030002_INSPECTIONS_20171231

Division of Wate'r-Resoure'
A
Facility Number ®- Division of Soil and Waterservation C) A0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance lnspecti n 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: O -1 Arrival Time: Departure Time:® County: Ai h Region: W SR-Q
Farm Name: �_ �rP��L t r u �(;� Owner Email:
Owner Name: VjjI to K_314.^ F6k�e>aj P s/ F 5+,2-+e— Phone:
Mailing Address: to L16o _q -,Je. vatle. K � ' t E h n-t e � r NC_ a $ (;- 3
Physical Address: 6-1 � (fade \fa-lley Ed - , C Al l s C — a ;7-3
Facility Contact: Mg*P'jDA0M let Title:
Onsite Representative: lamy �3nd'Ort Integrator:
Phone- G S? - 3 3 it_-7
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: 1 row q C)(A3& a Ub - a 3 Y 7 Certification Number:
(!�) ) 7 5131
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3(� [ 3 t + Longitude: $ 0 f i�
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Soars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -Laver
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Lavers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
I . Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pap.
Et
■
: : .•• •
[:)Yes O(No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes [] No
❑ Yes ❑ No
0 Yes ,MNo
❑ Yes �o
ao7
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
Page I of 3 214120I5 Continued

lFacility Number: - • Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection &Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
WYes
❑ No
l❑ NA ❑ NE
1- 6 6 a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA ❑ NE
%� 1�� Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
(��Identifrer:
Structure 5
Structure 6
M l Nr✓ OC_e_�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed`?
❑ Yes
I( No
❑ NA 0. NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
7�
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
[!ZNo
❑ 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 Ef No ❑ NA 0 NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NF
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes &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): 1/7 Ai_AJ.5, _AQ
13.
Soil Type(s): u
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?]
Yes N
❑ NA
❑ NE
15_
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement'?
❑ Yes rNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes ❑ No
WNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes N"'No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes J�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required
19.
Records & Documents
Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
❑ Yes r<No
❑ NA
❑ NE
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
❑ Yes PNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. Does record keeping need i rovement? Ifyes-cal' teia ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicati Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis oil Analysis [�-�44rs�e�nnsPtrrs ❑ Weather Code
[r Rainfall 109tocking ❑ Crop Yield 6�20 Minute Inspections Monthly and 1 " Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No �NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - Q Date of Inspection: S $
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste app 1 ation equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? *.'
s No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 5'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document
[] Yes
❑ 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 �dNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
❑ Yes
❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
jDdNo
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? if yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes )V"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
[] YesNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes D?"No
❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes gNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Usedrawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
�1 ✓�� T fis l)t? Qka-w) I ✓?
pp
aco) i 6(`cL,h'do doo- 10 o)_U1'�R' ,
Q9. �ta[Lt" fL +! S�
D51 N 1L2Y1i`f 1Gj 6ti 1'12tc7 �da-Yl �L rr Z j� �bT` U �"(�
r _
I Yi 3 z�5
a r, N s ,
• � r'1 � � 1
►.� o
c�tr
\je.
l l o
PLe,� ►®���� �v�-�'e.� llo� Cate tom ���j 4-(n_e rc�c�c�
v o,A- ' on e U ,
�•-�
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatui
Page 3 of 3
Phone:-�-7G�--�j[orl9 _
Date:�$I�
21412015

lFacility Number: j- Q Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? MW ❑ 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 ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑NA ❑NE
NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes CRTqo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes M No
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes Nr/No
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes 0 No
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? ❑ Yes lNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ONE
[:3 NA [3 NE
❑NA ❑NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments. I
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Pe, rn 1 Coe on -5i der
1. P�PPI► ea Dn r-e, Cora 5 srnc�. Nove,MllWr- 2015?
i=ree,boo-rjrecordY? �" _goo•
TrucI& �v br-whonS due. 20Ila. h6nei cua. on e4.[cibdP
rQ�-iar�s ?
5 [ nee_ o'Z elm Wo; N
� d ors-ao���i-.
No Nobw t\j Vs "ln ao13 f 2olq Cl uil P4'n"04.y
a()Ito C"'vil Nx\0-k V\./ i n aolnol 3 50 r
i n �o 4� o one, i •i-ion . I (� , o �r rvil� R 15 o 1 SA N 0- AC. B F , oA 03L6 2)
Lae- V. o � car -V.; led 01 �' i s at �(.ov> an ,n v t lrl V 1©l a.`h 4) V1 �Ses� ku o o i C
• •u-- fir.., -- � v� '�a�..c �'� c ua. 41� r c,��-e d C i[q
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur
Page 3 of 3
Phone: ,3A _77 (+j ~ 7 f 9
Date: r� L--�, do 11p
21412015

• 0
■ Division of Water Resources
El Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number: 030002 Facility Status: Active permit: AWC030002
❑ Denied Access
Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Alleghany Region:
Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 08/26/2016 Entry Time: 10:50 am Exit Time: 12:30 pm Incident #
Farm Name: Glade Creek Dairy Farm Owner Email:
Owner: William Blan Bottomley Estate Phone:
336-657-3347
Mailing Address: 6460 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Physical Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant i Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36° 30' 13" Longitude BO' 58' 16"
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts Waste Col, Stor, & Treat Waste Application
Records and Documents Other Issues
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
Phone
Primary Inspector: MAllssal Rosebro Phone:
g a a0ii
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
19. Permit and COC were on site.
21. Application records since November 2015 are ok.
21. Soil tests due again in 2019.
21. Freeboard records are good.
24. Mack truck slurry tank (4800 gal) calibrated March 2016. Calibration due in 2018 if used again.
24. Not using the Kenworth or "new" tank for applications.
26. No certified operator. NOD and NOVs in 2013. Civil penalty in 2014 and 2016. Four oportunities to take exam in 2015 and
three so far in 2016. Condition It. 16 & 17. of permit. Also 15A NCAC 8F .0203(c)(2). Lack of certified OIC is a continuing violation.
Suggest two OICs.
30. High freeboard was reported as required during the last year.
Martha Bottomley-owner 336.657.3347
Tracy Bottomley 336.200.2347
Nick Carty 336.200.4422
page 1

G
CJ
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: William Blan Bottoml Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 08/26/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspecti( Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Cattle
Cattle -Beef Feeder
0
Cattle - Dairy Heifer
5
Cattle - Milk Cow
400
0
Total Design Capacity: 400
Total SSLW: 560,000
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond
CONCRETE
108.00
Waste Pond
HEIFER WSP (SM.)
66.00
Waste Pond
MILK BARN WSP (LG.)
96.00
page 2

Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: William Blan Bottom] Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 08/26/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspecti( Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharcies & Stream Im acts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
0 ❑
❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑
MOD
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)
❑
0 ❑
❑
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 Waters of the
❑
❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
0 ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ larc
❑
� ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
ME][]
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicablE
❑
0 ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Ne No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ 0 ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page 3

•
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility : William Blan Bottom! Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 08/26/16 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspectii Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Tres No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Cover
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ M ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ ❑ M
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ ❑
❑
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
[]
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑ ❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
M ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Lease Agreements?
❑
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Stocking?
❑
page 4

• 10
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility : William Blan Bottoml Facility Number:
030002
Inspection Date: 08/26/16 Inssection Type: Compliance Inspectir Reason for Visit:
Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
Crop yields?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
❑
Sludge Survey
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
M ❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
❑
❑ 0 ❑
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
❑ ❑
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check the
❑
0 ❑ ❑
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
Cl
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?
0
❑ ❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
0 ❑ ❑
Other Issues
Yes
No Na No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑
❑
❑
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes,
❑
M ❑
❑
contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit,
. ❑
0 ❑
❑
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
❑
Lagoon / Storage Pond
❑
Other
❑
If Other, please specify
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 on -site representative?
❑
M ❑
❑
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑
0 ❑
❑
page 5

�Drvision=bf,,rWaternReso`ur,'ce t, A %_.
Facility Number - O Division of Soil and" Water" se'rvatien
O Other Agency
Type of Visit: qk Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review O Structure Evaluation p Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: 6 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up O Referral O Emergency O Other O Denied Access
Date of Visit: $ (o Arrival Time: �" �} Departure Time: t Counh : — Region:,
Farm Name: � � C rea le-- b airy F r w) Owner Email:
Owner Name: W1 iko_►l_Bla-n_ odorm lev C_s4a e_ Phone: (�k4f-:!+ 3333g7
Mailing Address: 6466 6 1" e- ya- E le y�• , E n n I C e— 1 N(, a�� a 3
Physical Address: W r Q V �- f✓ 1� 1'1 ( C 2 N G a 3
Facility Contact: M,9X Ok ViA lie Title: W 111 P.r' Phone:
TroLa � 3o t+6 (E y 3310 . a 00 . a 3 4- 7
Onsite Representative• Integrator:
N I G>~- �r a oo - q q.1 X
Certified Operator: Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Certification Number:
�o �6 Latitude: 330 ) 13 t Longitude:
w N F,r a rti z- 7 I & d L e- Va_ de y
Swine
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer i�-
Non-La er I +_
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State'? (If yes, notify DWR)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWR)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge`?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Daia Cow
QQ
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes DdNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes D No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ;
<No
[:)Yes I VNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3 21412015 Continued

Facili Number: - o�- � Date of Inspection: $ A6
d
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes
o
❑ NA ❑ NE
2 a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure 5
Structure 6
Identifier:
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes
WNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.),/
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
; No
❑ NA ❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
C�oNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Ile
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
X No
[] NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N&/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 ofWind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s): � I, l �E / [vita i; a-iy 7-t��-Vd1c) Vto— —
13. Soil Type(s):
14, Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No [$(NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes .No ❑ NA ❑ NF.
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Reciuired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes op
❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes OKONo D NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑Design ❑Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
21. es record keeping need provement? lf-e#�ee1 b@19 es o ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste Application Weekly Freeboard �64ste Analysis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers ❑ Weather Code
Rainfall �!rstocking Crop Yield i�< Minute Inspections [Monthly and I" Rainfall Inspections r1 sht4 e s.._.r
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes •,J�rNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No FZI-19A ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412015 Continued

0
Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El Other Agency
Facility Number:
030002 Facility Status:
Active Permit: AWC030002
Denied Access
Inpsection Type:
Compliance Inspection
Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit:
Routine
County: Alleghany Region:
Winston-Salem
Date of Visit:
11/20/2015 Entry Time: 10:05 am
Exit Time: 11:30 am Incident 9
Farm Name:
Glade Creek Dairy Farm
Owner Email:
bottomleyfam@skybest.�
Owner:
William Blan Bottomley
Phone:
336-657-3499
Mailing Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Physical Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant 0 Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36' 30' 13" Longitude: 80° 58' 16"
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. OR, tym left from Hwy 18 south on Glade Valley Road, Go 7 miles. Dairy is on
left.
Question Areas:
Dischrge & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Other issues
■ Waste Application
Certified Operator: Tracy Wayne Bottomley Operator Certification Number: 999441
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
24 hour contact name Tracy Bottomley Phone
On -site representative Tracy Bottomley Phone
Primary Inspector: M llisssa� Rosebro�lck /� `l Phone:
Inspector Signature: v11!/1_A 1 AA�i,�� 90A J9� Date: � a
Secondary Inspector(s): 1 ! f t! 1 O fs-
Inspection Summary:
page: 1

i •
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility : William Blan Bottomley Facility Number, 030002
Inspection Date: 11/20/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
-This is a revised inspection report from the one left with Tracy Bottomley on 11/2012015. Copy of revised report sent to Tracy
Bottomley's email address and to 6774 Glade Valley Road, Ennice, NC 26623"'
19. Copy of permit not on site. Permittee was reminded to obtain and maintain copy of permit and certificate of overage (COC)
during 2014 inspection.
21. Fall 2014 land application records and waste analysis were not on site. Per October 2014 inspection report, "recent land
application events to be recorded on forms when waste analysis is received."
21. Soil tests completed in 2015. Due again in 2019
21. No waste analysis record for Fall 2014 applications. Permittee was reminded during October 2014 inspection to obtain and
submit waste analysis for Fall 2014. Tracy Bottomley stated during Fall 2014 inspection that Spring 2014 waste analysis report
was not obtained since sample was sent to lab and was lost.
—21. No records were on site today. Due to sudden death of Tracy's father (and farm owner), Blan Bottomley, last month the
regional office has given Tracy Bottomley until December 15, 2015 to deliver records to DWR-WSRO. After that time, a Notice of
Intent (NOI) will be sent and a civil penalty pursued. The following records must be received by DWR-WSRO: a) Certificate of
Coverage (COC) and permit; b) freeboard records from October 1, 2014 to present; c) waste analysis for Fall 2015; d)
honeywagon calibrations for 2015; e) rainfall records since Oct. 1, 2014; 0 waste application records from Fall 2014 to present; g)
crop yields for those crops receiving waste since October 1, 2014.
24. Truck calibration due in 2016. Honey wagons were not calibrated in 2014 and 2015 (so far). Must calibrate prior to next use.
See October 2014 inspection reminder to calibrate prior to next use as well
30. Tracy Bottomley did not notify DWR-WSRO of overflowing waste structure prior to 10/05/2015 structure evaluation visit. He was
reminded during 2014 inspection to do so.
94,
4%bo
e -
-
rN2w Y,
,Soon
t�
13&ASce
o
-3op
Q
page: 2

4
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility : William Blan Bottom ley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 11/20/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current promotions
Cattle
0 Cattle -Beef Feeder
124
Cattle -Dairy Calf
30
Cattle - Milk Cow
400
0
Total Design Capacity: 400
Total SSLW: 560,000
Waste Structures Observed
Disignated
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond
CONCRETE
108.00
Waste Pond
HEIFER WSP (SM.)
24.00
Waste Pond
MILK BARN WSP (LG.)
20.00
page: 3

IA
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: William Blan Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 11/20/15 Inpsection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream_ Impacts
Yes
No Na No
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑
0 ❑
❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure
❑
Application Field
❑
Other
❑
a. Was conveyance man-made?
❑
❑ ❑
❑
b. Did 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?
❑
0 ❑
❑
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the
❑
M ❑
❑
State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na Ne
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
M ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I.e./ large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
0 ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
0 ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
M ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
Yes No Na No
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ M ❑ ❑
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%/10 lbs.?
❑
Total Phosphorus?
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
page: 4

1 i •
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility : William Blan Bottomley Facility Number:
030002
Inspection Date: 11/20/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit:
Routine
Waste Application
Yes No Na Ne
Crop Type 1
Corn (silage)
Crop Type 2
Small Grain Cover
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste
❑ N ❑
❑
Management Plan(CAWMP)?
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre
❑ 1:10
❑
determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
1& Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ 0 ❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No Na No
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
■
❑ ❑
❑
20, Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WU P?
Checklists?
Design?
❑
Maps?
Lease Agreements?
Other?
❑
If Other, please specify
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
0
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
Weekly Freeboard?
Waste Analysis?
E
Soil analysis?
❑
Waste Transfers?
❑
Weather code?
Rainfall?
Stocking?
page: 5

Permit: AWC030002 Owner -Facility: William Blan Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 11/20/15 Inppection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Crop yields?
120 Minute inspections?
Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
Sludge Survey
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment
(NPDES only)?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check 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?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Otherlssues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
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 regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
(i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, aver -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility?
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Application Field
Lagoon / Storage Pond
Other
If Other, please specify
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 on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
Yes No Na Ne
❑ E ❑ ❑
❑❑■❑
❑❑i❑
El
■❑❑❑
❑■❑❑
Yes
No Na No
❑
E ❑
❑
❑
E ❑
❑
■❑❑❑
❑■❑❑
❑
N ❑
❑
❑
E ❑
❑
■❑❑❑
page: 6

Division of Water Resourw
+ Facility Number - E? Q Division of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Co pliance Inspection Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral Q Emergency Q Other p Denied Access
Date of Visit: j ZU S Arrival Time: nDeparture Time: County: '1C a h Region: WS PC
Farm Name: (n I" LAY 2� IL- �i0.i r � �Qi jyl Owner Email +rac bo W6,nA�� � 3 1 ��Cko �A xoi'1k
Owner Name: T iPhone:
j (Q-S- -7 - 3: 311 7 �
Mailing Address; ( C p��Q, 1iLsk� 0- i� 4. n n lC e-
Aatt �lv
/\1�
77
Facility Contact:
ruLow —Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Pe_r_5°f-VL I zc�o — z3 4 7
Phone: L<5 7• 8 3 y 7
i'{os pi tell & 57
Certification Number: OD,-jp
Certification Number:
Latitnde: 3� ° 30' 13 ` r
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Other
Poults
Design Current
Longitude: `30
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
DairyCalf
Q
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes eNo ❑ 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 Ik No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters ❑ Yes f� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412014 Continued

Facility Number: jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
1 �11 Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: l In j Low,2rtrrve w. '4ei
T
Spillway?: +
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): D � 1�
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(i.e., large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
❑ Yes
0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑No ❑NA ❑NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑ Yes
14 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental
threat,
notify DWR
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes
[� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
:SNo
❑ 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.) YX
❑ 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): ccrh -An C' :j '� no ale-'
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes ENo ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes allo ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes [Z"No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? [ryes ❑ 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 ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
i22,
gthefacility
minstallan
nt? Yes ❑ No NA NE
reeboard ❑ Waste Analysis Soil Analysis ❑ Weather Code
d s Monthly and ainfall Inspectio ❑fie
ntain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes [:]No NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412014 Continued

