson County
Dear Owner:
Thank you for your recent submittal of the information requested in our letter dated April 15,
2003. We greatly appreciate the effort that you made in compiling this information and sending
it to our Fayetteville Regional Office by the date required. We also appreciate the fact that you
reported the problem with high freeboard to our staff as required by your permit and worked with
our staff to manage the problem once it occurred.
Upon review and consideration of the information submitted, the Fayetteville Regional Office
has determined that no further compliance/enforcement actions will be taken by the Division for
these high freeboards.
Also, based on your actions to properly operate your facility, the Division of Water Quality
hereby rescinds the Notice of Violation that was issued to you on April 15, 2003, and replaces it
with this Notice of Deficiency.
In the future, please continue to evaluate ways to maintain freeboard levels in the required range.
These methods include, but are not limited to, water conservation practices, adding additional
application sites, updating your cropping systems, adding additional and/or more flexible
application equipment, and maintaining the lagoon levels at the lowest allowable and appropriate
levels throughout the year. Our staff looks forward to continuing to work with you and your
Technical Specialist to evaluate and implement any needed changes to your system.
�s�i
KUM
Customer Service. Mailing Address: Telephone. [phone] Lmaiion_
1 800 623-7748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax: [phone] N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01-01 Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity I Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled 1 10% postconsumer paper
http://h2o.e,nr.state.nc.us

Inadequate Freeboard
Page 2
Thank you again for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact the staff of our Fayetteville Regional Office at 910-486-1541.
Sincerely,
Paul E. Ra �Is
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: FRO CAFO File: 82-597
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Central Files

�OC A � � en Michael F. Easley, Govemor
William `� C G. Ross Jr., Secretary
y North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources
Alan W. Klimek, P.E. Director
Division of water Quality
July 18, 2003
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Pagle Corporation
10023 Willard Road
Willard, NC 28478
Subject: Rescission of Notice of Violation /
Issuance of Notice of Deficiency
Paul Stanley Nurseries
Facility Number 82-597
Sampson County
Dear Owner:
Thank you for your recent submittal of the information requested in our letter dated April 15,
2003. We greatly appreciate the effort that you made in compiling this information and sending
it to our Fayetteville Regional Office by the date required. We also appreciate the fact that you
reported the problem with high freeboard to our staff as required by your permit and worked with
our staff to manage the problem once it occurred.
k
Upon review and consideration of the information submitted, the Fayetteville Regional Office
has determined that no further compliance/enforcement actions will be taken by the Division for
these high freeboards.
Also, based on your actions to properly operate your facility, the Division of Water Quality
hereby rescinds the Notice of Violation that was issued to you on April 15, 2003, and replaces it
with this Notice of Deficiency.
In the future, please continue to evaluate ways to maintain freeboard levels in the required range.
These methods include, but are not limited to, water conservation practices, adding additional
application sites, updating your cropping systems, adding additional and/or more flexible
application equipment, and maintaining the lagoon levels at the lowest allowable and appropriate
levels throughout the year. Our staff looks forward to continuing to work with you and your
Technical Specialist to evaluate and implement any needed changes to your system.
Customer Service: Mailing Address: Telephone: [phone]
1 840 623-7748 1617 Mail Service Center Fax: [phone]
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617 State Courier #52-01.01
An Equal Opportunity 1 Affirmative Action Employer
50% recycled 110% post -consumer paper
http://h2o,enr.state.nc.us
V9A
t" l) MR
tocaflon:
512 N. Salisbury St.
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617

Inadequate Freeboard
Page 2
Thank you again for your cooperation. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact the staff of our Fayetteville Regional Office at 910-486-1541.
Sincerely,
C:
Paul E. Rawls
Water Quality Regional Supervisor
cc: FRO CAFO File: 82-597
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Central Files

State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources RECEIVED
Division of Water Quality
James B. Hunt, Jr., Governor
Bill Holman, Secretary
Kerr T. Stevens, Director
CERTIFIED MAIL
RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED
Stuart Davis
Stuart Davis #1 & #2
10023 Willard Rd_
Willard NC 28478
Farre Number: 82 - 597
Dear Stuart Davis:
1AR 17 2000
FAYEiTEVILLE
AEG. OFFICE
March 15, 2000
NCDENR
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
You are hereby notified that Stuart Davis #1 & #2, in accordance with G -S. 143-215.100, must apply for coverage
under an Animal Waste Operation General Permit. Upon receipt of this letter, your farm has sixty (60) days to submit the
attached application and all supporting documentation. In accordance with Chapter 626 of 1995 Session Laws (Regular
Session 1996), Section 19(c)(2), any owner or operator who fails to submit an application by the date specified by the
Department SHALL NOT OPERATE the animal waste system after the specitied date. Your application must be
returned within sixty (60) days of receipt of this letter. Failure to submit the application as required may also subject your
facility to a civil penalty and other enforcement actions for each day the facility is operated following the due date of the
application.
The attached application has been partially completed using information listed in your Animal Waste Management
Pian Certification Form. If any of the general or operation information listed is incorrect please make corrections as noted on
the application before returning the application package. The signed original application, one copy of the signed application,
two copies of a general location map, and two copies of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan must be returned to
complete the application package. The completed package should be sent to the following address:
North Carolina Division of Water Quality
Water Quality Section
Non -Discharge Permitting Unit
1617Mail Service Center
Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
If you have any questions concerning this letter, please call J R Joshi at [phone] extension 363 or Jeffery
Brown with the Fayetteville Regional Office at [phone].
Sincerely, ' l ' %'` Z'
for Kerr T. Stevens
cc: Permit File (w/o encl.)
Fayetteville Regional Office (w/o encl.)
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1617
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
1
1
1
Telephone [phone] FAX [phone]
50% recycled/ 10% post -consumer paper