Facili Number: - — Date of Inspection: j 0 6_
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? "Yes
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ No 0 NA ❑ NE
❑ 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? *1 Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
2$. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes �3rNo ❑ 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 �yNo [] 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
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:
0 Yes ❑ No [:]NA [:]NE
❑ Yes Pf No ❑ NA ❑ NE
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewed]nspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes RoeqKZZ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
rrvcl�- O L�ibrGL ids due zoi(. F�on 1 QUn5 Cry ��� in ,ZGI [+rtzGlS i'
Fcl�l� �(anc cA.pplIe�ovl reCorJ5 4, r svf� OJIa_f S Is JP6w Fall 2Gl �{ y k.
e�
at r\ OAI (l W S 2.b p r I o v- f o l U 1 S%�o r S v 15 ! �, P ,? m! r, a ed t-o do ;e i r) a i�
(�Gp � o� Per- M t{- on. .51 e_ 7 NO
__7 to oil
i n ao rsQ � v e ate; n a-o I q o
1� fro via-:,ke_ G c"M S1S por r ao t u v- Fal G
Non
�{ S np I n1 I, e � ►� for
co �- ��vri ► �- L � � �. cam- lip
✓b� ��"�b � G r '� . � � o2C9 � t� -{'O p I��s-fir, f' �t.- 1► r �'-' 0. t ►'1 �r'car l � � i tt ifjo`)
µ,s5i r
LU S `e✓ r _Aj cA_ f y -S1 s 4 ;r Fa` 1 o►
f`►''S° � � o Yl �� t,_zi q c� t-� �.1 i b r�5(-C�►~l For �c� ! so
\/�p S �- 1 I CaL4� o t''2-eQ S CFO01 4 l -i—o r `�. J eLA L
;a0 ,0,9) Crop y i Ql � ��� cro p,5 re_ce:1 \r t 5 -e S I n
Reviewer/Inspector Name: ILI t� f 15 &—h r o c-Y —, Phone: _ 7 6 f (p q 9
I IA. -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
� �l
Date: 1'1,J G�,� 615C i �`
21412014
► Iry s

0 Division of Water Resources
Division of Soil and Water Conservation
El
Other Agency
Facility Number: 430002 Facility Status: Active Permit: �❑ Denied Access
Inppection Type: Structure Evaluation Inactive Or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Emergency County: Alteghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 10/05/2015 Entry Time: 02:30 pm Exit Time: 3:10 pm Incident #
Farm Name: Glade Creek Dairy Farm Owner Email: bottomleyfam@skybest.�
Owner: William Blan Bottomley QC.,i ` .;f. dr9drK e., y3 Phone: [phone]
MailingAddress: �7-4;Gfade�Villey:Rd y fi-66FNVNI323-�'-
Physical Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36' 30' 13" Longitude: 80° 58' 16"
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. OR, tym left from Hwy 18 south on Glade Valley Road, Go 7 miles. Dairy is on
left.
Question Areas:
Waste Col, Stor, & Treat
Certified Operator: Tracy Wayne Bottomley Operator Certification Number: 999441
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
24 hour contact name Tracy Bottomley
On -site representative Tracy Bottomley
Primary Inspector:
Inspector Signature:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Title Phone
Phone
Phone
Phone:
Date:
36 ] 7 76 r l6 99
Inspection Summary:
Today's visit was check on the structural integrity of the embankments since the recent storm. OIC was not on site. Heifer waste
pond was overflowing but only traveling a few feet. Waste can be pumped to one of other two WSPs if needed.
To pump waste on rye cover this Friday, October 8, 2015,
page: 1

0
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: William Blain Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 10/05/15 Inppection Type: Structure Evaluation Reason for Visit: Emergency
Waste Structures
Disignated Observed
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Freeboard Freeboard
Waste Pond
CONCRETE
21.00
Waste Pond
HEIFER WSP (SM.)
0.00
Waste Pond
MILK BARN WSP (LG.)
21.00
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No Na No
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
0
❑ ❑
❑
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le) large
❑
0 ❑
❑
trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
❑
M ❑
❑
waste management or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable
❑
M ❑
❑
to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
❑
■ ❑
❑
maintenance or improvement?
page: 2

L �
,Division of Water Quality y.
Facility Number 43 - 0 Division of Soil and. Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: VompIia ce Ines ection Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:outine omplaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Ip z3 Arrival Time: f O: 06 Departure Time: ;tc>, County: Region: W-A 0
Farm Name: 61C,4 t� �C Ir, , Y�irA, Owner mail:
Owner Name:i�kpi, e, Phone. ow"j 6 517 ^ 33T 7
Mailing Address: 5D 7/ G 1,. c� VA jte ��. �r1 r1; ce N G ZPG 2-3
Physical Address: 67 7
] �) zaD—z3YL7
Facility Contact: Cam, Mi Title: Phone: (`t.}) jA$ YJ 377 V-7
Onsite Representative:/ (11 k �0.r�y - Integrator: �� 3Strf
- - 1$t
Certified Operator: Certification Number: 4d, 667- 0a'-?Q
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Certification Number:
Latitude: �L3D 1 3 `/ Longitude: ED d57 /4
jZ .5 k GIB de 1f� j 1�, —off — 4 ,7 V � ., -4u H"� 1'e5 v�41e
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Soars
Other
Other
Design Current
Dry Poultry CanaCity Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Z$
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
/ Z
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: p , - 03 • 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 N No ❑ NA ❑ NE
O Structure 1 -,Structure Ik�l� cture 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: g If�,r `} ,F GOewr,
W^2✓
Spillway?: / �S
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
in)7 : �a g
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.) 10
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a ❑ Yes 19No ❑ 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? 0 Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste ADDhcation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes 9No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes A 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): Corn f rI 7�
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
A
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
Ye
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 [:]Lease Agreements
Oth r:
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, c ck the appropriate box below.
Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis
0yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Transfers
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Weather Code
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking ❑ Crop Yield ❑ Monthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
[:]No
Pq NA
❑ NE
Page 2 of 3
21412011 Continued

Facility Number: 0 3 - Q Z • Date of I mp ection: 1 p 2.
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check []Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey [:]Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non` -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ONE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes [ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal? �C
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
);�Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Ix No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[] Yes No
❑ Yes 4No
❑ Yes �ffNo
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
Dn 4f 3a/zap II rN. (�Pr�r�n Csi�ce�� �- 'kTe A�aV%j M4DIJS
t�' cLG ��� za14 ,
2� f , Sri 11 �- Lcr�' 1� �-t h�,; v►� G•���1��� q�rs a r�. �e . �.1 �6r�,�e N e�C�` Lt.s-e',� �d
{ �� ..�,�,� j�,��� (%f-I-� �� W��� �p�� 41e�cc'�'v' /►'�+5c NL'.r�� �'.e art(
414
-30, Remm 4,
OLMYI� 4C
f Lt 5C'j AVL �, S ro
A
1 &M
So�Is Q„4ly3rl n4X�J4'_�by ®e w r 20a, p
14 o� ¢f„e ►�� rc � ` o.��i 61AJ
/} P rx, nee -�o wly. ra.,�11•'� �tC�.
y' u PPS —ca Aa� fir-, roA
� � �- � Zak .
��P aoAl � 6 4r Ct��- le"I -e� *cuw'_ tj�Ltr�-*
Reviewer/Inspector Name: F K AllT Phone: (3-3
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: /� Date:
Page 3 of 3 2/4/20I1

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number Q j - 0 Division of Soil and '14'ter. CIR, rvation
0 Other Agency At
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review Q Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit:rl. Routine Q Complaint Q Follow-up Q Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: 1 z; 5p Departure Time: Z ; f 3 County: A]
Farm Name: 61,11G1eGl< J)hfi %"�11V� Owner Email:
Owner Name: 13 a iv, p' 4om I et, Phone: (MlijJ Cris% - 3 3 L
Mailing Address: lU_ i g,l A, J` �• C� �1 �1 �`c� f G Z
Physical Address: ( 7 7 T r
Facility Contact: fa e'y 3S7 OM Title:
Onsite Representative: 1- ry �d ITOy`�1L� 4- 1,4
Certified Operator: q
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
�w% 21 �•�
Region: W'Sh 0
3iCl zoo - Z 3 *7
Phone:
Zoo -fly-22
Integrator: 7(G)-?�3 - 7?Y9
Certification Number: I� 65 � - 0,030
�y Certification Number:
I Latitude: 3 6 b 3a
/� f1 411e� 1 b R - j- -4
u
Design Current
Swine kCapacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder,to Finish
Farrow 'fo Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Pon.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other.
Discharees and Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
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 impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge? �-
Longitude: 96 5-d / 6
llw,r s;LG14,�_�,��yM,
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
240
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
$Q
Da Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [] No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
[:]No
❑ Yes
XNo
XYes
❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 03 - UZ jDate of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
0 c"'ew}
Identifier: eAkr N1U'
Spillway?: Ye_
Designed Freeboard (in):
�t
ri r�
Observed Freeboard (in): Z� .36
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.) �4
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? 0
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? I El Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks, and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved
Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
❑ Yes
❑ No
JVNA
❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ 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
ANE
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
❑ Waste Application ❑ Weekly Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Analysis ❑ Waste Transfers
❑ Rainfall ❑ Stocking [:]Crop Yield ❑ 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 ❑ No
Page 2 of 3
❑ NANE
❑ Weather ode
Mudge 8
❑ NA NE
XNA NE
21412011 Continued

Facili ` Number: b - - 0 72— 1 1 Date of Inspection: 9
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? if yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? [-]Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
l
Other Issues �No
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. Ik
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
31. Do subsurface the drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ft Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommends ors or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages,, as necessary).
3, w I'Lr n� n„ � eff . we -a- an 441- 0 448,r t4j
)t42 an 'eye- Bn ! "' i3 Q �Q � �AG�fn� QO�► l� �1 � 1Gt»*��
Ley e
.-1`ev'CA�
4-11
P
fbV1 d ^
%. Ini�v cvf �f were �dI—
f��.r� � ter rY"•• � J�ILM+ 6„
1
l<e pAO V 41
led
Reviewer/Inspector Name: Tel �-r; �+� Phone:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: ! 3p
zz
Page 3 of 3 21412011

Division of Water Quali
Facility Number - 2 0 Division of Soil and Wate touservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: Routine O Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency Q Other Q Denied Access
Date of Visit: / 2d y Arrival Time: Departure Time: Z ' County: `' Region: W5P,10
Farm Name: Cam! q (� �P C 1 -!M Owner Email:
Owner Name: t At 13 0+M luf Phone:
Mailing Address: 7 &AAe L/i!I.Gil Rlinvt SCE : NC 2'G 23
Physical Address: 7'7
Facility Contact: ro'4'„ 1< 'ADM te, Title:
Onsite Representative: N i'C I" IV Integrator:
Certified Operator: P�Zo Ar, Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
W C&) z0F7-z3111-7
r
Phone: [ H G 7 — 83
331f17
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3L 3D � .3 Longitude: go
Design Current
Swine Capacity Pop.
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
B oars
Other
Other
Design Current
Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
Layer
Non -La er
Design Current
Dry Poultry Capacity Poo.
Layers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Q
Z$ 9—
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
t
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ 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? 0Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
of the State other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 0 3 - Z Date of Inspection: IVIW,3
0 / qw
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure,.2r � Structure 3 } Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Nei Ar W k San N e-W
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
r/ rr
Observed Freeboard (in): 3 Dri 30 30
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? /X
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 X 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) J4
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application y�
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes IXI No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? 1-'�
11. Is there evidence of incorrect land application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA XNE
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): �.� K/te�1 n rr- 0 c: U"{ej'1
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA �NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes WN o ❑ NA ❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable ❑ Yes ❑ No XNA ❑ NE
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes "VCNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes XNo ❑ 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. XYes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Waste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers Weather Code
Rainfall Stocking Crop Yield Monthly and V Rainfall Inspections
gludgirupmy-
22. Did the f cility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes � No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. if selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? [—]Yes ❑ No �NA ❑ NE
Page 2 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 6 3 - Z Date of inspection: [1
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes fij No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ 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? 9Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ENE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA j)Q NE
Other Issues��
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately. IN
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
NE
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
Yes
9
CDNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
❑ NA
❑ NE
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
Tidycs
/KNo
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
.omments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Ise drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
CT Cv r4�c►.j -Aram + , t,4D� WrP Cn 6w) . % C—A,6k �II`�, Weif
AfJ>� f1 Aa" d tl V �fu'4-1c 'J , J
GZ►. { f j �f r f J{-� Cs2'�t� �"+r '� %�i C� `t 3Qd►l�e! o�
3, Si�-v/� 1L--L� i� {[xn d�Q t�✓i�, IiJ,L�S
aK - dam' f r lug an e D r ; Mq I 4v a f�
Rv'0 L-tom -=
p+ Nv je_1_1f:r11 a
. W�St� qQQ, ���r•,.�"i' aw V`
0. _60r p �J+sa� l �+te% n �P `N� '��" M°vC ✓�Crr-
�. y � A-
4-b
Reviewer/Inspector Name: q c, f< I Vt i %U011 I Phone:
Reviewer/inspector Signature: Date: 17-Lb
Page 3 of 3 /4/toil

I ► " '114 Division of Water Quality
Facility Number �D� - (,i 0 Division of Soil and Water Aer'vation,n
Other Agency i
l
sit: Type of Visit: pk�mpliance Inspection Q) Operation Review O Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for ViRoutine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 F,inergengy 0 Other 0 Denied Access
, `0 tq"
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: Oa. Departure Time: 2; ounty:%Region: WSf, 0
Farm Name: lei Je- Gl�_,p,k N&-w T ,rm __ Owner Email:
:. rjUc� tll•-�.1
Owner Name: �ii iQt1 __e�m few Phone: 65_7 3' %
Mailing Address: 570 71 G l q � 6�q � �E c2 NG zy(, z3
Physical Address: &7 -%j f ! 1 1R,7'4- _z?G - 37 Z - 3z D'S
Facility Contact: Frq Gy 73.- 0411 try Title:
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: Mal- 1'Lc, -51`VM le-L/ _
Back-up Operator:
(G) Zoo-- 23�V
Phone C0 &,5 - 3
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3G 36 �� Longitude: $
4"y 2! N.; K 61�iJe V r1.1-y tU r
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
]Non -Layer
Design Current
Drv. Poultry Capacity POD.
La ers
Non -Layers
Pullets
Turkeys
Turkey Poults
Other
Discharges and Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
p
Dairy Calf
Dairy Heifer
O
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ YesXNo
[-]Yes ❑ No
[:]Yes [:]No
[:]Yes [-]No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
[DNA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page I of 3
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: O , - D 2— O Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate? Xyes
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? 0 Yes
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: N P 4,r (Vl; K T3ao N_e
Spillway?: Ye P Iy "
Designed Freeboard (in): _
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.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a
waste management or closure plan?
Structure 5
[-]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[-]No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 6
❑ Yes PkNo
❑ Yes �No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes X 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) 19
,,(
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes j�(I No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement? TTCC
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, e c.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lbs. ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Approved Area
12. Crop Type(s):
13. Soil Type(s):
N
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
_Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements
❑ Yes X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
[-]Yes [:]No YNA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes VNo
o
Yes
❑Other:
21. oes record keeping need im ovement? ❑ Yes ❑ N
VR
aste A licationWeekly Freeboardaste Anal sis Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
infall Stocking Crap Yield 120 Minute Inspections onthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes X-2,
Nc
23, If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes Nc
Page 2 of 3
DNA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Weather Code
[:] NA ❑ NE
I}!l NA ❑ NE
21412011 Continued

Facili Number: 63 - 2 • Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No NA [] NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ Failure to complete annual sludge survey ❑ Failure to develop a POA for sludge levels
❑ Non -compliant sludge levels in any lagoon
List structure(s) and date of first survey indicating non-compliance:
26. Did the facility fail to provide documentation of an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes No [DNA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals with 24 hours and/or document ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
and report mortality rates that were higher than normal?
29. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ YcsXNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately.
30. Did the facility fail to notify the Regional Office of emergency situations as required by the ❑ Yes�<No ❑ NA ❑ NE
permit? (i.e., discharge, freeboard problems, over -application)
3 I. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes N�No ❑NA [] NE
❑ Application Field ElLagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? 'es No ❑ NA ❑ NE
34. Does the facilityrequire a follow-up visit b the same agency? Yes No NA NE
q P Y g Y? ❑ ❑ ❑
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations (use additional pages as necessary).
2/. 2-011 soil
S.
' 1-rsl� P��� le�1, /off �jYC�hsTz+'a�1.
N,sf � J� �j�N�.1 k'A'�J' Qd�L� : j U �s t,� , D '�•,-/� .
Z , sa �+� o,�er t-' ,
stews;, J�
� C i A, �IpAic_ 4-D
La[.f
3 r
q-W-+fir ms, 4ok�_ GN , tdre� do ry
1 % �� l�ca
c t eJ zt2 l _(,per
( � "'nj ^N�' r, `l aY�''J +�kT co��✓1 .
✓ � 4- pho-dos, -i_c a``lc.Nlf.
Reviewer/Inspector Name: olt`i ���_
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3
Phone: (3361 - ) — 5 Z 95—
V -F�3 ZL71 Z_
Dater
21412011

pep
an
4
nil, 1
Mop",• e,l-
An,
Lz.
p"!
I Zen
A0-
IL
WS.