w Divi
Tsion of Water Quality Y
IFac�ity Number = Q Division of Soil and V4'ater Conservation
-Owlother Agency
Type of Visit • Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason €or Visit O Routine Q Complaint O Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit:
Farm Name:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address:
/�/ Arrival 'Time: Departure Time: I IQ County: Region:
Ala4a,rAd Owner Email:
Phone:
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: �''' Title: Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: =0
=,
=64 Longitude: =11=1 = u
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Populatio
'IngattleCapacity
Population
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Layer
❑ Yes tWNo [INA
❑ Dairy Cow
10 Wean to Feeder ZAP
10 Non -Layer
I
Dairy Calf
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Da iry Heifer
❑ Farrow to Wean
Dry Poultry
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Non -Dai
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Layers
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Gilts
❑ Non -Layers
❑Beef Feeder
❑ Boars
El Pullets
❑ Beef Brood Cowi
❑Turke s
Other
❑Other 1100ther
❑ Turkey Poults
Number a€ 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 , f�lNo ❑ NA EINE
❑ Yes ❑ No 4 NA
/
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA
EINE
❑ Yes ❑ No NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes tWNo [INA
❑NE
Page 1 of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection 7 A
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes M No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No WA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Z
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): d�
5_ Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes
® No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
/
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes
2 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
El Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
❑ Yes
No
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
[2 No
Waste Application
❑ NE
17.
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
No
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
❑ NE
18.
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.)
❑ NE
[:]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) C&I" K , W L4 . SB --,Dm-' S
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continued
r
a
Reviewer/inspector Name �' D�'�r r
_ .� r r�1J � � Phone: /0 )�'3�
Reviewer/inspector Signature: 4 Date: t!a�
13.
Soil type(s) 0911�
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
[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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continued
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers andlor any recommendations or any o#iter comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
a
Reviewer/inspector Name �' D�'�r r
_ .� r r�1J � � Phone: /0 )�'3�
Reviewer/inspector Signature: 4 Date: t!a�
Page 2 of 3 12/28/04 Continued

Facility Number: Date of Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists
❑ Design ❑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 1" Rain Inspections ❑ Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
[B No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
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
�9 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
6No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30.
At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
0 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
U3 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32.
Did Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on-site representative?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings
Page 3 of 3 12/28/04

Facility Number 8Z Date of Inspection I!
Time of Inspectiau 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted Q Certified © Conditionally Certified Q Registered JE3 Not Oper—a—ti—p—n—all Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Jr +.4 1" �A.. �.f. �. ., ....................... Count '1 . 0�+3
County ............
Owner Name :.......... .................... �lvil................. .......1111..................... . Phone No:.....�Z..��..........................
Facility Contact: .. .:�!'Ov.-f.......................... Title:
Mailing Address: /o v.23......SCJ...f............................
................ .......... .......
Onsite Representative: ...........!/��.......y........................
1111... sues......... ...........
Certified Operator:.......... ! „.14(1 ............. .
' •¢ 1111.. ................
Location of Farm:
....... Phone No:
,e�....N...G.....?
!t.`................_ ...............
Operator Certification Number:
c............... ............. I ...................... .................................................I................................. I ................. .................... 1...11...1......... .............
Latitude o • �� �. Longitude 0 • �'+°
L
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy:q-:
❑Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
_. ,-.rr.r..
--
❑ Other _
' Total Design Capacity
.-Tota1-SSLW
77
i �rPs;Rd, nsa C Design Current ;'r r �,. Desrgn Current - Design _ . •Current
Swine r, Ca aci Population "''Poul#iy-Ca acity: Po' I ti' Cattle Capacity .Po 'Mahon
Wean to Feeder DD O D
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gils�
❑ Boars
ber.oif L-agoans_= . 2_ 3 w. ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 0 Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
!o,", olid=T
/ Sraps ❑ s __'. No Liquid Waste Management System E
..
Discharges & Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (Il' yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Dues disrharge 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
❑ Yes NLNo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes 'KNo
❑ Yes ,� No
❑ Yes ,�j No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes 4 No
Structure 6
Identifier: loe
Freeboard (inches): Z! �� ..
.............'........_...................................,................_.................................................. ....................................................................
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes WNo
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back

Facility Number: 2 — I Date of Inspection
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7_ Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Anulication
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes ;qNo
10.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
KNo
11.
Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
IRNo
12.
Crop type _5-zP4§O.W a-,rw.
XNo
18.
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
KNo
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
XNo
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
�
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
XNo
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
D(No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
[:]Yes
JR No
Required Records & Documents
Use drawtugs of facility to better explarn srtuaho s (use addrtional pages`as`necessary)
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
XNo
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Reviewer/inspector Nameb
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
�
XYes
El No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
,KNo
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
XNo
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes
g No
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
NNo
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
X No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
),No
�4•viola f idlis :or• def ci6ndi-.5 -were h0fed• d><rrixig Ois: visit. Ybu will -receive Bio: i lifrtht2r •
corires oridei "abir6f this visit: ::: ::::::: : .
Comments. (refer to"quesiron #) Explain any YES answers and/or any. recommendatrons or:.any other comments
Use drawtugs of facility to better explarn srtuaho s (use addrtional pages`as`necessary)
Reviewer/inspector Nameb
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
3/23/99

s
Facility Number:�� — Date of Inspection /.t /C
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ 4No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes 0 No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Ycs No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes j$ No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes gO No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ y�j o
WdditionafCdjim-ents an or
w
3123/99

Division of Soil and Water Conservation 0 Other Agency
Division of Water Quality
Routine Q Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection V Follow-up of DSWC review O Other �
�r.r.r w�r.�w rr i ■ ww i ���
I Date of Inspection `'Zg
Facility Number Time of Inspection 124 hr. (hh:mm)
© Registered Certified [3 Applied for Permit © Permitted 113 Not O eratiErnal` Date Last Operated:
I(If.,
tj.. ...... .. ..L..,. ... ............... County:....1r !`'..............................................
Farm Name: _ 54uc ' .
Owner Name:... ,1 Z ! .... ............................................................... Phone No: ................... ..-. �� .Z....................
Facility Contact: q r� V < ... Title: D ctrl e C' ... Phone No: ...............................................
Mailing Address: .......1. 0'2-.�3........ t &.)- ..1: o rd ........f.Y F....................................LL.�..f .1.Q�P... 4,.Y .......................... z.t?.T...7�.
t ..
Onsite Representative:.. � L<.��..1.�!.�. -. Integrator: .............. Al .. ffE..........•->--.................................
Certified Operator---- ar.f._...... .. Operator Certification Number; ........ .... . . __..
Location of Farm:
Latitude =-=,=" Longitude 0' 01 =11
" Design -. Current Design ' Current: " �eSlgq� Cjarrent
•, �n;d4x ddj ero &¢V� . ' _ �
Swmea .. Capacity .PapnIabonPoult'
f fry 'Capacity Popuiaiii h Cattle, ,.. apa �h'. 9PU w
Wean to Feeder `. ❑ Layer` ❑Dairy
:.
FI El
eeder to Finish ❑Nan -Layer ❑Non-DairybR
❑Farrow to Wean
❑ Other
El Farrow to Feeder s ;
> , ,
Farrow to Finish - Tetal Design Cap ex > Q}D
s❑ .
❑ Gilts ;-v` x_, �;; w' k
- ❑
Boars
Nnml►er of Lagodns I HoIding`Pnnds rr� ❑Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area JEISpray Field Area
�" �' T„, ,w $w ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System _-
w�x r¢
.
General
1.
Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
2.
Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
o
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
❑ Yes
[] No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Surface Water? (If yes. notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ Yes
❑ No
3.
Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
9No
�r4No
4.
Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
5.
Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
jkrNo
maintenance/improvement?
6.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
,�
ll0
vvvP
7.
Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
El Yes
No
7/25/97

Facility Number: 2 7
O
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes No
Structures (Lagoons,Holding Ponds= Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes "'No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard(ft):.......... -• ..............•-.. .................................................. ...............•. -•---•
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 P No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes K No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ❑ Yes No
Waste Application
14. Is then: physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes No
(If in excess of WWW, or runoff entering wate of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .......Coj...Y.�........... h�. ... .................................................. .........................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes f No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes KNo
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes O -NO
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment? ❑ Yes 9No
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes JO No
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative? ❑ Yes PdNo
22. Does record keeping need improvement? ❑ Yes KNo
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available? ❑ Yes 0 N
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes (-No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No
No.violations-or_ deficieitcies.wer`note'd-during th_is.visit.- You.will iieei i've•no-furdier:
:�:•correspQndehceabou�this:visit:•: .•.:�.�.. :-:�:�. ;�.:,:�:-:���.•:�:-:�.•:•:•:• •.:. :�:�:•�•:•
�Coetrts (lFerto_tsh©n"#)EyipNatn'ang YES answersatnlio army recommendations'oianyiiher°cirnimeuts:
...6f k -w :UEj3 c mbr.. ,bL__ff✓�,� s.`,'ies�'? .Z' % t:;."'r... '�' ..
#1 eirst tvtttgs of fa hty trs better expiatn�'situWat,ons (use additkiw pages as.ne sary):
Favc_. we lt°t,.`_':S`'..Jba'"'tsy`t}1 h0.�6'...2t[i'✓ta'.-.Yr:.PNE3xu.....`xv�.f.a_�hts.,,`ib�aYSYFY..�i3.v �•.. :<%s':MS.,v[�5sib:Yf.+x�F`h Mac4.t:-:a �''„ `:-
Gee I ria �~� rocW
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Naives
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: _ Z��—