,080.' T a.p 1 i i l l l I l l OF 71 pa.p°^IW I! I I I I I I I I oso° �. a.po°I
4V,.
��7 � ��►
�
� f`
���,< �f�
o
C-
.`��� _ =r ref
,.
iy
'� l p +
.� � • "F_.. �� .r G {3��E�
~ -- - rs� ,ram T `� ' ,�
--w � � a+��• ,�.` `
+
I I `ram}=�
• `/
i- t r l
• \
Mf
A ♦` is / 1. / %
�l 1��: 1 \ '�`'
(lv �1
I
M
cq
m7.
f` ��
t i , , �.. •
ij �'�
M
{� �
} � �
`•\ �f ��\ t /`'1 i �Y
- LA �'. a; � x��••^ /{f"' 3' —IL1
�r• i•
-
r�•
L1{
>700
* , '}
'� (Y 11
���_
; +
00
!•+
Jar I
Sy` Y. •~� `.%J%�."``
�.a_
!
ci
O
.
3 57`3011
�� �41 T� U.S. 2i
{
I ' �05
O
O
to
M
—
�
L
0 1000
200
—
N
1000
—
GN
TOI,
—
00026
y CO N
—
1 Mil.
NATIONAL G
O
I I I I I 1 1 1 i I 1084` 5T h0.bT'W 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1080° 5T bo.b0^Iw t i I I I I I I I I o80° k. 3a bo-,1
Oat=; NA077 Copyright (C) 2009 MyTopo

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 030002 Facility Status: Pctive Permit: AWC030002 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Cgmpliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Other County: Alleghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 07/31/2012 Entry Time: 11:00 AM Exit Time: 11:45 AM Incident #:
Farm Name. Glade Creek Dairy Farm Owner Email:
Mailing Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd Ennice NC 28623
Physical Address: 6774 Glade Valley Rd
Facility Status: 0 Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 36"30'13" Longitude: 80°5816"
Glade Valley Rd_ (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. OR, tyrn left from Hwy 18 south on Glade Valley Road, Go 7 miles. Dairy is on left.
Question Areas:
Certified Operator:
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name
Operator Certification Number:
Title
Primary Inspector. Patrick Mitchell Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone
Inspection Summary:
Reconnaissance review of Blan Bottomley clearing area off Saddle View Rd./Glade Valley Rd. No cattle waste was observed. Some
grading was taking place at the time of visit. Referred to Soil & Water for adding to the WUP and to the SWPS of DWQ for any
potential sediment/surface water issues. It should be noted that there was no surface waters observed in the cleared area during this
offsite reconnaissance review.
Page: 1

o - zolI- c- o 916
Division of Water Quality
Facility Number - Division of Soil and Water Arvation I PM
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit: Compliance inspection 0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit: ( Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up 0 Referral 0 Emergency 0 Other 0 Denied Access
Date of Visit: (1f' j J j� Arrival Time: Departure Time: County: ��y Region: )t�, ,5RZ
Farm Name lr� e-� e�' �iry fic�r M Owner Email:
Owner Name: n p 60 n J Phone: 495-7— 3 3q 7 M M W�f- In.)
Mailing Address: S`O -7 1 f n in, e V'ea E12n j C -- , iV G -z RG -23
Physical Address: & 77 1 ad 2 tirt'-,- Q u ,Q c Fn n i c-e N L , In 2 �1
Facility Contact: rrQL\1 O-CTG M l �t Title:
Onsite Representative: ��( f}x j &jhk fU
Certified Operator: r b G
Back-up Operator:
U±; 7 --T 347 Y
Phone: 'goo - a-3 µ7 C"
Integrator:
Certification Number:
Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: 3 6 30 13 Longitude: .30 5` q I G
us H-` y .71 N. I Q h an -fo Wade VT i_ 1jor (5 2. I` q 5�
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Pop. Wet Poultry Capacity Pop.
La er
Non -La er
ury rou
Lammers
Non -Lay
Pullets
Other
Poults
Design Current
Dischar es and Stream Impact
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
+ Discharge originated at: ❑ Structure ❑ Application Field ❑ Other:
a. Was the conveyance man-made?
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does the discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any observable adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the waters
of the State other than from a discharge?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Pop.
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
-
Dairy Heifer
Dry Cow
Non -Dairy
Beef Stocker
Beef Feeder
Beef Brood Cow
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes MNo
❑ Yes No
❑NA ❑NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: [Date of Inspection:
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
t a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Structure S Structure 6
Identifier: Ad IL n We—
�Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
0
(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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes o ❑ 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 ZPAN > 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,o r n 5 i ja p p 5 m a l i a ra
13. Soil Type(s):
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable
acres determination?
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have the Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box.
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ Yes}
No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑ Yes
No
❑WUP ❑Checklists ❑ Design ❑ Maps ❑ Lease Agreements ❑Other:
[W21. oes record keeping need i provement? Yes [:]No
aste Application Weekly Freeboard Waste Analysis Soil Analysisjaste "transfers
Rainfall Stock)to
27ctopYield [01 0 Minute Inspections onthly and 1" Rainfall Inspections
22. Did the faci t fail install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 0(No
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
19 NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA ❑NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
DNA ❑NE
114eather Code
❑ NA ❑ NE
&-9A . ❑ NE
Page 2 of 21412011 Continued

Facility Number: Q - Q Date of Inspection:
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste appolon equipment as required by the permit? P Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Is the facility out of compliance with permit conditions related to sludge? If yes, check ❑ Yes ❑ No % NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box(es) below.
❑ 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 [A No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessments (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0 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)
31. Do subsurface tile drains exist at the facility? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Application Field ❑ Lagoon/Storage Pond ❑ Other:
32. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
33. Did the Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
34. Does the facility require a follow-up visit by the same agency?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[)d No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
(Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any additional recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawines of facility to better explain situations (use additional Daces as necessarv). Mn 57 k i A n n i ~n.- n r c Zvi
D r CL.MJb i� d anj C M G
3 - L "L .ha+e_ ? Pe ke^40r) �(5 rS aA-e. wo CV-4, � V_ a�. Sae t PV SA4
a t a.0 ( S o
11 b r r f e 4 S oU 2 toeLz raw
IUD 1 �
S �} jpl i e-6f Dorn rnP-rct c� 1 -1�5 = �o
rM c�h v r� P N
�- N oy
WRSi E WK$ 5 11
4119/1) 1630d`6
AR "
Reviewer/Inspector Name:
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Page 3 of 3 AST
11z3 Coo 9 = q. q M 3w 9= q. 3
�v u P54-rea-K wa
Phone: `7
Date:
/4/2011
5.

WATF9oG Incident Report
_O�OF
a �
Report Number:
201101269
Incident Type: Complaint
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS - Animal
First[Mid/Last Name:
Tracy Bottomley
Incident Started: 06/10/2011
Company Name:
County: Alleghany
Phone:
City: Ennice
Pager/Mobile Phone:
1
Farm #: 03-002
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Permit: AWC030002
Company Name:
Facility: Glade Creek Dairy Farm
Address:
First Name: William
Middle Name: Blan
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Bottomley
Phone:
Address 6774 Glade Valley Rd
Pager/Mobile Phone:
/
City/State/Zip: Ennice NC 28623
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM
Chemical Name
Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal Position Method: Unknown
Latitude: +36'30'13" 36.503600 Position Accuracy: Nearest Second
Longitude: --80°58161, -80.971100 Position Datum: Unknown
Location of Incident: Glade Valley Dairy Farm
Address: 6774 Glade Vly Rd
City/State/Zip Ennice NC 28623
Report Created 06/22/11 12:21 PM Page 1

Cause/Observation:
Caller alleges that dairy is holding cattle on a concrete pad.
Wash down water containing cattle waste drains to a tributary of
Little River.
Action Taken:
Per the Complaint Report Form, Mike Thomas received
complaint by voice mail on 6/10/2011, Caller did not leave name,
just phone number. Report does not state that caller ask to
remain anonymous. Tried to reach caller on morning of 131h, to
no avail. Then called Tracy Bottomley and left message on
machine to call me regarding a complaint. Spoke with Tracy that
afternoon. Tracy stated that a Kim Cottle had been fired/quit and
rehired by Blan Bottomley several times from the
evergreen/produce business. Most recent firing was 2-3 weeks
ago.
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type.
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Directions:
US Hwy 21 north. Right onto Glade Valley Road (SR1444). Farm is on
right.
Comments:
Tracy stated that all three waste ponds are well below the maximum
liquid level and that he has not been apply waste recently. He also said
that he had checked the leachate retention holes and that nothing was
entering surface waters. Caller had stated that waste had running off from
the "leachate field" for a long time. Since an inspection was scheduled
for the next week, DWQ did not drive to farm immediately. We do plan to
check DO and pH of stream and possibly take water samples when
inspection is performed. Stream looked much better in Dec. 2010 when
most recent compliance inspection was conducted.
Conveyance:
Estimated Number of fish?
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
Event Type Event Date Due Date Comment
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Inspection or Site Visit Conducted 2011-06-23 01:00:00
Report Entered 2011-06-22 09:43:00
Report Created 06/22/11 12:21 PM Page 2

•
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Incident Start
Report Received
Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name
Phone
DWQ Information:
Report Taken By:
Michael S Thomas
E
2011-06-13 07:45:00
2011-06-10 10:00:00
2011-06-10 10:00:00
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
DatelTime: 2011-06-10 10:00:00 AM 2011-06-22 09:43:00 AM 2011-06-13 07:45:00 AM
Referred Via: Voice mail
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 06/22/11 12:21 PM Page 3

COMPLAIN` REPORT*. E. /C,7
Division of Water Quality r.k--" pm
Winston-Salem Regional Office
' COUNTY:�
Did caller ask to remain anonymous? Yes No _ � �
{If XES, skip to directions section)
ADDRESS-.,'N
TELEP110NE
DIRECTIONS
SOURCE Or POLLUTION:
NATURE OF COMPLAINT:
REFERRED TO:
ACTION TAKEN: 1�Q4- I-P- h awOAE�_ /u) �n[�rn� tnS7� i�3Y7. 1J :wa- a 34 i
L- A - - -
nM. _-. n11-j— _ -,^. AAA. A d'J—.-1-.A /. llW.. J 16-4. I !%.. !
0
1
RECEIVED BY: ~ThaaadS y INVESTIGATOR:
A

-I/- co to f a.411 -
Type of Visit j Compliance Inspection 0 Operation Review. 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit 4 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Datc of Visit: U a /�
Arrival Time: � Departure Time: v2 a t County: �a� Region:
Farm Name: VI Cade. Chia— i�C��`�``a Fai-m Owner Email:
Owner Name: _(�\Otn B 6tf0M t4 Phone: 5_- 3 3 q 7
}}
Mailing Address: -go-1% �0.0� Vo-Alew ` R-A-11 rNnlLe a P C— 2 (0 2-3
Physical Address: L -7 � (� a-u e V o i i eU I .f�Ed '2- 136'2._ 3
&57-5s3L11 H
Facility Contact: Title: Phone No: z r1� - `t G
Onsite Representative: Tc '_C Integrator:
Certified Operator: M O' ` -IneL O "C ""� _ Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®° 30 ` Longitude:
US R-Ok.
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
JU Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design. Current_
Wet Poultry- ,Capacity Population
❑ Layer I E��]l
❑ Non -Layer
Dry. Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
Poults
JEJTurkey
❑ 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)
Design aw;Curreiit
Cattle CapacttyPo,'pulatiohe
Dairy Cow
Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Da Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Nurnberg
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes �No
[]NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
[--]No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P iNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104
Continued

Facility Number: — o • Date of Inspection .
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: n �1 � iL- 17�
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes [�fNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ElNE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes (No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes IN No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 lb ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ElApplication Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) 'SIMA N Q_ y-c" Yl W V 'jr (E-Ae 1
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
P Yes
ElNo
ElNA
ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
El Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
ONo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
L a c c.ln c-+e- i n --remit ry) 2 ,
T, s t a lL t vtj we I! I
a r NO L00-5fe_ o_ncL� 's * �l � h l� D Aact5o g pA a o I o
Reviewer/Inspector Name I —`SSOL -e- b T' OC A Phone: -sot g
Reviewer/Inspector Signature. Date:
Page 2 of 3 X 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 0—Q *of Inspection 0 iJ
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. ElWUP ElChecklists ❑ Design ❑Maps ❑Other 'A
21. Do record keeping neeVW
rovement? I - Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
aste Apple ation e ly Freeboard Waste Analyse SYon'thly
ysis Waste Transfers
YRainfall S o inrop Yield 124 Minute Inspections and ] "Rain Inspections ad Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes jfNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑Yes
allo
El NA
El NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?i�gyJ
❑Yes
LbJ Na
❑ NA
❑ NE
25.
Dad the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? 0 to
❑ Yes
0No
❑ NA
El NE
26.
Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27.
Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
El NA
El NE
Other Issues
28.
Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
DNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
29.
Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
El Yes
gNo
❑ NA
El 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?
El
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
3 L
Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
El Yes
10 No
El 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
XNo
El NA
❑ NE
33.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
;�No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
ao O So i
Uq. CCl-� i b ro_-f o n r 4 R4 O 4 2 N O+ � e_f fo r zo Z o.
l
fN Nbv. .
E��)T - 13 4 ve Jl u -5 {� r �`�{
w u �4�a�-� ar 4) i
carob
s ��
�T
a1 e
ai99 �� I�

�OAT6�h G incident Report
6
� r
--i
Report Number: 201001655 j\} 6 V 1 02� I o US -f
Incident Type: Non -Compliance Reporting
On -Site Contact:
Category: APS -Animal
FirstlMid/Last Name:
Ilncident'Sta rted: 01/22/2010
Company Name:
County: Alleghany
Phone:
City: Ennice
Pager/Mobile Phone: 1
Farm #: 003-0002
Responsible Party:
Reported By:
Owner:
First/Mid/Last Name:
Pe�mit� AWC030002
Company Name:
Facility: Glade Creek Dairy Farm
Address:
First Name: William
Middle Name: Blan
City/State/Zip:
Last Name: Bottomley
Phone:
Address 6774 Glade Valley Rd
Pager/Mobile Phone: /
CitylState/Zip: Ennice NC 28623
Phone:
Material Category: Estimated Qty: UOM Chemical Name Reportable Qty. lbs. Reportable Qty. kgs.
DD:MM:SS Decimal Position Method:
Latitude: Position Accuracy:
Longitude: Position Datum:
Location of Incident: Glade Valley Road
Address:
City/State/Zip
Report Created 05/14/10 12:36 PM
Page l

F
•
Cause/Observation: Directions:
Action Taken: Comments:
Incident Questions:
Did the Material reach the Surface Water? Unknown Conveyance:
Surface Water Name?
Did the Spill result in a Fish Kill? Unknown
If the Spill was from a storage tank indicate type.
Containment? Unknown
Cleanup Complete? Unknown
Water Supply Wells within 1500ft : Unknown
Access to Farm
. Structure Questions
E Animal Population
Estimated Number of fish?
(Above Ground or Under Ground)
Groundwater Impacted : Unknown
0 Spray Availability
Report Created 05/14/10 12:36 PM Page 2

Access to Farm
Farm accessible from the main road?
Animal Population
Confined?
Depop?
Feed Available?
Mortality?
Spray Availability
Pumping equipment?
Available Fields?
Structure Questions
Breached?
Inundated?
Overtopped?
Water on outside wall?
Poor dike conditions?
Waste Structure Type Waste Structure Identi inches
Waste Pond OLD PIT 18.00
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes [)No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ Na ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
[DNA
❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Plan Due Date Plan Recieved Date Level OK Date
Event Type Event Date Due Date Comment
Incident closed
Requested Additional Information
Report Received
Referred to Regional Office - Primary Contact
Report Entered 2010-05-11 01:14:36
Incident Start 2010-01-22 08:00:00
Report Created 05/14/10 12:36 PM Page 3

f,
Standard Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
Other Agencies Notified:
Agency Name Phone
•
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
First Name M.I. Last Name Contact Date
DWQ Information:
Report Taken By: Report Entered By: Regional Contact:
Melissa Rosebrock
Phone:
DatefTime: 2010-05-11 01:14:36 PM
Referred Via:
Did DWQ request an additional written report?
If yes, What additional information is needed?
Report Created 05/14/10 12:36 PM Page 4
-.._'116-

D V - aooq - P C -- og
ivision.of Water Qn
Facility Number Division of Soil and 1
' 0 Other Agency
a
ltry 1 F $ r 1
A
ater COIIServation G
k;
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
0 Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation
0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
)6 Routine 0 Complaint
0 Follow up 0 Referral 0 Emergency
0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: � Arrival Time: I - I Departure Time: Q County: Region: UDS
Farm Name: +O �� ��p�� I r' Owner Email: 2
Owner Name: _ t'l !_ kah, -] bRA14 Phone: �7" ! �
Mailing Address: �L �0 P ��{f�lf +:� l�l1t ' EY1�iICe-,
Physical Address: (0�� ! c (GAe `ra i 1 , C_hn tcc oZg{i► �. _
Facility Contact: le: TitPhone No: 0o34
Onsite Representative:
A l re, C xf Integrator:
Certified Operator: �I 't Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator: Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: ®o ®` ®" Longitude: :J� o ®` ® "
Swine
❑ Wean to Finish
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
_ ❑ La er
JoNon-Layer
Other
❑ Other
Dry Poultry
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)
Design Current _ ..
Cattle Capacity Population
DaiEZ Cow
wad
El Daia Calf
❑ Dairy Heifer
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number -of Structures:..r -_�
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation`?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
P(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
VYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 17 — 3 • Date of Inspection ro � 0 •
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: L L1,tr' o AaL.
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
through a waste management or closure plan?
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Structure 5 Structure 6
❑ Yes N1 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes Wo ❑ NA ❑ NE
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ,O'�o ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes 'O�No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need El No El NA El NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes W No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or l0 lbs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
a
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
r, 18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
C.e-55 �Ve_ t �vt •t-c ll ` c� �'oc�.�l 1
vV-10 Vnfodo
��e�ude, ���1ar o+nr� Secw��s s00e1 as post fed
Reviewer/Inspector Name T tt] r0
Phone: -7
Reviewer/Inspector Signature:
Date: d
- ' ' 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: C) D�of Inspection b
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available?
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Desig
n El Maps El Other
21. Doe record keeping nee�ZeleekFreeboard
vement? I fiete-b w. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ste Applicat' n aste Analysis S;Zon
lysis aV aste Transfers n
Rainfall tocking Yield 120 Minute Inspections thly and 1" Rain Inspections ['Weather Code
[I NA El NE
❑ Yes ffNo
❑ Yes CeNo
❑NA ❑NE
22, Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
;0 NA
❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to.lihrate waste application equipment as required b�thhe pper it9
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
ElNE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? -q eat
[:]Yes
[:IN
[� NA
❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
❑ Yes
*o
❑ NA
❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
❑ Yes
[ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
ElYes
No
El NA
El NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
12128104

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number `' Q O Division of Soil and Water nslervation
- O Other Agency
Type of Visit ��Compliance Inspection O Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation Q Technical Assistance
�( Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time:10401 Departure Time: �-! County: Region: W S
Farm Name: (t> _ G��L L.Ul1 rTj Y-M Owner Email:
Owner Name: Phone: .y
Mailing Address: 71
/i ��/ En n tt� e, NL
7`Physical . ressss�: �n 7 t� �C�� e V 1� ! ►_ Gli li 1 Ge - 6 %
Facility Contact: Tr C Title: Phone No: 7— R 3 7
BOO— a 3q7 C.
0
Onsite Representative: J Integrator:
Certified Operator:a' �"rt� �.L LdiZi�d Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Back-up Certification Number:
Location of Farm: Latitude: [Mo 0 TT31Longitude: o
U S w t� �21 N 0 h+ O C 610A Zia [ 1 e to 5 R I f f -�
a�n
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current Design CurWnf
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population Cattle pacify opuration
1. ❑ Layer Dairy Cow
❑ Non -La er
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey Poults
❑ Other
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)
El Dairy Calf
LK Dairy Heifer
El D Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
U Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
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?
❑ Yes * No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
1 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Page 1 of 3 12128104 Continued

Facility Number: — © �Q�ate of Inspection Iv7 0� q
Waste Collection & Treatment qq��
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage�IiisAeavy rainfall) less than adequate? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
!� truaure I S �cture 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: eA- 0
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.) ///0
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes X
No ElNA ElNE
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 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need
maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes )� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
11. is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Heavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.)
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
P 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
No
❑ NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
V No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
10 ���i�-�oY1 mowed 2 giros i on ors �� � d-it-- �t��.:.�<��•�
n
1-34
l� ! .o a=.
Reviewer/Inspector Name o, j — (�( — --� Phone: 7 -] -_Tg$9
ReviewerlInspector Signature: ' 1 Date:
Page 2 of 3
12128104 Continued

Facility Number: 03 — Qa *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 El Checklists El Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need im vement? 1 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ W ste Application Weekl reeboard Waste Analysis Soil A sis Waste Transfers
pp Y
Rainfall tocking Crop Yield Monthly and l" Rain Inspections Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes 9 No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes El No O�NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes Ipl No ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes /❑ No XNA ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes � (INo ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes 0No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? *es ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document [] Yes JyNo ❑ 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 >rNo ❑ 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 XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes KNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ad 'tional Comments and/or Drawings:
Cali b rctr}-to(1 din
d-Od
V
�J . a oa /aao soy r, r�S Igo sool r-e5:lfS For QC077 © K06t o 'I
fir' cs �', �Y1 � die NOV
i�[c� recur 5 — s1,orY1 0? . 7 .� -- �� a
�I
re-c (A �d t xc�g cxs t�:�tr � n
Page 3 of 3 1 (/ 0 E f / 12128104

Facility Number
u
Division of Water Qualityl
Division of Soil and Water
0 Other Agency
servation
dbhm
Type of Visit
Compliance Inspection
O Operation Review O Structure Evaluation
O Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit
I Routine O Complaint
O Follow up O Referral O Emergency
O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: $ 01 Arrival Time: �nr o� Departure Time: County: I A I eqLt n \l Region: Lo�
//j� 1. •oc r
Farm Namc: i21C�' �. P , e fee iL iQt r U �_Q Ir IY} Owner Email:
Owner Name: � 16-n V o �0yy)1tT Phone: 5y— b10_S�- ` cairn
Mailing Address: 1 CQ f I e �Q fey :1_ n nic- e-! L a a
Physical Address: n h l �� f oZ
Facility Contact: TrQcu B 0{6tn `2y Title: Phone No: -7 — S'3 77
Onsite Representative: C- `` Integrator: °�� —a3q J
Certified Operator: 0.'r L'�`0 m I ey Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: ®° ©� Longitude:
I Va- l tt m r �� hi fro try-\ uc,�> H-w, 2-I No
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
F-1
Layer
Non -La ei
Dry Poultry
❑
Layers
❑
Non -Layers
❑
Pullets
❑
Turkeys
❑
Turkey Poults
❑
Other
Dischames & 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)
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Populations
Dairy Cow
a �S
❑ Dairy Calf
5_rkairyHeifei >►
O
Wbry Cow
Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
Number of Structures: 731
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?
•\ ;Y
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes VNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104 Continued

Facility lumber: - -- O Z • Date of Inspection 0
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
'' ff Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier: _t-t e 1 Bar n
Structure 5 Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in): (P LQ
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes WNo ❑ NA
Cl NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes tXNo ❑ 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?
Xyes ❑ No ❑ NA
❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes Wo ❑ 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 Wo ❑ NA
❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes �(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA NE
essive 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
B utside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s) mot) fn d)lr,'j n 5, (! n lr n 5 3 1 44 IL , h a -AA / o a, 6 ktl Ire-
13. Soil type(s)
t4. 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
❑ No
XNA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
VNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
18. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
;KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question ##): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments(1�
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): �� ►►
L u_C.h Q.A-er a. re.,5 5eJ 7 Man v try -rr o m L o-V U L l `� f� -
ew ho nq wo % o,n ur _k 10 ra..-�ed 2 y ES . lb U & A C� N I 11101
73
i b r-" o n Fro m S oot4t v, S
T
Reviewer/Inspector Name P� b r-o Phone: r `�
Reviewer/inspector Signatur Date: `F 1,920
�4� Lol 1 � f �1 �� `� 1 L.Vt.� 0 . __ i)o q'ontinued

9
Facility Number: •te of Inspection o'29 d
ReUired Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes Elwo ❑ NA ❑ NE
1
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑ Yes �No
ElNA ❑ NE
the appropirate box. ElWUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design ElMaps ElOther
21, Does record kee ing need improvement? Ifyes, 0 Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Waste Applicatio (g Weekl eboard ❑ Waste Analysis [Soil Analysis C&Vaste Transfers
Rai fall ❑Stocking Crop Yield Monthly and V Rain Inspections .Weather Code
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes Xo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No 19NA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit? ❑ Yes WN o ❑ NA ❑ NE
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit? ❑ Yes No IX.
A ❑ NE
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ Yes ❑ No A NA ❑ NE
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP? ❑ Yes L]' o ❑ NA El NE
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document El Yes `11III ____No El NA ❑ NE
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? �{
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative? ❑ Yes O(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes ko ❑ NA ❑ NE
Ad ' ' nal Comments and/or Drawings:
o l � r-Po ��-? Z rY AX-� V l S ' +a �
a.�
N C H N b-laxr-e -Po r SP ri n Fal6LP9 k cn n
ohn2. �e'Y'05 you 0 ok� -beAwe Q� m,IV., ba'm uJas` '
0,0VA 6�0,
A4J V-e5 -60�)StOn Or Siu In CCurS
�►n� id-� e,ce-A yea a
V
a -7 f'e_c o r-6 Ch e n, n e. v i. l �-
p2 �iC'D� 1 �IQ rPOr'C,�Sd'r 5 s Pr t d7OFF
S� 66n

•
r
•

0 Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency l�I
Facility Number : 030002 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWC030002 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Alleghany Region: Winston-Salem
Date of Visit: 11/22/2006 Entry Time:09:50 AM Exit Time: 12:15 PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Glade Creek Dairy Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Dian Bottomley
Mailing Address: �071 Glade Vlv Rd Ennice NC 28Q23
Physical Address:
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
Question Areas:
Discharges & Stream Impacts
Records and Documents
Phone: [phone]
Latitude:36"30'13" Longitude:80"58'16"
Waste Collection & Treatment Waste Application
Other Issues
Certified Operator: Martha R Bottomley Operator Certification Number: 21384
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Tracy Bottomley Phone:
24 hour contact name Tracy Bottomley Phone:
Primary Inspector: M li a Rosebrock n, Phone:
Inspector Signature: Date: oZ o
Secondary Inspector(s):
Inspection Summary:
3. Are getting silage leachate into creek as well as manure from lot containing large "gully." Suggest trench to contain leachate--by
end of year. Repair gully in cow lot to contain sediment and waste also.
18. Facility to purchase another honey wagon wlin next 30-60 days. Calibrate this as soon as possible, and by end of year.
19. Facility will be receiving revised/new permit to reflect increase to 400 milk cows and new waste plan.
21. Need waste analysis for October applications.
21. 2006 soil test results obtained. Fields/samples 30551, 26181, 13152, 13154, 13442 report zince levels around 1500. Limit is 3000.
24. Must obtain calibration documentation from Southers as soon as possible.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC030002 Owner -Facility: Blan Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 11/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
Cattle - Dairy Heifer
114
15
Cattle - Milk Cow
300
260
Total Design Capacity: 414
Total SSLW: 534,000
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond HEIFER WSP (SM.) 32.00
Waste Pond MILK BARN WSP (LG.) 66,00
Page: 2

Permit: AWC030002 owner -Facility: Bian Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 11/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspeclion Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NE
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
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 Waters of the State other than from a
■
❑
n
n
discharge?
Waste Collection, Storage & Treatment
Yes
No
NA
NE
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑
■
❑
n
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (Le./ large trees, severe
❑
■
❑
❑
erosion, seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management n
■
n
❑
or closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
S. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? (Not applicable to roofed pits,
❑
■
❑
❑
dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑
■
❑
❑
improvement?
Waste Application
Yes
No
NA
NE
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or
❑
■
n
n
improvement?
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑
■
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
fl
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
Page: 3

Permit: AWC030002 Own or - Faclllty: Blan Bottomley
Inspection Date: 11/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number: 030002
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Ap Ilcation
Yes
No
NA
NE
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P205? '
❑
Failure to incorporate manure/sludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Other
Crop Type 2
Crop Type 3
Crop Type 4
Crop Type 5
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Sail Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management
n
■
n
❑
Plan(CAWMP)?
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination? ❑
m
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
I]
■
n
n
1 B. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑
■
❑
❑
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA
NE
19, Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
■
n
n
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
m
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Wu P?
❑
Page: 4

Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: Blan Bottomley
Facility Number:
030002
Inspection Date: 11/22/2006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Documents
Yes
No
NA NE
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21. Does record keeping need improvement?
■
❑
❑ ❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
Cl
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
■
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
n
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES
only)? ❑
■
❑ ❑
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
■
❑
❑ ❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
■
❑ ❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
■
❑ ❑
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
❑
■
❑ 0
Other issues
Yes
No
NA NE
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP?
❑
■
❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document and report those 0 ■ n ❑
mortality rates that exceed normal rates?
30, At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional Air n ■ n rl
Quality representative immediately.
Page: 5

•
•
Permit: AVVC030002 Owner -FaclIIty: Blan Bottomley
Facility Number : 030002
Inspection Date: 11/2212006 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Other Issues Yes No NA NE
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit?
32, Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
0 M 0 0
❑■00
Page: 6

Division of Water Quality
Facility Number=�__ Division of Soil and Water onservation Z_ Q Other Agency �� R
Type of Visit ��Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review 0 Structure Evaluation 0 Technical Assistance
Reason for Visit q6 Routine 0 Complaint O Follow up O Referral O Emergency 0 Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: Arrival Time: a �� Departure Time: County: 18Qk 12 h Region:
Farm Name: 6
i t t tr i Q r m Owner Email:
Owner Name: 10-n nt+O0A 1bA rr Phone:
Mailing Address: e G ii Vl I C NC_ W 6 a 3
Physical Address: L"—J- 'j
Facility Contact: �r� �1� 0 hUlti It- V Title: Phone No:-. a— °Z.3 q.
Onsite Representative: Integrator:
Certified Operator: Operator Certification Number:
LI
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
5f- jqq
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: [ o © ©��
CQ �a 1° 1ia i P� rJ p f f HIIJ11 d_l NO
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
F❑ La er
I; JEI Non -Layer I_ - - - -
Other
❑ Other - — — - - -
Dry Poultry
❑ La ers
❑ Non -Layers
❑ Pullets
❑ Turkeys
❑ urkey 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)
g ®o�6 ���
Longitude:
Design Current
Cattle Capacity Population
IN
Dairy Cow
Itp�
El
Dairy Calf
❑
Dairy Heifer 1
❑
Dry Cow
❑
Non -Dairy
❑
Beef Stocker
❑
Beef Feeder
❑
Beef Brood Cow
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?
Page I of 3
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes MNo
❑ NA ❑ NE
Yes ❑ No
❑ NA ❑ NE
12128104
Continued

. ,ter
Facility Number: — b Date of Inspection L o�
Waste Collection & Treatment
Lfi
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
l! a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
1 St cture I �Sttrructure 2 Structure 3� Structure 4
Y�9 Identifier: I' I ([ �,(X xn
�e
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
Structure 5
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
Structure 6
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed ❑ Yes [(No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement? ❑ Yes ,gNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require ❑ Yes %No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement? A
j
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application'? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes 1KNo El NA El NE
El Excessive Ponding El Hydraulic Overload El Frozen Ground ElNeavy Metals (Cu, Zn, etc.) I
❑ PAN ❑ PAN > 10% or 10 Ibs ❑ Total Phosphorus ❑ Failure to Incorporate Manure/Sludge into Bare Soil
❑ Outside of Acceptable Crop Window ❑ Evidence of Wind Drift ❑ Application Outside of Area
12. Crop type(s)
13. Soil type(s)
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP?
❑ Yes
No
ElNA
ElNE
15. Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑ Yes
YNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination ?
❑ Yes
❑ No
NA
❑ NE
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
1� No
❑ NA
❑ NE
18, Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
gNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
7!; 3 • lire- n
1wha-f�4Wo " u,-W &,e--
Re 'ewer/Inspector Name r
it 1 Phone: — Sa
R iewer/Inspector Signatu
Date: 9,3 00
P e 2 of 3 13tit lj�v� @LLIr 1212 104 Continued

Facility Number:03 — 6 ate of Inspection •
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes X
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
24. Does the facility fail to have all com CAWMP readily available? If yes, check ❑Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box.
❑ WU ❑Checklists Design El Maps ❑Other
21. Do s record keeping need im ovement? es, ZcnecK ea o ria e ox Yes o ❑ NA ❑ NE
Vaste Applic tion kly FreeboardWaste AnaI S' Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
R, ll �tocking Crop Yield _ [Monthly and V Rain Inspections EfWeatherCode
�Dmt
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes �No ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment? ❑ Yes ❑ No VNA ❑ NE
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern?
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
itional Comments and/or D
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes 0 No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes Info
❑ Yes 5 No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes No
❑ NA
XNA
❑ NA
1XNA
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
❑ NA ❑ NE
❑NA El NE
El NA ONE
❑ NA ❑ NE
resu(�s F!€tc SSG` �j��e5 3r7SSf� 0-7(0 ��� 3J5,
n l �ve1S -t_ t S o O
? �- Lc wt I� 15 Sono .�D'9�7 Fi'0_ ij A'ejaed �ro rk- IT
�)-Foxc;(A t,,; {( be revel Ui vA re vl5eilnew-) perrAl+ + re-F �e
Ir1crQat5,0 400 � � �, cowl .¢- op- w �S P.0 '
MNIISIM'

•
•
Division of Water Quality
❑ Division of Soil and Water Conservation
❑ Other Agency
Facility Number: 030002 Facility Status: Active _ Permit: AWC030002 ❑ Denied Access
Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Inactive or Closed Date:
Reason for Visit: Routine County: Alleahany _ Region: N]_tL1' ston-Salem
Date of Visit: 0411912005 Entry Time: 10:15 AM Exit Time: 12.05PM Incident #:
Farm Name: Glade Creek Dairy Farm Owner Email:
Owner: Blan BottQmlgv Phone:
Mailing Address: 5071 Qlj3de VIv Rd -Ennice-NC 28.623 _ /�^�TQ
Physical Address: li i • o_12 "b `'-1
Facility Status: ❑ Compliant ❑ Not Compliant Integrator:
Location of Farm:
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
Question Areas:
0 Discharges & Stream Impacts
Q Records and Documents
Latitude: 36°30'13" Longitude: 80'58'16"
0 Waste Collection & Treatment 0 Waste Application
0 Other Issues
Certified Operator: Martha R Bottomley Operator Certification Number: 21384
Secondary OIC(s):
On -Site Representative(s): Name Title Phone
On -site representative Martha Bottomley Phone:
24 hour contact name Martha Bottomley Phone:
Primary Inspector: Melissa M Rosebrock Phone: [phone]
Ext.383
Inspector Signature: Date:
Secondary Inspector(s):
Phone:
Phone:
Inspection Summary:
3.and 9. Silage leachate is entering surface waters. Must retain or exclude this waste from surface waters. New owner/operator plans
to install gravel retention basin by June 1, 2005.
21. Went over the new permit requirements with new operator.
28. Operator irrigated some waste from the small WSP onto rye in March 2005. Waste plan is for slurry only.
Page: 1

Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: Blan Bottomley Facility Number : 030002
Inspection Date: 04/19/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Regulated Operations Design Capacity Current Population
Cattle
❑ Cattle -Milk Cow 300
Total Design Capacity: 300
Total SSLW: 420,000
Waste Structures
Type Identifier Closed Date Start Date Designed Freeboard Observed Freeboard
Waste Pond HEIFER WSP (SM.) 26.00
Waste Pond MILK BARN WSP (LG.) 57.00
Page: 2