•�
fi- 4 ❑ DSWC Animal Feedlot Operation Review ""`
��.,�.�...� w. wo- ♦a ,rer s.e-. rY a•,,w,a.'
jMDWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection x _
ff Routine O Complaint 0 Foils %v -up of D1V0 inspcvtion 0 Follow --urs of i)S" C review 0 Other
Facility Number
Date of Inspection /O
Z
Time of Inspection '3a 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Registered & Cert/ified �© Applied for Permit 13 Permitted [3 Not Operational I Date Last Operated: ..........................
Farm Namc:.......... S T�4r4,.,.L.. - !ls......................................... County:..r....!!°.ra...J-----..................I....................
Owner Name . .......... ...�r4!�JF.......�'�'15............................................................. .. Phone No:.i ll��....���..`"�.��.Z.....................
FacilityContact: ......... r!�.............................................. Title: ................ -........................ ....................... Phone No:...................................................
3e
Nfailntg Address: ...... X'4111ra�.&2 .... . ......
..................
Onsite Representative: ............. Integrators ...
jP............... p
Certified Operator:...... W Sf•�4'�i!>f�'!/...............-------------------..�/©perator Certification Numberj;.....1...---_---
Location of Farm: i�r✓ti `3ooZ1 �,- Le'..._
Latitude Longitude
Swine
® Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
CapacityPopulation
Design' Current Destgn .' ;Currenf-
.Poultry Capacity Population. Cattle Capactity Population
❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity.
Total SSl1W
Number of Lagoons / HoldingPonds' ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ t,agcwn Arra ❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management S}stem
Cencral
1. Are there any buffers that need tnaintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ,UNo
2. Is any discharge observed from an), part of the operation? ❑ Yes KrNo
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a_ If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes 0 No
b. If di char e is observed, did it react Surf1we Water" (If yes. Notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
c. l I discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon systetn? f ll' yes. notify DWQ) El Yes 1K No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes Xtio
s
1. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes N No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require ❑ Yes �rNo
mai nten an ce/i mprovetnent?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge? ❑ Yes RNo
7125197
Continued on back

Facility Number.
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes 'Pt No
Structures (Lagoons.lnlolding Ponds, Flush Pits, etc.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes (VrNo
Structure 1 Structure. 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:
Freeboard (ft}:`..✓ ............. . 3 " ...........................................
........ ...... .... ......................................••......-.................................... ...:...
10. 1s seepage observed from any of the structures? ❑ Yes kNo
11. is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes krNo
12, Do any of the structures need maintenancelimprovement? ❑ Yes ( NO
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an inunediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers?
Waste Application -
14. Is there physical evidence of over application?
(If in excess of WMT, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....--------
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Flan (AWVIP)?
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/lnspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Pennitted 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?
13 No.violations or deficiencies were- noted- during this.visit..You,will receive no further
correspondence about this. visit'.,. .
❑ Yes N[No
❑ Yes No
O Yes ANo
❑ Yes A No
❑ Yes (9 No
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes KNo
(ryes El No
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes "No
❑ Yes A No
Comments prefer fo question #): Explain any.nYES answers and/or any, rerornmendattons or any other comments, ry
Use drasytngs of facility to'betterexptaii►stfttat�on� (use additiot>al pages a5 -necessary)
.mss
/v �iC- �i�-✓iC r' �/£,FPr rD AA /4 /� �S C �h%� %� /4wa0• - A i•✓c.�.."/�5c
AAV/4
n
/�✓ T� >�fs �v aZ,4B-) A Ill cJ �fa"10 .� irk
,�4rar T"
2.2. Irl�l
7125/97
ameReviewer/Inspector \m6P, p _
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

1
Date of Visit: G 4/ Time: �.�
Facility Number Z 7
Q Not ration.! Q Below Threshold
® Permitted IN Cer if-ied [3 Conditionally Certified Q Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold;
Farm Name: ...........r*..-� .... i/,C�rl~, .......................... County: _....... ............... ..... ... .
Owner Name:..1.1�'" ` ��. _ _ ... �wW Ww. . _ Phone No:
FacilityContact: .........* 1...........:r..... ............. Title: ......................................................... . ..... Phone No:...................................................
Mailing Address:........2 ..A�[F��....... ✓...�.�J'......��_�G��.. _ .. .
Onsite Representative: .. ,.7x� ,alcY ' ".ler. Uttegrator:
Certified Operator:.......... ....... . .. ... .. . .......................... Operator Certification Number:..,
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude • a 44 Longitude • f 66
a urD Crent_._,gn Current = , 'Desegn Current
..
_.
Cattle:
ci y- -Po 'ulatton pP try_. R, :Ca p ,. Po niiition . C
Wean to Feeder a4LFO Layer' ❑Dairy
❑Feeder to Finish ❑Nan -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
T.,
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder Other
❑ Farrow to FinishiD#Al-Msi Ca ..... i
Pay t3'
Gilts _ _
Boars Total Sgt*
Numbec,of Lagoons a ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ©�ooa Area . 10 Spray Field Area
41 Ponds 1 Solid T"
raps,- Na Liquid Waste Management System '
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes f NO
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes KNo
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes 21 No
c. If discharge is observed_ what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes lj�Nn
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus stone storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ,VTo
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 - Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Jv
.,�tIdcntificr............................ ............................. ...... .................................... ........ ................................................
Freeboard (incites):
5100 Continued on back