I •
•
1
Permit: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: Blan Bottomley Facility Number: 030002
Inspection Date: 0411912005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Discharges & Stream Impacts Yes No NA NF
i. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ N ❑ ❑
Discharge originated at:
Structure ❑
Application Field ❑
Other ❑
a. Was conveyance man-made? 0000
b. Did discharge reach Waters of the State? (if yes, notify DWQ) 0000
c. Estimated volume reaching surface waters?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system? (if yes, notify DWQ)
❑ 0 ❑
❑
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
0 ❑ ❑
Yes No NAME
❑
Waste Collar•.tion_ Storage & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity less than adequate?
❑ ❑
Cl
If yes, is waste level into structural freeboard?
❑
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed (I,e.1 large trees, severe erosion,
❑ ❑
❑
seepage, etc.)?
6. Are there structures on -site that are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ 0 ❑
❑
closure plan?
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ N ❑
❑
8. Do any of the structures lack adequate markers as required by the permit? {Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks
❑
❑
and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require maintenance or
❑ ❑
❑
improvement?
Yes No NA
NF
Waste Apl2hoation
10. Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need maintenance or improvement?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
11. Is there evidence of incorrect application?
❑ ■ ❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Excessive Ponding?
❑
Hydraulic Overload?
❑
Frozen Ground?
❑
Heavy metals (Cu, Zn, etc)?
❑
PAN?
❑
Is PAN > 10%110 lbs.?
❑
Total P2O5?
❑
Failure to incorporate manurelsludge into bare soil?
❑
Outside of acceptable crop window?
❑
Evidence of wind drift?
❑
Application outside of application area?
❑
Crop Type 1
Com (Silage)
Crop Type 2
Other
Crop Type 3
Food Crop (Fruits &
Vegetables)
Crop Type 4
Timothy, Orchard, &
Rye Grass
Page: 3

Permit: AWC030002 Owner -Facility: Blan Bottomley
Inspection Date: 04119/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection
Facility Number : 030002
Reason for Visit: Routine
Waste Applerajon
Crop Type 5
Yes
No
NA
NF
Crop Type 6
Soil Type 1
Soil Type 2
Soil Type 3
Soil Type 4
Soil Type 5
Soil Type 6
14. Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan(CAWMP)? ❑
■
❑
❑
15, Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement?
❑
■
❑
❑
16. Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination?
❑
■
❑
❑
17. Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑
n
❑
❑
16. Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment?
Documents
❑
Yes
0
No
❑
NA
❑
NE
Rt'co[ds and
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage and Permit readily available?
❑
❑
❑
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
WUP?
❑
Checklists?
❑
Design?
❑
Maps?
❑
Other?
❑
21, Does record keeping need improvement?
❑
❑
❑
If yes, check the appropriate box below.
Waste Application?
❑
120 Minute inspections?
❑
Weather code?
❑
Weekly Freeboard?
❑
Transfers?
❑
Rainfall?
❑
Inspections after > 1 inch rainfall & monthly?
❑
Waste Analysis?
❑
Annual soil analysis?
❑
Crop yields?
❑
Stocking?
❑
Annual Certification Form (NPDES only)?
❑
22. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑
❑
❑
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain a rainbreaker on irrigation equipment (NPDES only)?
❑
❑
■
❑
24, Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
❑
N
❑
❑
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
❑
❑
n
❑
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
❑
0
110
Page: 4

0
• 0
Permlt: AWC030002 Owner - Facility: Blan Bottomley Facility Number. 030002
Inspection Date: 04/19/2005 Inspection Type: Compliance Inspection Reason for Visit: Routine
Records and Oncuments Yps Nn NA NF
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorous loss assessment (PLAT) certification? ❑ ❑ ■ ❑
Othpf ls5UUes Yes No NA NE
26. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the Permit or CAWMP? ■ ❑ ❑ ❑
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hours andlor document and report those mortality ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
rates that exceed normal rates?
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an air quality concem? if yes. contact a regional Air Quality ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
representative immediately.
31. Did the facility fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by Permit? ❑ ■ © ❑
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fait to discuss reviewlinspection with on -site representative? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ ■ ❑ ❑
Page: 5

O.Divis.ion of.Water,Quality
Fa lfi" ''Nu M be a O Division of Soil and Water Cervati.on' /l A
U
Oilier Agency
Type of Visit x
C pliance 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
c�x
Date of Visit ! Arrival Time, Departure Time- Q S County: A Region: Los f�
Farm Name,:_rna M 12 C1 (O P L� / GU i I Q--K Owner Email: L
Owner ,Name: `1 I Phone:
Mailing Address: Ci i Iw L44 Q. � ri'i � �I ! � �_��
Physical Address:
Facility Contact: S
Onsite Representative:
Certified Operator: T
Back-up Operator:
Location of Farm:
Swine
Wean to Finish
Wean to Feeder
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
Farrow to Feeder
Farrow to Finish
Gilts
Boars
Other
❑ Other
Phone k o:v 1 �-3
Integrator:
Operator Certification Number:
Back-up Certification Number:
Latitude: 7° Longitude: r°
Design Current Design Current
Capacity Population Wet Poultry Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑Non -Layer
Dry Poultry
❑ Layers
❑ Non -Lavers
❑ 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?
Design Current
Cattle Capacity. Population
Dairy Cow
❑ Dairy Calf
❑ Dairy Heifei
❑ Dry Cow
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Beef Stocker
❑ Beef Feeder
❑ Beef Brood Cow
Number of Structures:
b. Did the discharge reach waters of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. What is the estimated volume that reached waters of the State (gallons)?
d. Does discharge bypass the waste management system'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of a past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State
other than from a discharge'?
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
*No
❑ NA
❑ NE
AYes
❑ No
❑ NA
❑ NE
12128104 COtrrinii'ed

'Facility Number: 0 o � Date of Inspection hf 11 y I CiS I
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (structural plus storm storage plus heavy rainfall) less than adequate?
4i a. If yes, is waste level into the structural freeboard?
r� �•
/ � I
❑ Yes !!! No El NA ElNE
El,
Yes ❑ No )J NA ❑ NE
.. St cture 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 2) Structure 4
Structure 5 Structure 6
� '` Identifier: wl
Spillway?:
Designed Freeboard (in):
Observed Freeboard (in):
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑ Yes XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
(ie/ large trees, severe erosion, seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed
❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
through a waste management or closure plan?
If any of questions 4-6 were answered yes, and the situation poses an immediate public health or
environmental threat, notify DWQ
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance or improvement?
❑ Yes X'No ❑ NA ❑ NE
8. Do any of the stuctures lack adequate markers as required by the permit?
❑ Yes No [INA ❑ NE
(Not applicable to roofed pits, dry stacks and/or wet stacks)
9. Does any part of the waste management system other than the waste structures require
Yes ❑ No ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance or improvement?
Waste Application
10.
Are there any required buffers, setbacks, or compliance alternatives that need ❑ Yes
XNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
maintenance/improvement?
11.
Is there evidence of incorrect application? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ❑ Yes
X No ❑ NA ❑ NE
ElExcessive Ponding ElHydraulic Overload ElFrozen Ground ElHeavy 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 Drifl ❑ Application Outside of Area
0 o
12.
Crop type(s)
13.
Soil type(s)
14.
Do the receiving crops differ from those designated in the CAWMP? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
/
15.
Does the receiving crop and/or land application site need improvement? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
16.
Did the facility fail to secure and/or operate per the irrigation design or wettable acre determination`❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
17.
Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
18.
Is there a lack of properly operating waste application equipment? 30W ❑ Yes
No ❑ NA ❑ NE
Comments (refer to question.#): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):
Reviewerllnspector Name r� Phone: T --%
Reviewer/Inspector Signatur Date:
_&t&tk� _�� 94QW
/St oxa5_ 12128104 ` Continued

Facility Number: — Olaf Inspection
Required Records & Documents
19. Did the facility fail to have Certificate of Coverage & Permit readily available? ❑ Yes 96o El NA El NE
20. Does the facility fail to have all components of the CAWMP readily available? If yes, check El Yes +++� No ❑ NA ❑ NE
the appropriate box. ❑ WUP ❑ Checklists ❑ Design El Maps El Other
21. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes. check a appropriate box elow. ❑ Yes No ❑ NA ❑ NE
V`ste Applicati �GaCekly Freeboard jast 4alysis 12 Soil Analysis Waste Transfers
(p Ul r. ,�, ,
Rainfall Stocking ❑ Crop Yield onthl}and I" Rain Inspections Ltd Weather Code
22. Did the faci y fail to install and maintain a rain gauge? ❑ Yes MNo ❑ NA ❑ NE
23. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
24. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment as required by the permit?
25. Did the facility fail to conduct a sludge survey as required by the permit?
26. Did the facility fail to have an actively certified operator in charge?
27. Did the facility fail to secure a phosphorus loss assessment (PLAT) certification?
Other Issues
28. Were any additional problems noted which cause non-compliance of the permit or CAWMP?
29. Did the facility fail to properly dispose of dead animals within 24 hoyrs and/or document
and report the mortality rates that were higher than normal? 300 1 -Fr-OVA & ilkll
30. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? 3
If yes, contact a regional Air Quality representative immediately
31. Did the facility fail to notify the regional office of emergency situations as required by
General Permit? (ie/ discharge. freeboard problems, over application)
32. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with an on -site representative?
33. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
❑ No
O(NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
0 No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
*A
❑ NE
❑ Yes
XNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
❑ No
A NA
❑ NE
Yes
rNo ❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
KNo
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
X No
❑ NA
❑ NE
�tY'Leps—)(No
❑ NA
❑ NE
❑ Yes
�1 No
El NA
❑ NE
El Yes
///X"` No
❑ NA
❑ NE
Additional Comments and/or Drawings:
F0
_ a
V 12128104

tvision of Water Quality;
w ivision of -Soil and Water Conservation
O Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other Q Denied Access
Facility Number 03 02 Date of Visit: S/1812004 Time: 0930
O Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified © Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: GJadg jr.eck.1?aia..EarM......................................................................... County: A1199kantic......................................... W,5j3.Q........
Owner Name: Ulaa......................................... J11.Rt [am Icy ........................
Mailing Address: 07.J.Glatl�..Y..all�x.l�aad........................................
Phone No: -b 2..3499...........................................................
................ Eiatzick...iy.C............................................................. 20.6za .............
Facility Contact: Ala[.Q.C.1llaJCth.lAtt9.IxlltrY.....................Title:................................................................ Phone No: '!'..................
Onsite Representative: J.!'la.CthAjB.QjtQi1 lF'y....................................................... Integrator:...........
Certified Operator: M0.taha.&............................ Up.t.tonlry ....................................... Operator Certification Number:ZX3.$;l.............................
Location of Farm:
Slade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 OF 30 13 Longitude F 16 «
Design Current Design .. ' Current Design. - Current
Swine- - Capacity Population Poultry Capacity Po ulation Cattle Ca acit _ Po ulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Soars
❑ Layer IN Dairy 1 414 12
❑ Non -Layer I I JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
Number of Lagoons 0
2
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. 1f discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (if yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ® Yes ❑ No
Structure l Structure 2 Structure "a Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: ...........Heifer ........... .......Milk ham....... .... .................... .................................................................................. I............................
......
Freeboard (inches): 12 44 q� xx
12112103 Continued tj�--

Facility Number: 03-02 1 Date of Inspection 5/18/2004 •
r
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
® No
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
®No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
® No
elevation markings?
Waste Anrslication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type Timothy, Orchard, & Rye
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
®No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
®No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection did the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes ® No
Air Quality representative immediately.
Use.drawin(s of facility to better explain situations. -(use addi d/or P grecommenda�}ns or ❑any::other comments Comments refer to uestion,# • Explain any YES answers:an y
g y ptonal a es as necessa Field Copy ® Final Notes j
4. Need to pump small WSP immediately or transfer to larger pond. Waste level is only 12 inches from overflowing the concrete berm.
5. Owner/operator still plans to close WSPs. See technical specialist about obtaining a closure plan.
7. Need to mow embankment on larger WSP.
13. and 29. WSP has recently been revised to include new fields.
16. Operator is going to contract his pumping and hauling.
23. Waste analysis is slightly out of the 60-day window. Fall 03' records look good for most part. Don't forget to record freeboard each
Operator left message with DWQ about two weeks ago regarding high waste level in smallest WSP. Owner plans to apply waste on
land after he cuts it (in about a week).
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu
12112103
Date:

Facility Number: 03-02 *f Inspection 5/18/2004 0
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes ® No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ieI WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below. ® Yes ❑ No
❑ Waste Application ❑ Freeboard ❑ Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
24.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ieI discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
28.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
29.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
NPDES Permitted Facilities
30.
Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
32.
Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes
❑ No
33.
Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes
❑ No
34.
Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
❑ No
35.
Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form []Rainfall ❑ Inspection After V Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
12112103

a sion Of' Water Quali
ty
vision of Soil an&Water Conservation
Q Other Agencyt✓-`
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other 0 Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: Tiine:
O Not Operational M Below Threshold
[Permitted ©Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered
Farm Name: d.V--U-e.---. ... arvi....
Owner Name:..... ....... MMU.%x..M.....
Mailing Address:a,f..,,,,)` ..4......W ........... Q.
Facility Contact:
Onsite Representative: ..... I.!W..'j.V.jM.......
�
Certified Operator:,,,;,,,,,,,
-p—
Location of Farm:
r
Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..�= .I.��..... 3
County:..-�.�.
_.:..............f..q.................... 0Phone No:.......:.cJ................I...1.
:.tnn��e 1--......a.g.6�.........
Phone No:
integrator: ............. &wm.m&amm& ........... o
Operator Certification Number: ,„�, i„0, b,
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude E250' ®4 �44 Longitude ®• 1 «
_ Design Current'
Swi>te __'Ca aci , <Po uldti6ti
❑ Wean
to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Discharees & 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? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway
tru dire Structure 21 Structure ; Structure 4 Structure 5
tkIdentifier• 1r�
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
*0
❑ Yes
No
Yes
❑ No
Structure 6
.... .... ...................
Freeboard (inches): L
12112103 ��, Continued

Facility Number: -- O Z • Date of Inspection I S 1
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees; severe erosion,
[]Yes
No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
❑ Yes
KNO
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?
xyes
[INo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenancelimprovement?
❑ Yes
No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes
No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
11. Is there evidence of over application? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes
X<0
❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Frozen Ground ❑ Copper and/or Zinc
12. Crop type
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those desig ted in the Certified Ani al Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
Yes
❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
RNo
'`N
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
El Yes
o
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
WO
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
)<No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
'VNo
Odor Issues
17. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
18. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes No
19. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
20. At the time of the inspection slid the facility pose an odor or air quality concern? If yes, contact a regional ❑ Yes
Air Quality representative immediately. 7�
Comments (refer to questeon:#) , Explatn''any YES answers and/or any:recomniendations or ny.other comments:
Lase drawings of facility to better explain situation§ {use additaonalpages as necessary):,. Field Copy ;❑ Final Notes
� • 8Io5e.)r2P(a1 For he_tfe'r, ba.,rcn w5P 5� r?�
7 • N�e e.d vb i..� man km'en -I- i� n 1 o�r-c� m t
tvASte �,d i
�Fov� �'eI� <1-il) need 4 be, adJeA L6 LoU'P 684-P�
(� PX'a�o-r ha5 C�ree� QFaN'On
I
)fieQ-rna,P�s�� ►5 Sly
Reviewer/Inspector Name
O
Date:
I21I2103"—&.6 r4 /0-11D�T'

Facility Number: —024f Inspection i
Required Records & Documents
21. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes No
22. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes No
23. Does record keeping need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
aste Application IjVreeboard Waste Analysis ❑ Soil Sampling
Yes ❑ No
24. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes 4(No
25. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes XNO
26. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
❑ Yes KNO
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
2T Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
28. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
3to
29. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
Xles ❑ No
NPUES Permitted Facilities
30. Is the facility covered under a NPDES Permit? (If no, skip questions 31-35)
❑ Yes No
3I. If selected, did the facility fail to install and maintain rainbreakers on irrigation equipment?
❑ Yes No
32. Did the facility fail to install and maintain a rain gauge?
❑ Yes ❑ No
33. Did the facility fail to conduct an annual sludge survey?
❑ Yes ❑ No
34. Did the facility fail to calibrate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes ❑ No
35. Does record keeping for NPDES required forms need improvement? If yes, check the appropriate box below.
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Stocking Form ❑ Crop Yield Form ❑ Rainfall ❑ Inspection After I " Rain
❑ 120 Minute Inspections ❑ Annual Certification Form
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Additional Coriiments and/or.Dra%iings._.-" `
�'rnh`�J
y ■ _
C1 3 aS WuP � adeD �Q��,�y� ��aoo3
A l-0. �2
z s e o �t�� e�es4 peg- Sasser a-' Andam a (�-d� �.��Q T- 13�� �-I rornalFa��.� rc�e j�wL
0?.3 Fa- l I re- c.o4S
�a/o � o fit'' rvles� O�bou-I- ce�b d
Cle.e� utSMaIi poll
�'rw�-Eer 4� teneuf' .�hcJ . �45t� let/0 �� S oa_c�
12112103 1 oZf tr V U r s 5 UQC---+ 16 W t � -1 COM QefP— 10 64-0 4

&chnical Assistance Site Visit Repor;
• DiMbn of Soil and Water Conservatiori
O Natural Resources Conservation Service
O Soil and Water Conservation District
O Other...
Facility Number 03 - �2 Date: 10/21/03 Time: 1 9:15 1 Time On Farm: 90 WSRO
Farm Name Glade Creek Dairy Farm County Alleghany Phone:
Mailing Address 5071 Glade Valley Road Ennice NC
Onsite
Representative
Type Of Visit
® Operation Review
❑ Compliance Inspection (pilot only)
❑ Technical Assistance
❑ Confirmation for Removal
® No Animals -Date Last Operated: 10/15/03
❑ Operating below threshold
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Integrator
Purpose Of Visit
pp Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/locai referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
IN Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
Integrator
Purpose Of Visit
pp Routine
O Response to DWQ/DENR referral
O Response to DSWC/SWCD referral
Q Response to complaint/locai referral
O Requested by producer/integrator
Q Follow-up
O Emergency
O Other...
Design Current
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
❑ Non -Layer
IN Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
IN Dairy
❑ Non -Dairy
414
0
❑ Other
336-657-3499
28623
GENERAL QUESTIONS:
1. Is waste discharging from any part of the operation and reaching surface waters or wetlands? ❑ yes ® no
2. Is there evidence of a past waste discharge from any part of the operation that waste reached ❑ yes ® no
surface waters or wetlands?
3. Does any problem pose an immediate threat to the integrity of the waste structure (large trees, ❑ yes ® no
seepage, severe erosion, etc.)?
4. Is there evidence of nitrogen over application, hydraulic overloading or excessive ponding ❑ yes ® no
requiring DWQ notification?
5. Is there evidence of improper dead animal disposal that poses a threat to the environment. ❑ yes ® no
and/or public health?
6. Is the waste level within the structural freeboard elevation range for any waste structure? ❑ yes ® no
Structurel Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier Heifer/Calf barn F Milk Barn
Level (Inches) 72 28
CROP TYPES lCorn, Silage ISmall grain sil jPumpkins
SPRAYFIELD
SOIL TYPES
7. What type of technical assistance does the onsite representative feel is needed? (list in comment section)
03/10/03

U
a
Facility Number 03 - 2 Date:
10/21/03
PARAMETER
0 No assistance provided/requested
❑ 8. Waste spill leaving site
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE Needed
Provided
❑ 9. Waste spill contained on site
25. Waste Plan Revision or Amendment
®
El
10. Level in structural freeboard
26. Waste Plan Conditional Amendment
❑
❑
❑ 11. Level in storm storage
27. Review or Evaluate Waste Plan w/producer
❑
❑
❑ 12. Waste structure integrity compromised
El13. Waste
28. Forms Need (list in comment section)
❑
structure needs maintenance
29. Missing Components (list in comments)
❑
❑
❑ 14. Over application >= 10% & 10 lbs.
❑
❑
❑ 15. Over application < 10% or < 10 lbs.
30.21-1.0200 re -certification
❑ 16. Hydraulic overloading
31. Five & Thirty day Plans of Action (PoA)
❑
❑
32. Irrigation record keeping assistance
❑
❑
❑ 17. Deficient irrigation records
❑ 18. Late/missing waste analysis
33. Organ ize/com p ute rization of records
❑
❑
❑ 19. Late/missing lagoon level records
34. Sludge Evaluation
❑
❑
[120. Late/missing soils analysis
❑ 21. Crop needs improvement
35. Sludge or Closure Plan
❑
❑
❑ 22. Crop inconsistent with waste plan
36. Sludge removal/closure procedures
❑
❑
37. Waste Structure Evaluation
❑
❑
❑ 23. Irrigation maintenance deficiency
[124. Deficient sprayfield conditions
38. Structure Needs Improvement
❑
❑
39. Operation & Maintenance Improvements
❑
❑
40. Marker check/calibration
❑
❑
Regulatory^ Referrals
41. Site evaluation
❑
❑
❑ Referred to DWQ Date:
42. irrigation Calibration
El
El
El Referred t0 NCDA Date:
43. Irrigation design/installation
❑
❑
❑ Other...
system
Date:
44. Secure irrigation information (maps, etc.)
❑
❑
LIST IMPROVEMENTS
45. Operating improvements (pull signs, etc.)
❑
❑
MADE BY OPERATION
46. Wettable Acre Determination
❑
❑
1
47. Evaluate WAD certification/rechecks
❑
❑
48. Crop evaluationfrecommendations
❑
❑
2.
49. Drainage workievaluation
❑
❑
50. Land shaping, subsoiling, aeration, etc.
51. Runoff control, stormwater diversion, etc.
❑
❑
❑
❑
3
52. Buffer improvements
❑
❑
53. Field measurements(GPS, surveying, etc.)
❑
❑
4.
54. Mortality BMPs
❑
❑
55. Waste operator education (NPDES)
❑
❑
5'
56. Operation & maintenance education
❑
❑
57. Record keeping education
❑
❑
6.
58. Crop/forage management education
❑
❑
59. Soil and/or waste sampling education
❑
❑
03/10/03

Facility Number Date: 1 10/21/03
COMMENTS:
Waste analysis: 7-14-03 LSD 4.8 Ibs.N11000 gals. B, LSD 9.2 lbs.N11000 gals. B
The facility sold their cattle on 10-15-03. Mr. Bottomly wants to close out the waste storage ponds, and
come off the registered .0200 operation list.
l encouraged Mr. Bottomly to get with his technical specialist to have a closure plan done for the waste
storage ponds and to contact the Division of Water Quality 24 hours before work begins,
will leave a request to be removed form with Mrs. Bottomly.
Mr. Bottomly was hauling waste today and no records have changed since the Spring applications
except the freeboard records.
Mrs. Bottomly requested that her technical specialist add pumpkins to the waste plan, however, that ha
not been completed yet.
TECHNICAL SPECIALIST lRocky Durham
SIGNATURE
Date Entered: 10/22/03
Entered By: lRocky Durham
03/10/03

'other Agency
k0.
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
I)a�e ut' \`isit: t)7l09l2t103 'I'inu•: 1010
Facility Number 03 02
0 Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered pate Last Operated or Above Threshold:
Farm Name: G.lade.Qxeels.D..3ky..FarM...................................................... Counn: Alleghanx............................... W,51LO-_.__.
Owner Name: Blau ----- --------._._ jlfltf4tan,ley.-------------------- -- Phone No: 336:657:3494--------------- - --- --- --
Mailing Address: S.QZl.l lacy.YaAley.ltQ�tsl.................................................................. notice.. C ............................................................. M.Q3 ..............
Facility Contact: 131ati.oar.Nxariha.OattQmley................Title:............................................... Phone No:......................................
Onsite Representative: MRHJWl30tt9mtlex___________-._.___._._._.___-_--- Integrator: ------------._._._._.-----------------____-•
Certified Operator: Martha.R............................. Ralf u Ity........................................ Operator Certification Number: 2133.4.............................
Location of Farm:
31ade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. A
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®• 30 13 46 Longitude 80 • 58 ' 16 .4
Design Current
Swine Canacitv Pnnulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ® Dairy 414 1 344
❑ Non -Layer I I ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
~.. Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
Number of Lagoons 0 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps- 2 JE3 No Liquid Waste Management System _
Discharges R Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field .❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass it 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 K Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: --._IHeifer.harn..... ...... Milk.l3ara.__._-------------------------- ..__•--•--.__..-.--....-- .....................__._.._.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 6
Freeboard (inches). 48 36
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 • Dale of Inspection 07/09/2003 •
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed'? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yes ® No
12. Crop type Rye cover Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) pumpkins
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ® Yes ❑ No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
M. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ®No
® Yes [--]No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes [:]No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
® Yes ❑ No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about 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-MEField Copy ®Final Notes
3. and 8. There is evidence that sediment and manure is coming off the concrete lot outside the freestall barn during rain events and
_
getting into a ditch that goes to the creek. Suggest curbing the end of the concrete area to at least contain the manure. Could also dig a
gravel pit at the bottom of the ditch to catch run-off. Could also route a ditch around the buffer area below the lot so that manure and
sediment could be filtered. Check next visit.
13. and 25. Applications of animal waste onto pumpkins is a violation of the CAWMP and permit since only cabbage is listed. Need to
revise WUP as soon as possible.
v
Reviewer/Inspector Name +Meliss osebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: L&IT 47 2 Date:
05103101 ­1 1 / Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 Do' Inspection 07/09/2003
Odor issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation 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 or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional Comments and/orDrawings:
8. No leachate noted in the ditch. Looks ok.
19. Operator is waiting on waste sample result to complete the SLUR 2 form for Spring applications. Check next visit.
19. NOV for failure to obtain soil analysis in 2002. Per operator, samples were sent Feb. 2002.
22. Freeboard violations were noted in October 2002 and June 2003. Need to call DWQ as required by permit. 336.771.4608 ext.
265
25. T- 1342 F- I is listed as hay (alfalfa) in records. WUP lists rye. Need to add alfalfa hay to WUP.
05103101

1DAm
Division of Water Quality.
Q-Division of:Soil.and Water Conservation
.Q-Otber Agency
Type of Visit Compliance Inspection O Operation Review Q Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Otheer%�%�� r❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
slate Of Visit: �-�-'— Time: L=s-yr—a
E rO Z
Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
[Permitted 0 Certified M Conditionally Certified Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:
�]
Farm Name: �f��u r t p 0'l— C i County:
Owner Name:
Mailing Address: _7 V 1 1_ _U I Wj
Facilitv Contact: _81t
Onsite Representative:
^
Certified Operator: ' r ,
Location of Farm:
Phone No: ").mil/.7 c % r ♦:3 1�
- -a t_nnIc'v_ I
Phone No:
Integrator:
o44o M 1.JI.Operator Certification Number:
j T I / turn r f C3 h- Q (0 Y '4:)-1
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ®' ®• ®u Longitude ®' ®1 EITIµ
Design Current Design Current Design Current
JN III I'
n Wean
U Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
Boars
Poultry Ca acity Population Cattle Capacity Population I
❑ Laver Dairy
❑ Non -Laver Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW r 47-7 q , dQ
Number of Lagoons JE3 Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area AE1,Sprav Field Area I
HoldingPonds / Solid Traps p ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges g Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? XSpillway
5 cure l Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: Qx
Freeboard (inches):
05103101 J
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
K No
AYes
❑ No
❑ Yes
lJ(1 No
Structure 6
I
Continued

rA%
Facility umber: — Q Date of Inspection 9 /W
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion. El 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? El Yes No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered ,yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ElYes ANo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level KNO
elevation markings? ElYes
Taste Annlication
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload ❑ Yea No
12. Crop type
13. Do the receivi crops diher with those designated in a Certified Animal Waste Mana e ent Ian AWMP)? Yes o
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ElYes 1No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes X No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement? ElYes ;KNo
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment? ❑ Yes XNo
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available? ❑ Yes F
No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ W- P. checklists, design, maps, etc.) / ❑ Yes P<No
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irri ation. freeboard. waste analvsisOwlample reports) Yes ❑ No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, frechpardproblems, over application) Yes ❑ No
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? LLL❑��, Yes No
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency? ❑ Yes o
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AR'MP? XYes ❑ No
10 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other:comments. _
Use drawings of facility to betterexplain situations.:(use'additional.pages:as necessary): Field { onv V ❑Final Nntes
M L,4 i�1 I {
go
Sedf.vt"ei 1
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05/03/01, L r r t Continued
` 1f U&� 10+ ou+s true 5 d
. u�'t
V I I Vs t4lq Qiaj

0 9
Facility lumber: Oj — Date of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discbarge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there anv 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 or a permanentitemporary cover?
an
'3. 5'l I Q/kJ4--&J �e
plr�r-�t.Je
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes I
No
E5 -- P .,
INN
as. r i3� z F ► � t� y ��� Ae ? I)Wd ta�
fanczlwsis
o.i >a t � 7 /� -�y--7 N O� -� o�
S O� o + ZddZo W'�Gre, ��7� .2 ZiD® o
Z& br a-,r� Ui Dlc tOrG nt +eJ in Ot*be_- zoo 4-
-Tunes ZaD; . !r-e
rvc.�d � � Q a5 Y
P�
mA. 336,77 ? 1. 4609 ��a�,�
J
05103101

tston:of Water Quality
skon?of Soil'and Water Conservation
O Other'Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection Q Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Dale 44, Vi.it: 9/11/2002 Time: 9:30
Facility Number 03 2
Q Not Operational O Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold
Farm Name: Glade.Cteek.RaicX.EaT .....:...:::.:................ ......... County: AjUeghany ............................... YY�1i.R------
Owner Name: JBlaR------ --- - - - --- �fltIODDIey -------- --- ----- - - Phone No: 4a.Q_it7.3494--------- --- - - - - - ----
MailingAddress: S.Q.L .Made..Yall�y.. aatsl................................................................... lannic.C.AC........................ .............. I..................... Z8623 ..............
Facility Contact: ........................................... :............... Title: .. Phone No:
Onsite Representative: Ma>rJtha4�Q#19]Y_--------------------------------- Integrator: ------------------------•------------------•
Certified Operator: bbrlha.R........................... :. RQUA xtlej........................................ Operator Certification Number: 21M.4.............................
Location of Farm:
'lade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse - Latitude 36 • 30 13 Longitude 80 • 58 16 •
Design Current
Swine Canacity Pnnulntinn
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish'
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current
Design Current
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Layer
® Dairy
414
414
❑ Non -Layer
❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other-
__�_Total,
Des igrt Capacity
414
Total SSLW
579,600
Number of Lagoons 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 1 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) El Yes ❑ No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
2. is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes to No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6.
Identifier: .-.--Heifezlcalf..... ...... Mills barn-.--.- ------------ I --------------
Freeboard(inches): 48 30
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-2 Dale of I nspection 9/11/2002
0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, Yes 0 No
seepage. etc.)
& Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? Yes ®No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste ADDliCalion
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 Rye Corn (Silage & Grain) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
IN No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
Q No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YE5 answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary): ❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
$. Silage leachate drain may need to be opened upon the upper side of the milk barn. A small amount of leachate is draining out of the
_
ve pipe into the waste pond now. However, there is a large amount of leachate in the ditch on the upper side of the milk barn.
o waste application done since the Spring.
* Remember to get a 2002 soil analysis on the application fields.
Lj
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
ReviewerAnspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 43-2 I) )f 1nspvction 9/11/20(lZ
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of 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 or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
AdditioffAl C6tnnients an or rawmgs:
Waste analysis: 3-27-02 LSD 13.7 lbs.N/1000 gals. B, LSD 18.O lbs.N/1000 gals. B
+
05103101

Mi
sion of Water Quality
sion of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number 03 02 late of Visit: 4/4/2002 "Time: [400
Q Not operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified [3 Conditionally Certified [] Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:.........................
Farm Name: G.lade.G�e�) .1].airX. alrtn........................................................................ County: AlIgghany ........................................ NY%0........
OwnerName:laulB..........................................RxtR>attleX.................................................. Phone No- h-f 5.?.-3.4Q?...........................................................
MailingAddress: 5.0.71.Gl.ade.Malley.RQad.................................................................. E110ic.q ... NC ....... .......................... .................... ..............
FacilityContact: ..................... Title: ... ............................................... I............. Phone No: ...................................................
Onsite Representative:.Ia.tl..ald..lax.Iola. RSI.txQAtkley.............................................. Integrator: ............................................................................
Certified Operator:M;,Cliha.R ............................ HAttl1.[T7111t3:....................................... Operator Certification Number:ZJ3.8.4 .............................
Location of Farm:
lade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 ' 30 13 �° Longitude 80 • 58 z 16 «
Design Current.
Swine Canacitv Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 414 354
❑ Non -Layer I Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
Number of Lagoons 0 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharees & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (if yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in -al/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?
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Stricture 6
Identifier: ......Heifkr.Ham..... .......&Ulk.Barn....... ............ !....................... ..................... ............... .................................... ............
Freeboard (inches): 60 72
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 Date of Inspection 4/4/2002 0
5. Are there any immediate threats to the iority of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Rye cover Corn (Silage & Grain)
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Re wired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about 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): -
, Field Copy ® Final Notes
Lp
3. PVC pipe that carries silage leachate from silo to waste storage pond was cracked when I arrived and leachate was flowing down the
+
ill towards the creek. Repairs were made before I left farm. Looks great now.
8. Loafing lot by milk barn is denuded. Need to rotate cattle or re -vegetate. Run-off of waste getting into small tributary. Per owner,
they are working with NRCSISWCD to fence and buffer the hill. Plan to put in water boxes as well.
S. Run-off of sediment and manure from denuded lot below heifer barn goes into owners freshwater pond.
10. Some waste had been applied closer than 200 feet to a residence. Per Martha Bottomley, the farm has a verbal ok from the owner of
the residence to apply to entire field.
15. Tract-1344 Fields-3&7 received waste last Fall and no rye cover was planted. PAN from Fall has been deducted from Spring corn.
1 -
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock _ r -
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: Z
05103101
Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 D.Inspection 414/Z002 •
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge atlor below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation 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 or a permanenthemporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes Z No
❑ Yes ❑ No
Additional omments and/orDrawings:
*** If Fall rye is not harvested this Spring, then PAN that was applied in the Fall must be deducted from the Spring crop (i.e. corn). F
J
05103101