: �ti10 Yt � t4 :e ' def c�e»�ite*to 00" ooitmg his. VWjt; - X00 will-teeoiye 04 00"W .
corrin deuce. about: this visit:::. - ... ...: :
Facility Number: RZ — _,5"f Date of Inspection
Comments (refer to questioq #) , Eiicplata aay_YR5 answers and/or any recommendations or say other cn fa '
Use dtraw;of fairility to explant sitiiationts. (aseadditional pages as niJ,
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
I'd
closure plan?
❑ Yes
P!Vo
(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
JR No
& Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
j No
9- Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
�fo
// --
Wactc Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
IrwrNo
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN []Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
No
12. Crop type -_Sz� -r ::e
13- Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
PNo
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
L
P No
C) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
;RNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
;5�No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
J'No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available'
(ie/ WUP checklists, design, ✓, etc.) ��
❑ YesANo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigatipn, freeboard, wasteanal tsy s soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
RNo
20- Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
RNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
to
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(id discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
o
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative?
❑ Yes
XNo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
9No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
: �ti10 Yt � t4 :e ' def c�e»�ite*to 00" ooitmg his. VWjt; - X00 will-teeoiye 04 00"W .
corrin deuce. about: this visit:::. - ... ...: :
Comments (refer to questioq #) , Eiicplata aay_YR5 answers and/or any recommendations or say other cn fa '
Use dtraw;of fairility to explant sitiiationts. (aseadditional pages as niJ,
_lbetter
I'd
Reviewer/Inspector Name g�
Reviewerflnspector Signature: Date:

Facility Number: z_ — Date of Inspection Qi
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below CWYes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? [:]-Yes No
28_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ®,No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes Wo
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ANo
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes E Vo
AMitioum Comments and
or. wawings:
qV
5100

J
State of North Carolina
Department of Environment
and Natural Resources
Division of Water Quality
pa','J !s
!••
SI{ -
Michael F. Easley, Governor ✓
William G. Ross Jr., Secretary NCDENR
Gregory J. Thorpe, Ph.D., Acting Director NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
ENVIRONMENT AND NATURAL RESOURCES
August 27, 2001
MEMORANDUM
To: Regional Water Quality Supervisor
From: Sonya Avant, Environmental Engineer AW.
Non -Discharge Compliance and Enforcement Unit
Subject: Wettable Acre Determinations for Certified and Permitted Operations
Attached is a list of the facilities in your respective regions that have been selected to receive
notification letters advising them that they have been flagged or pended for the month of
September.
Each facility will be given written notice via certified mail. The notice will include a copy of the
certification form and a deadline for response.
I will also be sending copies of the final monthly list of selected facilities to the Division of Soil
and Water Conservation Operation Reviewers and Soil Water Conservation District Offices each
month along with an updated copy of all facilities in that county that have been either flagged or
pended. This will hopefully enable the Districts to be better able to schedule their workloads.
If you have any questions, please contact me at 733-5083 extension 571, or
[e-mail].
1617 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, North Carolina 27699-1617 "Telephone [phone] Fax [phone]
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer 50% recycled/10`k post -consumer paper

Facilities Flagged/Pended for September 4, 2001
Facility Flagged/Pending
Number Owner / Farm Name Address Status IVA PAN dericit WA Visit Date Integrator
EM
82 — 36 Betty Herring 105 Five Bridge Road F2 2832 4/13/1999 Prestage Farms
Clinton NC 28328.91
Alpine harms
82 —47 Stab 'Thornton 731 West Darden Road F4 2781 7/;/1999 TOM Farms, Inc.
. Clinton NC 28328
Thorton Swine Farm Bldgs. 1-8 &
new rarm
82-65 Thomas McLamb 346 Pine Forest School P2 3090 7/19/1999 Coharie Farms
Road
McLamb Bros. Inc Rusebore NC 28382
82-67 Ann/ David Herring PO Box 300 F4 3140 6/28/1999 Newton Grove grain and Feed
Jr. / Charles Newlon grove 28366
Pork Chop Hill
42-94 Newton Grave Box l55 F4 3140 5/28/1999 Newlon Grove (:rain and Feed
Grain & Feed Newton Grove 28366
York Chop Hill
92-121 Milton McLamh (100 Hunter Road F2
Clinton NC 28328
McLamb Farms
3546 6/14/1999 Warren Swine Farms
82-212 Joseph & Pope 5450 Garland Highway F4 3324 V16/1999 Carroil's Foods, Inc.
Jason Clinton NC 28328
Pope Brothers- Ruckley Farm
(20.25)

Facilities Flagged/Fended for September 4, 2001
Facility Flagged/Pending
Number Owner / Farm Name Address Status WA PAN deficit WA Visit Date Integrator
12-219 Tony Malthis 5607 Mosely Ave F4 2995 4/15/1999 Prestage Farms
Clinton NC 28328
Triple M Fannti
82 — 2.10 Mike Iters 4130 "Taylors Nrldge Hwy F 2 2942.85 4/16119'1"! Prestige farms
Clinton NC DOM
M & A Farms
82-236 Coharie Hog Farm 300 Westover Rd F4 2099 7/7/1999 Coharie Farms
Clinton NC 28328
Coharie Farms C-5
82 .– 262 Dave & Cary Wells 300 West Road F2
. Turkey, NC 28393
Marvin 1'. Farms, Inc. - 1, 2 & 3
3454.75 3/15/1999 Murphy Family Farms
82 —308 Ernest Odusn 4740 Rosebor0 Highway P2 2419 7/21/1999 Coharie Faiths
__._„........„.,. Clinton NC 28328
Odum 11
82 —331 Sam Anders 3879 N US 421 Highway F4 2861.5 4/28/1999 Prestage Farms
Clinton NC 28328
Sam Anders Farm
82-144 Thomas Howard 1315 Iloward Rd P2
..........................I.....,... Autryville NC 28318
,].'['homes Howard & Sans Farm
Finish
3294 7/20/1999 Coharie Farms
82 —345 Larry Naylor 2901 Church Road 113 2597.05 5/4/1999 Murphy Family Farms
Clinton NC 293211
Naylor Farmk (A&L)

Facilities Flagged/Pended for September 4, 2001
Facility Flagged/Pending
Numher Owner / Farm Name Address Status WA PAN deficit WA Visit Date Integrator
92-360 James Naylor 3189 Church Road F4 2574 4/1411999 Brown's of Carolina, Inc.
Cliotim NC 28378
James F. Naylor Farm
82-488 William T. herring 110 Box 300 F4 3140 6/28/1999 Newlon Grove Grain and Feed
. Newlon Grove 28.166
Pork Chop Hail Finishing"
82-501 Mark Daughtry 443 Daughtry'lrown Rd F2 2730 4/28/1999 Prestage Farms
....................................
Clinton NC 28328
1. & M Daughlry Inc.
82-516 Thomas Howard 1315 iloward Road P2 2981 7120/1999 Coharie Farms
Autryville NC 2831.4
J. Thomas Howard & Suss Farm -
Sow
82-597 Paul Slunley PO Box 535 F4 3312 3/5/1999 Murphy Family Farms
I ............................ flurgaw NC 28425
Paul Stanley Nurseries
82-667 Coharie ling Farm 300 Westover Rd F4 3308 7/7/1999 Coharie Farms
Clinton, NC 28328
flail Farm
r

*Division of Water Quality _
G Division. of Soil and -Water
' � Conservation
Q Other Agency _
_ r
Type of Visit 0 Compliance inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit 0 Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number $z Date of Visit: /10 •rime: ! S�Printed on: 7/21/2000
=Not Operational Q Below Threshold
Permitted ® Certified 0 ConditionallyCertified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ....................
Farm Name: ............... in.mz..JAA ......1. ly�'w................................................. Counh:
..................... .......................
Owner Name:• •.._.......L ............ Phone No:�...=2................
Facility Contact: ......... d/ ... �10... .... J........... Pitle:................................................................ Phone 1io:. :, ..........7��..e....._
Mailingaddress: ....... ,.... ....................................................... ..........................
Onsite Representative: ..,••-„,.�-------_ Integrator: -_!� fj4 ..... .._....................
Certified Operator: ............: ... ..--/.... ,�t.--..- �(g ... Operator Certification Number:..........................................
Location of Farm:
Em
-1 1W
❑
Swine ^❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude C • C�° �•� Longitude �• �� �44
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder <2po j” ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagnnn Area ❑ Spray Fietd Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impact4
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 canvc, tnec man [trade? ❑ Yes No
h. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
E) Yes �No
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estirnaled flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system-' (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure ) Structure 4
Identifier: .............................•-•---..--.-........................................
Freeboard (inches):
5/00
❑ Yes kNo
Structure 5 Structure b
Continued on back