1 ;tr �'
�Ak. K b �' -
4
visi
'on of Water Quality
•
r
x
Division of Soil and Water.Cooservahon
�..h
O other Agency —
Type of Visit )p Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ARoutine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number Date of Visit: ime: Do 0
10 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
Permitted [(Certified [3 Conditionally Certified Q Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ... Q.I.................................................�........................... County ..+................... ......... . ............
Owner Name: b.1.0-Y) ........ .................................................... Phone No:..............,, ..fP...'....1�!..�7.... :. ..
acility Contact: ....J�...0../.1........>�t..L ......,V-•�... ... .:.�.. .�i.�. .�!`- -'P we.h}ee..•.....................Y...................
a
ailing Address: ..... h-Ia,[..I...erL..:i.a,44...... .. tL..Q �.. .... ... ....
Onsite Representative:Mar*n ........ IWOMIL14)OLn-.-,...,, integrator: ,,,,,•,,,,,,•, ,•
Certified Operator:-••M�,j" .(a . �,QH Operator Certification Number- � � a,,,,-
P • ..........................
Location of Farm:
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry � Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude ' 4 &6 Longitude • ®1
64
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine... Capacity PopulationPoultry
Ca vacitvPovulationC e
Capacity Population.',,
❑ Wean to Feeder
10Layer
Dairy
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑Non -Layer
❑Non -Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
(
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑Other
l ;
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
❑Gilts
❑ Boars
.
Total SSLW
S Q�
Number of Lagoons bsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharses & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: []Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway
Stru�c`ture Str - ulre 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier: .. PJ`rP�( ... .t.. .. ..................
L,,z Freeboard (inches): �o Z
J \ � t ,, 5/00
❑ Yes JNo
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes XNo
Yes No n ,
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
Continued on back

4
Facility Number: — QZ . Date of InspectionLwvom 18 Printed on: 1/9/2001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes XNo
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑Yes O(No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes )rNo
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?`j
Yes ❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
❑ Yes I'No
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes *o
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
❑ Yes XNo
12. Crop typeAj
13. Do the receiving ogs differ with those d ignated in t e Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP}?
[I Yes �'�io
14. a) Does the- facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes 9.No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes No
c} This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
WYes
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes KNo
Renuired Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available? ❑ Yes VNo
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 )KNo
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports) ❑ Yes No
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design? ❑ Yes No
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge? ❑ Yes No
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application) ❑ Yes XNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative? ❑ Yes Vlo
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
iq yiQiatiolis'0 dgfie cndies rvV it noted- dttrift phis:visit: - Ybir)<11j
rorres ondejke: about; this visit.: '
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or'any otherco' .y
Use drawingsof facilityto better. explain sihiations. (use additional. a es as necessary).
reW-
\4- LoUtE 1%. A
~z
, ro; v- px"— 14
Reviewer/Inspector Name_.
Reviewer/Inspector Signature Date: $/pp

Faciftty Number: - l0of Inspection
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below -ET er-IH-N-o
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? (ix, residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes hrNo
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? -E Yer-fj-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 X No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? �<No
&U
4
VA MZ WA I P NJ TMA a #1/l

!vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
tj Other Agency W
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: 8/21/2401 'nine:10:00
Facility Number 03 2
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
®Permitted ®Certified 13 Conditionally Certified D Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ..............
Farm Name: Gh1d.eXjrU.>)AJ[r..x.arM........................................................................ County: A119911AMY ........................................ NYS . Q........
OwnerName: kllaU......................................... RRlttar I'a.................. .................... Phone No: 91.0-5.5.7.-3.499............... ........................................................
Mailing Address: S.O.7..l..GLade.Yallf<x.>3pad................................ . 1�nWmz...n.C............................... ....... 2N.62.3 ..............
................................. .......................
FacilityContact: .............................................................................. Title:................................................................ Phone No:...................................................
Ohsite Representative: It�1�it.. ..N1[axkkta. A.k.kAltiA1�Y.................................................. Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator:Mv.tbA.................................. j3q't'(QjWCy ....................................... Operator Certification Number:ZI3.84................
Location of Farm:
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. +
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry 0 Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 30 r 13 GL Longitude $0 • 1 58 ° 16 «
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
F
Layer ® Dairy 414 351
Non -Layer I A JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
Number of Lagoons 1 1 ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps 1 2 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the 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 ❑rib
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifer: ......Hcifez.bam...... ....... Mdk bazn....... ...........
................... ....... ................................... ......................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 36 48
05103101 Continued

Facility Number: 03-2 Date of Inspection 812I12001
5. Are there any immediate threats to the in(Vity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tree Oere 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 Annlication
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
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 Corn (Silage & Grain) Rye Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Fescue (Hay)
13.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14.
a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required
Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit 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?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
®No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
®No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
®No
0 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about 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): `❑-Field Copy ® Final Notes -
# 19. Mrs. Bottomley faxed a copy of the weekly freeboard readings. She couldn't locate them at the time of the review.
+
# 3. Recommend keeping the solids removed from behind the milk barn more frequently to reduce runoff from this area.
Records look good.
dvised Mrs. Bottomley that, if the rye crop is not removed (cover crop), any waste applied to the tye would need to be deducted from
the corn crop nitrogen balance in the Spring.
Applications will be made this Fall after the corn crop is remover!.
Reviewer/Inspector Name 'Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
05103101 Continued

Facility, Npmber: 03-2 Dpof Inspection 8/21/2001 .
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation 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 or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
A ditiona omments and or ravings:
Waste analysis: 3-13-01 LSD 5.7 lbs.N/1000 gals. B, LSD 6.7 1bs.N/1000 gals. B 171
J
05103101

vision of Water Quality
vision of Soil and Water Conservation
Q Other Agency
type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Qther ❑ Denied Access
1)ati. of Visit: 4/1Rl240[ Tinic:
Facility Number 03 U2
O Not Operational Q Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 0 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold:...............
Farm Name: G1adc.GrgvkJ Wry Fail.M........................................................... ............ .. County: AjjWhwU'.......................................... .W.SRO.......
OwnerName: l lain ......................................... 13P.tEt)]lWCy.................................................. Phone No: �.36-05..7.a3499......... ........ 1,.........................................
Mailing Address: QL�.. �ad�..Y.atlle}'.kZQa ............................... .................... lannicc..).!iG............................. .. U.623 ..............
............... ...............................
Facility Contact: Maxth;x.R,. oU.Q.mlex.................................Title:............................................................... Phone No:
Onsite Representative: MarAlla-BA tOMIa....................... .. .. . Integrator:....
Certified Operator:nalkilm.................................. RQUmba ....................................... Operator Certification Number: Z13$4.............................
Location of Farm:
;lade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21. i
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 36 • 30 6 13 i( Longitude 80 ' 58 & 16 «
Design Current
Swine Capacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
[:]Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacitv Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I I ® Dairy 414 290
❑ Non -Layer 10 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
N g be Lagoons U -f❑❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ La -one Area ❑ Spray —71 4_I field Area
Holdtn IPonds / Sohd Tra s 2 No Li uid Waste Mana ement Svstem
. . h� -,
Discharge & .'tream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. Nvas the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed. slid it reach Water of the State? (if ves. notify DWQ) ❑Yes ❑ No
c. I1 discharge is observed. what is the estimated slow in Lnklhnin?
d. Does discharge bypass a kwoon svaem? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes [:]No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
01/01/01 Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 Data 001' Inspectiol}
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3
Identifier: ....... ilfC. t1.............He.Ef.�x..R3.0...... .............................
4/18/2001 •
® Spillway
Structure 4
r
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Freeboard(inches): 7.2. ... ...,54.... .............................................................................................................................................
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 any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN ❑ Hydraulic Overload
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Fescue (Hay) Rye ' Alfalfa
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes IN No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
17.
Are rock outcrops present?
❑ Yes
❑ No
18.
Is there a water supply well within 250 feet of the sprayfield boundary'? ❑ Unknown
❑ Yes
❑ No
❑ On -site ❑ Off -site
Required
Records & Documents
19.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit or other Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
20.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Does record keeping need improvement`? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
22.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge'?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
26.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
27.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
Odor Issues
28.
Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below
❑ Yes
® No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
29.
Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours?
❑ Yes
® No
01/01/01
Continued

Facility Number: 03-02 1) 4'I11spertiom 4/IS/20i31 Printedc,n: 5/1/2001
30. 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)
31. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
33. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
34. Do the flash tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No
113 No violations or deficiencies were noted during this visit. You will receive no further correspondence about this visit.
❑ Field Copy ® Final Notes
119, Need to keep weekly freeboard per permit.
samples dated 3/14/01: Dairy 6.7 Heifer 5.7 lbs./1000
animals buried >300 from waters of the state.
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signatu Date: Jr/1I
01/01/01

x s Y
rvisian of Water 'ty
Water Co ation
fivisi6n Sod to
# E
of and nsery
Q Other Agency
tr
of Visit - ID Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit ?A Routine O Complaint Q Follow up O Emergency Notification Q Other ❑ Denied Access
Date of Visit: h� Q Time: a ; 40
Facility Number
Q Not Operational Q Below Threshold
0 Permitted Wertified [3 Conditionally Certified ❑ Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .........................
FarmName: ......... ... .......................................... County: (.�.'1.......................................
j,, ��1�- '�3.1LQ
Owner Name:.. iU......... —bog.. w�.l............................................................ Phone No:..........'...�..�..7...........7....J....
Facility Contact: ..ix..l `1�(il......:......... �. Phone
'1�.................................... �.......... 7
Mailing Address:.., 1�.Q..7............ MaJ.e...... a.1..� ....... 1.. ................. ...... rt n a.l.c e.... f.... N.. ........... a..$.�.. ...........
Onsite Representative: I " l J�.Y �. �......OUi�L...�.�.. Integrator: ................. ....................................... 6 ............
Certified Operator:...h.AQ.E-.%..0,- .� .. a.flol,w6t',j.. ... Operator Certification Number:
...... 1 a� 13 S
Location of Farm:
1 Smiles ha r4fi of* RY a1
[]Swine []Poultry Cattle []Horse Latitude ' ®4 ®" Longitude ®• ®S ®"
Swine
Design Current
Capacity PDDulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
'Design Current Design -,.Current:-1-",'-
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population,
❑ Layer Dairy'
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity
Total SSL W
Number of Lagoons ❑ Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area jP Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds 1 Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impac
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes No
Discharge originated at: [-]Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes ❑ No
h. 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 cstimatcd 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 __WNo
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes Jk No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? Spillway ❑ Yes �o
,Structure I 5trueture 2 Structure 3 p S ucture 4 Structure S Structure 5
Identifier: t.:.l f.�.4L .....LILY.-i1......frJ..1.) .. �Q.%1`�.ei ill....... ....................................................
Freeboard (inches) : L t I
5100 Continued on back

[Facility Number: — t� Date of Inspection 6AS Printed on: 119/200I
5. Are there any immediate threats to thepegrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
❑ Yes
XNO
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan?
❑ Yes
*0
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
�No
r
8. Does any pan of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
'
�iNo
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
XNo
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
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
�
t?/
1
Vq
12. Crop type r Q Q s� ,* Q
f
13. Do the receiving crops differ with I'm sig ed in t i E niJal'Waste nag menT ld AWMP)?
❑ Yes
*
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
P No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
P'No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
IgNo
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
L'%X:No
16. is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
XNo
Required Records & Documents
IT Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
I�Ko
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
o
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
CXNo
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
�PNo
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
XNo
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
(Po
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
j'No
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
El Yes
%
?N,O •yigl,atiolis ;oc• def cieucies -ware po(ed d ' witig.4-
is;visit;, yo will reecipe
correspondence. about this visit.
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations. or`any'ather'cornmenti*�x -f
Use drawings of facility to better explain situations. (use additional pages as necessary):'.
00- fe s " 1 e S ' 3f 1qQ f •
�a r ►� fv ,7 I-} eI C- 7 �• 7 1 b s I oo� .
Nee4 -t V-e a -1 iog e
Reviewer/Inspector Name
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ' �� _ 1 Date:

. Fac lity Number: —17.24pe of Inspection Printed on: 1/9/2001
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below []Yes KNa
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 XNo
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 KNO
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes XNa
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?-Vie&—Q-b _
010-hr ux ? l ve�V-1� F-r4e board ? ra. t l q e-Ord S
Bu rmo 5? Dtu)ude.J a,Irea 7 5 i a -
,3Oo r u r I a_ Z
13021
5/00
J

1ri _ "Ivssion of Water Quality
i - -Sion of Soil and Water Conservation
IO ther Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit OO Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Dare 401' Vkil: 11/$/2000 Tinre: 9:30 Printed nn: 4/10/2001
03 2
0 Not Opt -rational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified 13 Conditionalhv Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: .............
Farm Name: .......................
Owner Name: U.Jag......................................... JD,9jt.Q lttle3:
FacilityContact: ....................................................................
Mailing Address: 5071.0ad.c..Y. RUCY.R.oAd.................
Onsite Representative: MallbA.j pX.(.0.ml1y..................
County: At cghalntx......................................... WSR.0 ........
Phone No: 1lQ-6.7.749.......................................
....................
.......... Title:................................................................ Phone No:.............................................
.......................
.......................... E trace...iN.C............................................................. M.623 .............
....................................
............. Integrator: ......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Martha .................................. Bo. to]miey.........................
Location of Farm:
Glade Valley Rd. (SR 1444) 5 miles N. of Hwy. 21.
... Operator Certification Number:Z138.4.............................
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude 3b 30 ' 13 61 Longitude $0 • 58 4 16 11
Design Current
Swine CaDacitV Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 414 1 390
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity F 414
Total SSL W 1 579,600
Number of Lagoons I I ❑ Subsurface Drains Present 110 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Fic1d Arca
Holding Ponds I Solid Traps 1 2 1 ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges .0 Stream Impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed. was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Waier of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If disch:u- c is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min'?
d. Digs discharge bypass a lagoon system" (li' yes. Tiolifv DWQ)
0
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier:.........Calfbam ...... ........... milk..bat n.......................................................................................................................................................
Freeboard (inches): 60 84
5100 Continued on back

Facility Number: 03-2 Darr• oil' Inspection 11/8/2U00 Printed 4011: 4/10/2001
5. Are there an immediate threats to the0 rit of an of the structures observed? ie/ tr9evere erosion,
Y g Y Y { Yes ®No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan'? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenancefimprovement?
❑ Yes ® No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Applioation
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 Corn (Silage & Grain) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Alfalfa
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)? ❑ Yes ® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application? ❑ Yes ® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination? ❑ Yes ® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination'? ❑ Yes ® No
15.
Does the receiving crop need improvement?
[-]Yes
® No
16.
Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Rer uired Records & Documents
17.
Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18.
Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
® Yes
❑ No
20.
Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
❑ Yes
® No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
N6*h)'1ati6ns:or deficiencies"were :noted duritig•this. visit."=Y4u.wiu receive•po-further•
ctilrres ondence 'b' 'fthis: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):
� 9. Recommend installing a marker that is graduated with 6 inch increments to approx. 5 ft. below the max. liquid level" 4&
� 19. Need to keep weekly waste pond levels per the general permit requirements. Still has to record Fall waste applications for 2000.
Dverall facility and records look good.
Waste analysis: 3/8/00 LSD Heifer pond 9.9 lbs. N/1000 gals. B, Cow pond 7.5 lbs. N/1000 gals. B
Reviewer/Inspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date: 5100

Facility Number: 1)d' I1,spVctiun 11/81Z000 I'riirted on; 4/10/2001
(?dnr Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation'?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ❑ Yes ® No
28.
Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt,
❑ Yes
® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29.
Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon?
❑ Yes
❑ No
30.
Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
31.
Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover?
❑ Yes
® No
32.
Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes
❑ No
,&I
J
5100

ision of Water Quality •
ision of Soil and Water Conservation
0 Other Agency
Type of Visit O Compliance Inspection O Operation Review O Lagoon Evaluation
Reason for Visit O Routine O Complaint O Follow up O Emergency Notification O Other ❑ Denied Access
Facility Number
Date of �'isii: b/f+120ot) I ime: OR45 Printed on: 6/23/2000
03 02
0 Not Operational 0 Below Threshold
® Permitted ® Certified © Conditionally Certified 0 Registered Date Last Operated or Above Threshold: ................
Farm Name: .................................................................. ...... County: AlIgghany ........................................ WSRQ........
OwnerName: Rut ......................................... B.01t. t 1my................................................... Phone No: 3.3.6::657:73.49.9 ...........................................................
Facility Contact: Marlhta.�� B tkQ1I lcy................................. Title: .. .. ............ ..... ..... Phone No: _el1ohOn 3. 'a�
........ .... ... 3 � S
MailingAddress: 507.t.�rlas..Y..a�l�y.tiR�d.................................................................. EaWc-e-KC ............................................................. M.62-3 .............
Onsite Representative: t1��t.130tt0[littley.................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: .Cttt�t. ............................. 4ttQltwey........................................ Operator Certification Number: 2,13.8.4 .............................
Location of ]Farm:
a
_ :I
❑ Swine ❑ Poultry ® Cattle ❑ Horse Latitude Longitude 80 • 5$ 16
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity_Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 414
❑ Non -Layer ❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW 579,600
Number of Lagoons 0 10 Subsurface Drains Present ❑ Lagoon Area ❑ Spray Field Area
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 2 JE1 No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & tream 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'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
0 Yes ❑ No
® Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ® No
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min? Not measurable
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? 0 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 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4
Identifier:........ Milk,barn........ .... En�tall.Barn.......................
Freeboard (inches): 66 54
❑ Yes ® No
Structure 5 Structure 6
Continued on back
Ok_

A..
Facility Number: 03-02 Date of I nspection 6/6/Z000 Printed on: 6/23/2000
5. Are there any immediate threats to the grity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ tre severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
6. Are there structures on -site which are not properly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan`? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
® Yes
❑ No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
❑ Yes
® No
Waste 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 Corn (Silage & Grain)
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?
Cl Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
® No
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
❑ Yes
® No
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
❑ Yes
® No
19.
Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
❑ Yes
® No
20.
is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
® No
21.
Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
❑ Yes
® No
22.
Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
® Yes
❑ No
23.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
® No
24.
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
® No
25.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
® No
EFT6VWtions;or deficiencies were noted clueing this: visit. ;Ypu;will reeei<ve no further ;
cor:respotidei�ce: A66f 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):
�I. and #2. Discharge of silage/juice coming from silage trench when it rains. Owner to plug up hole immediately to stop surface
water/silage from running off temporarily. Will contact NRCS for suggestions (i.e. piping to waste pond; discharge to filter strip;
,urbing, etc.).
�7. Burrow hole on east side of #1, about halfway down, needs to be repaired.
M. Denuded area behind freestall barn needs to have vegetation established. Is better than 12/99 visit, though.
rIq
Reviewer/Inspector Name Melissa Rosebrock
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: ,pAwAd— Ar ,/�j; j p Jb Ay _ Date: a n d