0II)hvision of Waterf�ua�t} - - = -
r
-"Q Drvtsion of Sbtl and:Water-Conservataau'
} b Other Agency
}
Type of Visit ® Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up ()Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
$K 7 Date of Visit: !d �9�� Tiane: / : � Printed an: 7/21/2000
Facility Number
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
❑ Permitted (I Certified ❑ Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .-------
FarmName. ..............f .l...... _21?`t! Vii/ ..... z1,d'x. . ............................................... Countv:../..+ ...................... .......... - ..........
OwnerName: ..............?.Qr:rZ......!/i�. 7 ..............................._.................................... Phone No: /. L�� .... .. 2 ................
Facility- Contact: ....... .J,256!1.-s.......�Z?o�.................... .ritle:........... ,............ ................... I.................... Phone No: �..?L.......
Mailing Address: .......p.0.....J .. .. .G%Q�? /�2...._......................................
.......... .1,.............
Onsite Representative: ....... ..xt.. rf .................................................... integrator: ..�kL�x" .�.1..�/.e ............................
Certified Operator:........... ......5 ...................................... Operator Certification dumber:..........................................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ❑ Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude �' �� Longitude
Design Current Design Current Design Current
Swine Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
Wean to Feeder rt6D ❑ Layer ❑ Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish ❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ FarroW to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder ❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish Total Design Capacity
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons
'e.
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps
[[-]Subsurface Drains Present ][❑ Lag -on. Area I❑ Spray Field Area
❑ No Liquid Waste Management System 71
Discharges & Stream Im acts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ffl No
Discharge originated at: El Lagoon E] Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes )@ No
b, If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes I„No
e:. Il discharge is observed. what is the estlniated flow in gal/tnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system-! (If yes, notify DWQ) []Yes N No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes A No
I 3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential advcr%L impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes A No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes A No
Structure I Structure; 2 Structure , Structure 4 Structure i Structure 6
Idemi ficr : ................
Freel) rami (inches):
3/00 Continued on back

Facility Number: 0'L — ,$rj7 1):stc nl' Inspection Printed on: 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑Yes KNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plats? ❑ Yes JU No
(If any of questions 46 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes KNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes WNo
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑Excessive Ponding ❑PAN ❑Hydraulic Overload ❑Yes No
12. Crop type r_ae�.
13. Do the receiving crops differ with chase designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑Yes to No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes P No
h) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes RNo
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ❑ Yes No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes PO
Re uired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available'? ❑ Yes JVNo
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
Oc/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.} []YesXNo
L07
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, �aal& soil sample reports) ❑ Yes ❑ No
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes N No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes CRNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) Yes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative'? ❑ Yes /KNo
24- Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes A No
)'ski yioi�ati¢r}s;c�i deCcier�cies were noted dire crag #his;visit; Yoiir will �eceiye t{io; fuTth r;
co'riestitic�errce: abauti this :visit: :
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
j
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 6 / LD' 5100

.4 :;(;14'p 6.''% _. - -,..Af.sif>,. . _ 's^-'�'*. .i, i, :•'a9.1'I:x'.yam..; ,-;;: ^'„J.....6.aw.�..,,- . t�.,b v'';,•c:c., '1�. :x+^ ..�..•,,;. •-,..:,;,�..+._...�- ...,r.. -
I�atility Number:date of Inspection Printed an• 7/21/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (iel trees. severe erosion, ❑Yes No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on-site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes No
(If any of questions 46 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
Tori iso oiideirce: a�aut. this :visit.' ' :: :: : :
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement'?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any pact of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
gNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers .with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/intprovcment7
❑ Yes
No
1 I . Is there evidence of over application'? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes
X No
12. Crop type
-
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
] No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No '
4
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No t
C) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
A No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement'?
Cl Yes
PR No ,.
Ib. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
0 ..
Required Records & Documents
17. Pail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
EI Yes
9No
18. Does the facility fail to have ail components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
ANo
(ie/ WUP, checklists- , design, sign, maps, etc.)
V, 6- 1-
f9. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, aste anal si - & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
❑ No
20- Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
MNo
21- Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
CKNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) AYes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on-site representative? ❑ Yes ANo
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency: ❑ Yes ❑ No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP? ❑ Yes No
: ('VO-001afiortis:vi-' ileficie_nciies'Were noteta-if0itig ibis* visit:' Y:oix WillI-receive 1i6further,
Tori iso oiideirce: a�aut. this :visit.' ' :: :: : :
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 6 / 2l/ V5100

Facility Number: — Date of Inspection Printed on: V21/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge a1/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes C'No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes P1 No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes 10 No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes R1 No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes CO No
5100

-.�•:._.!-`e1:r-r<.;:�.�"�:•.•s%� ir''�'+iTf:.t5w1-�'+n''4:::r r� :r �r�iy..rr - � ..:t �..---Y,�,` �_ �� .. . . _ ..,:r-���..,,.�
—FrUe lity Number. — _ [�' rate nn(" �uI ecter►n r � _ Printed on: 7/21/2000
Odor Issuer
26' Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge. at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
r
r,
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes qNo
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e.. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes P No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes—] No
32_ Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes P No
j i -,,,[]Yes
_ 7 Yom, t--;>
Additional omments an&or Drawings. ,� " n,
5100
5100

Facility Numb r:
e 501 Date of Inspecti4in
QAO—r Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or agitation?
ag
storage pond with no
M -
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of property within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation. asphalt,
roads. building structure. and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s). inoperable shutters.. etc.)
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
32- Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe ora permanentitemporary cover?
0 Yes 0 No
El Yes 1AN'o
0 Yes V No
El Yes [D No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
El Yes Q No
-Additional,Comments:andlor DrawingS.-:,+-
05103101
05103101

Division of Environmental Management
Animas Feedlot Operations Site Visitation Record 4
Dan:
Time: �po
C&neral Information:
Fam Name.v..rk is t,4, �- _ .� cn
Owner N"W: ne No,- S
On Site Representative:_... f fr Intrgratar: j'ny r ._
Marling Address: GO-'- A --
Physical
- Latitsde: 1 I Los�itnt�e: I 1 - -
w
Qperatlon DeserlID90 : (based on design chameftrWa)
of S**e No. of�� Type ofPvuloy No. ofAsimU Type ofCA
No. ofAaimaU
ow O Layer O Dairy
u:sery 5 X pa O No* -Layer O Beef
Feader
terNumberjye of Liv j=t Number ofMinAals:
Number of Lagoons:: z __ (include in the Drawiap and Observations the freeboard of each lagoaa)
FaelliII ns�ne�tioe:
Lagoon
Is lagoon(s) freeboard less than l�foot + 25 year 24 hour storm uozage?:
Yes 0
No$
Is seepage observed from the. lagoon?:
Yes 0
No
Is erosion observedt
Yes 0
No 6
Is any discharge obsezwd?
Yes
Nois
Q Alan -Ninth C Not fan-rweide
Cover Crop
Does the facility nerd more acreage for spmyiag?:
Yes 0
No
Docs the cover crop need improve hent?:
Yes 0 .
No k
list the Crops WhiCh nerd LVrarsmew)
Orap type: �a s n 7
Setback Crige& :
Is a dwelling located within 200 feet of waste application?
Yes 0
No(C
• Is a well located v►►ithin IOD feet of waste appllcadon?
Yes O
No 19
Is animal waste stockpiled within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Stream?
Yes D
No 1�
.Is animal waste land applied or spray irrigated within 25 feet of Blue Line Stream?
Yes O
Noa
A01- raawe7 I7j"6
_ ......:...,.

�Idi�ts�ts�a`rt
Does the facmty maitatenam need Yes 0 No�
`. h there evideace of past discharge from my part of the opciadw? Yes 0 No
#4 Does record keeping need improvemeg? Yes O No {\
%6 Did the f=Mty fat? to have a copy of ft Animal waste Managenw.W Plan on she? Yes D No tr
BVIRia any Yes aaswexs• .
Signanne; Date: lam? 9G7
c. Jrwgiry Asxssmew Uaft Use AM=&-mw jrNeeded
Drams --or _abser"doM
mss. b 34 4
AOI -- j nuw 717,10%
I
�Y�•.•�. i:rV�� r���r 'w
*fart! I�t1 �.-'f..�+ 4r�wr�..• •w

Division of Environmental Management
Animal Feedlot Opers dons Site V ahation Rama
Time• 'oo
f tneralatlon:
Farm a n
Owner Name. _ mu r 12A It _YhOIIe No: S A -
On Site RepresentadvC:, - ! eQ [ ! ,_ _ 4,, r Integrator: L1
ress
Mailing Add:- 130 W We; -.r As- Q r � I&& e.
Physical Address&ocadon:SR tool
— _ • - - Latitude: 1 I Longitude: 1 I
Opsutign DescriRtiom,(based on design characterisdes)
7e of SwiAz No. ofMimab a e Pvulvy No. of AniMU AYW Type � N47. of Mim&U
Y _ 5 _- PQ 0 Non -Layer 0 Bad
Q Food=
Itherrype of Livermak Number of Animals -
Number of Lagoons:(ioclude in the Drawings and Obser+atlons the freeboard of each lagoon)
ncllily
Lagoon -
is lagoon(s) freeboard less than 1•foot + 25 year 24 hour storm storage?: Yes O No
Is seepage observed from the, lagoon?: Yes O No
Is erosion observed?: Yes 0 No IR
Is any discharge observed? Yes 0 No 11
Q Manmade 0 Not Man -mode
Cover Crop
Docs the facility need more acreage for spmyiug?: Yea 0 No 10
Does the cover crop need improvement?: Yes D , No It
(An the crops which rued iVrvvemew) 7
Crop type:_ . a r A _ Acmw*
Setback Criteria '
Is a dwelling located withifl 200 fed of waste application? Yes O NoP
-Is.a well located within 100 fcet of waste application? Yes O NOR
Its animal waste stockpi3ed. within 100 feet of USGS Blue Line Strom? Yes O No
'Is annual waste land appNe:d of spray irrigated within 25 feat of Blue Line Streaas? Yes D Nod.$
AOI -- Januu7174M . • - - +'-

,�IQirils�tQac+e -
Does the faulty mnintenaaa Deed improv+emeat? Yes ❑ No
. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? Yes 0 No
Does record keeping creed improvemmt? Yes ❑ No 1�
�. Did the facrflity fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Pian on tee? Yes ❑ No tr
Explain any Yes answ ,
Signattue: Date: (C
C= Facility Asst=mew uswr Use Anaahx� y1Veeded
prawinp or ObsenmtioM;
'w.
(re.,0-60,4 : 3+4-
AOI
+4-
IL
_ ... _ ♦ w= �w�.-�+_r r+��... .t.� •w.� - . `)R' 11 ar�p���.�f•y��'�rJV�+.R � �1_...
.- - - .• lrr._.- ���-.tom
AOI — Tanuw717.19%