• _Facility Number: 03-02 1101' Inspection 6/6/2000 • Printed on: 6/23/2000
Odor Issues
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lagoon fail to discharge at/or below ❑ Yes ❑ No
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation?
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours'? ❑ Yes ® No
28_ Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i.e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ Yes ® No
roads, building structure, and/or public property)
29. Is the land application spray system intake not located near the liquid surface of the lagoon`? ❑ Yes ® No
30. Were any major maintenance problems with the ventilation fan(s) noted? (i.e. broken fan belts, missing or
or broken fan blade(s), inoperable shutters, etc.) ❑ Yes ® No
31. Do the animals feed storage bins fail to have appropriate cover? ❑ Yes ® No
32. Do the flush tanks lack a submerged fill pipe or a permanent/temporary cover? ❑ Yes ❑ No

$:oP b t�
0 Division of Mnd Water Conservation —Operation-Rev' �D�.
,3 Division of and Water Conservation - Compliance Ins t_ion C30
ivision of Water Quality - Compliance Inspection
Other Agency - Operation Review
gRoutinc Q Complaint 0 Follow-up of D% Q inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review Q Other
Facility Number a Date of Inspection
Tina of Inspection 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Permitted [3Conditionaliy Certified [3 Registered [3 Not Operational Date Last Operated:
Farm Dame: .f a ...f�'/ Cunt:....... ...........................-.fil............ l�
Owner Name: Phone No: 3 � • ;_57,.3
i 4 za........ ... :Q n ................................................................. .......9..........................
Facility Contact: .f.!..!.! [....I..!..i. ...J...:.......Phone No:
�3l ,r 1I a
19ailingAddress: � IJIQ(.�....V.�.[.L . �n �-....lv..............................�...... ..........................
............+.../..,.. Q 4 .......1... ......If ............... 1........11.....
Onsite Representative:... Mad_.`.1:Y.1,6L.... l 4&P!lel� ................... Integrator:................................... Q�
Certified Operator: •rnar.4. -...9. Q1 ..b„ , .... ... Operator Certification Number U„ ._....
1f7, ....................... ...... ....
�......... r t ...........:........... �ri�......z...... 40 r.........'0.............. .1.1 ............................................
..................................................................................................................................................................................................
Latitude ®0 4 �• Longitude
Design Current
Design Current
Design Current
Swine Capacity Population
Poultry
Capacity Population Cattle
Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
JE1 Layer I
I
I Dairy
I y/qja
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Non -Layer I
INon-Dairy
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Other
❑ Farrow to Finish
Total Design Capacity
1
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Total SSLW
1Number of Lagoons JE1 Subsurface Drains Present 10 Lagoon Area 10 Spray Field Area
I-Ioldirig Portds / Solid Traps ❑ No Liquid Waste Management System
Discharges & Stream Impacts
1. Is any d isch arge. observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge orioinlaied at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field j Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance roan -made'?
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State'? (If yes, notify DWQ)
c. If discharge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallmin'?
r
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes, notify DWQ)
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge?
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ]Spillway
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5
Identifier:;1n
Freeboard (inches): .............. fwr ................ .......... ............. ....... .............................. I ........ I. ..................................
..............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion,
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99
ft
AYes ❑ No
VYes ❑ No
❑ Yes ` No
Yes ❑ No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes KNo
❑ Yes No
Structure 6
❑ Yes )KNo
Continued on back

• Facility Number: — O 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 Application
10, Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type 11,o r rx S i 1 , ciA
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14, a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15, Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21, Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
Oe/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25, Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
0: N16- iolatioris.oi-• deficiencies •mere hated• diiririg �his'visit' • Y:o4 :Will reeeN ii6 rurther
corres661rideh 'e. about. this visit.
❑ Yes XNO
-Akpes No
Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes [No
❑ Yes XNO
❑ Yes X No
❑ Yes io
o
ElYeso
❑ Yes
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes >Qo
❑ Yes ANo
❑ Yes)R'No
❑ Yes [;KNo
❑ Yes_IR*No
1 �J Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes No
❑ Yes P(No
❑ Yes ZNo
Comments (refer to question #)c Explain any YES'answers and/or any recommendations or,any other comments..'.,
Use drawings of facility to better -explain situations. (irse additional pages as necessary): 1
i and C m 0.) S -o;ra� e, pre,
Cn n S i I &� e, KoLrc - 'Tone A u s+- N oY I n 5 p QOior)
"" (Coal 5e-6660t �rcrssJl um�� a1 �Q 1��� — San. - bec-. n%o4-e5 .
p aS' -ua- O-C*l s ea5an --,t.t .
Y)OF- raz4d - ar1 . tma.L U9. _ De. C .
Cab ar�plan� I . � n r Oman C�r15� ,o
Ail
P �q
FRevie,
eviewer/Inspector Name
er/Inspector Signatu JAL "WI4 Ql l+],d A Ij l l jy IV Date: 61, 66 160
3/23/99

' f Facility Number: —
Odor Issues
I f Inspection 0
26. Does the discharge pipe from the confinement building to the storage pond or lago n fail to discharge at/or below *es EJ
liquid level of lagoon or storage pond with no agitation? a�
27. Are there any dead animals not disposed of properly within 24 hours? ,B Uri cd ❑ Yes -D(No
28. Is there any evidence of wind drift during land application? (i_e. residue on neighboring vegetation, asphalt, ❑ YesNc�
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 or a permanent/temporary cover?
❑ Yes ®( o
❑ Yes XNo
❑ Yes �No
7 -`9 ff 13ur rou) hole ah c.65i- SAL (0-� 411 a ba%J4 k60-Cuta,
e n Llc" re-z s l j ee5 4-6
venue +0.H oki
�J
� 1 C* i ce� Cow} r �
� n�
( 10, Cq- +re
ai n5 .
D Doner- +6 P U9 L)
+6 S+c, p S u rf a-c e- 6 M
t' u n n i na 64- ra. r i i t co me
N �1
r S� �S'e)h5 �_
�g e . p P rl� 4c,
J6
4
3/23/99

;- Division of So;' ind Water Conservation - Operation Review
[3Division of*NWVer
d Water Conservation - Compliance Ins*
NiDivision of Quality - Compliance Inspection
`Other Agency - Operation Review
140 Routine O Complaint O Follow-up of DWQ inspection O Follow-up of DSWC review O Other
Facility Number 03 2 Date of Inspection 12/2/99
Time of Inspection 11:30 24 hr. (hh:mm)
® Permitted ® Certified C3 Conditionally Certified 0 Registered 0 Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
Farm Name: Graade..Gj: K.QaWy...EAru........................................................................ County: Alftbaru.'......................................... !'!'SRQ........
OwnerName: 01atx......................................... ctltmley..................................__............... Phone No: 410:.6S7.: 4Q9...........................................................
Facility Contact: .............................................................................. Title:.................................. . Phone No:
Mailing Address: 507.1.G1;Ad.v.Y.aUcy..Ragd........................... .... Euttxis:�.-Kc.......................... . 2N.623 .............
.....................................................................
OnsiteRepresentative:........................................................................................................... Integrator:......................................................................................
Certified Operator: Mjw.thA.K..................:.......... 05glo7Iwey........................................ Operator Certification Number:,?,1�.$4.............................
Location of Farm:
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... +
Glade- .................................................................................................................................
:j
Latitude 36 • 30 + 18 « Longitude SO • 58 06 64
Design Current
Swine Canacity Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer ® Dairy 414 250
❑ Non -Layer J JE1 Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 414
Total SSLW
Number of Lagoons I JE1 Subsurface Drains Present I ❑ Lagoon Area ID Spray Fictd Arcs
Holding Ponds / Solid Traps 2 JE1 No Liquid Waste Management Svstem
Discharges & Stream impacts
1. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑Lagoon El Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made'? ❑ Yes ❑ No
b. If discharge is observed, did it reach Water of the State? (If yes. notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. if discharge is observed. what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (If yes. notify DWQ) ElYes ❑ No
2. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation? ❑ Yes ® No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Milk Barn Heifer Barn
Freeboard(inches): ................116 ...... 2A........... ...._......... ................ ......... .................................... .................................... ...................... ..............
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (iel trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 1213/99

f[Facilky Number. 03-2 1): of Ins ection
6. Are there structures on -site which are Aperly addressed and/or managed through a Ananagement 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 maintenancelimprovement?
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement?
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings?
Waste Application
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Timothy, Orchard, & Rye Rye
12/2/99
❑ Yes
® No
® Yes
❑ No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
❑ Yes
® No
Fescue (Graze)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(iel WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (iel irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(iel discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were dny additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
E1: No.violatiotis:or dk!fcieni46•rvere;noted:during•this: visit.:You:wilt receive fi'6-further•.
: correspondence: ah"f this: visit: . . . .. . . . .. . : :
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
[:]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
rrmreu on i zfwvu

' Dwts�on of Sr" and"Water Consei vatron -Operation Revie w `r
13bivrsion of �nd Water Conservation -Compliance Ins n
13,Division of--Wa-t6r Quality - Compliance -Inspection
A ; P',Other.-Agency_LiOperation Review
16 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of DWQ inspection 0 Follow-up of DSWC review 0 Other
Facility Number 03 2 Date of Inspection 6/9199
Time of Inspection 9:45 24 hr. (hh:mm)
0 Permitted ® Certified E3 Conditionally Certified [3 Registered 113 Not O erational Date Last Operated . ..........................
Farm Name: ........................................................................ County: t)JggbajxY......................................... NY RQ........
OwnerName: Man ......................................... B.01tO.WIVY................................................... Phone No: UA-4,51-3.49............................................................
FacilityContact:.............................................................................. Title:....................... ... Phone No:...................... .
Mailing Address: 597.1G1A&..Y..alley.kid ............................. .. EAulls9..NC........................... ........ ZbAZ3 .............
........................................ ..........................
Onsite Representative: aCl 1.1A.till.t1011�Y.......•..•..•..........•.. ... Integrator:
............................................................................................................
Certified Operator: llAattkl.li............................. .Q.t1oxwey ....................................... Operator Certification Number:Z13,&.4 .............................
Location of Farm:,
......................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... l
Calade..Y.atll� ..17d..S.J[It1te,5.N...Ql.ktlS..2t................................................................................................................................ ....................................... I...............
:I
Latitude 36 a =1
l8 44 Longitude 80 • 58 1 Ob 44
Design Current
Swine CaDaCitV Ponulation
❑ Wean to Feeder
❑ Feeder to Finish
❑ Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Feeder
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Design Current Design Current
Poultry Ca acity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ Layer I 1® Dairy 300 365
❑ Non -Layer I I❑ Non -Dairy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 300
Total SSL W
Discharges R Stream Impacts
I. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation'? ❑ Yes ® No
Discharge originated at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Spray Field ❑ Other
a. If discharge is observed, was the conveyance man-made? ❑ Yes [:]No
h. If' discharge is observed. did it reach Water of the State? (If yes, notify DWQ) ❑ Yes ❑ No
c. It'd ischarge is observed, what is the estimated flow in gallntin?
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 0 No
3. Were there any adverse impacts or potential adverse impacts to the Waters of the State other than from a discharge? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste Collection & Treatment
4. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Spillway ❑ Yes ® No
Structure 1 Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure 6
Identifier: Freestall Milk barn
Freeboard (inches), ............ ...4$ --- .-.. 48
5. Are there any immediate threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? (ie/ trees, severe erosion, ❑ Yes ® No
seepage, etc.)
3/23/99 Continued on back
Printed on 1211/99

t
Facility, Number: 03--2 of Inspection 6/9/99
6. Are there structures on -site which are n roperly addressed and/or managed through a waste management or
closure plan? ❑ Yes ® No
(If any of questions 4-6 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
7. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ® Yes ❑ No
8. Does any part of the waste management system other than waste structures require maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes ® No
9. Do any stuctures lack adequate, gauged markers with required maximum and minimum liquid level
elevation markings'? ❑ Yes ® No
Waste AoDlicati
10. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
11. Is there evidence of over application? ❑ Excessive Ponding ❑ PAN
❑ Yes
® No
12. Crop type Corn (Silage & Grain) Orchard,clover (hay)
13. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan (CAWMP)?
❑ Yes
® No
14. a) Does the facility lack adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
® No
b) Does the facility need a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
c) This facility is pended for a wettable acre determination?
❑ Yes
® No
15. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
16. Is there a lack of adequate waste application equipment?
Required Records & Documents
17. Fail to have Certificate of Coverage & General Permit readily available?
18. Does the facility fail to have all components of the Certified Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
(ie/ WUP, checklists, design, maps, etc.)
19. Does record keeping need improvement? (ie/ irrigation, freeboard, waste analysis & soil sample reports)
20. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
21. Did the facility fail to have a actively certified operator in charge?
22. Fail to notify regional DWQ of emergency situations as required by General Permit?
(ie/ discharge, freeboard problems, over application)
23. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative'?
24. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
13: N6- 66 ati6iis:or deficiencies were noted :dut'ing•tkis: V6it.:You:rvi11 r4&WvOJi6-fu:rth'ee- : • '
correspondence. ah'outi this :visit. . . . .. .. .. . . .. .. . . . . :: . . . .
7 Need to mow around WSP ( milk barn) for easy visual inspection.
peration is in good shape. Records look good.
heration recertified for 414 animals. 300 milk cows and 114 heifers.
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ❑ No
❑ Yes ®No
[-]Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
(:]Yes ®No
❑ Yes ® No
ReviewerAnspector Name Rocky Durham
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:
Printed on 12/1199

p Division of Soil and er:Conservation - Operation ,Review
MUvision of Soil and er Conservation - Compliance Inspection_
M Division of Water Quality -'Compliance Inspection
p Other Agency - Operation .Review
16 Routine p t,onipianu p hollow -up of urvy inspection O i•olum-up of i»wt, reylel%, p toner
F;lcility Number Date err tn�li�ctinri
t'iole or lu.pi-cittui � 24 hr. (hh:mm)
13 Registered 0 Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted in Not Operational I Date I_.ist (operated:
Faris Name: Glade.Cretk.Dairy.Fatrm...................... Comity: Alleghany WSRO
...................................................
(honer Name: Blan.... `....m��C-:.... Bottom.ley.................................................. I'hone No: 9.111-.65.1-3.499 ..........................................................
hacilityContact: ................................................................................rioe................................................................ I'hone No:....................................................
[Mailing Address: 1?.ZI..Glade.Yall�a.Rd....................................................................... B.ttnice..�C............................................................. 2862a ..............
Onsite Representative:..................................................................................... ..... .. Inic-rator':
Certified 01wroior:i1 arlbaA.............................Rottarulty ........................................ Operator Certification Number:21384.............................
Loention of Farnt:
:......... eGlai::........PY:........:...:!n.. eS:...:::a..:... :.Y.,...::::::::::......:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: �
........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ I
Swine Capacity Population
p Weanto Feeder
❑ Feederto Finish
❑ arrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to Fee er
❑ Farrow to Finish
❑ Gilts
❑ Boars
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
p Layer rC3
airy300
p on- ayer on- airy
❑ Other
Total Design Capacity 300
Total SSLW 420,000
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds 2 JE:I Subsurface Drains resent p agoonArea
p No iqui aste Management ystem
❑ Spray ie
re
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
® No
2. is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
Discliar�,e ori,inatcd at: ❑ Lagoon ❑ Sprav Field ❑ Other
a. I l'discl1ar2e is observed. Was the conveyance man-made?
p Yes
p No
b. Ifdischarge is observed. did it reach Surface Water? (ll'ves. soli€v DWQ.)
p Yes
p No
c. 11 discharge is observed. What is the Qstimaled llo%1, in-allmin'?
d. Does discharge bypass a lagoon system? (If yes. notify MVQ)
❑Yes
p No
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
❑ Yes
® No
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
❑ Yes
®No
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
❑ Yes
®No
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
❑ Yes
®No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
p Yes
® No
7/25I97

Facility Number: 03_2 13,rte tliectiotr
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes ® No
S(ructures (I.a'-poons.11oldim" fonds. blush Pits. Cie.)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ® Yes ❑ No
Stl-UClttr'e I Structure 2 Structure _i Structure 4 Sn-nCtUre 5 Structure 6
Identifier: 1 2
Frceboard(11):.............. .l..ft.............. ............. 1.8..ia............ .................................... ................................... ......................................................................
10. Is seepage observed from any of the structures? 0 Yes ® No
l 1. Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed? p Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? ❑ Yes M 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? p Yes ® No
Waste Application
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? ❑ Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type .......Gstrn.kSi)agP_.&.firain.).................................................................................
16. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the Animal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes ®No
17. Does the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
18. Does the receiving crop need improvement?
19. Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
20. Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
21. Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Per•ntitted Facilities Oniv
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management flan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified A WMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q ...o.viar trions.or icrencies-were.note unng this visit: - tom Will.receive no, further.-.
.•.�olrCe$�jtin�Crle�dbQUt��IiS•YiSi't:.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•.•_•.�.•.•.•.•.•.•.-.•.-.-.
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ONO
p Yes ONO
p Yes ®No
El Yes ® No
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
Comments (refer to question #): Explain any YES answers and/or any recommendations or any other comments.
Use drawings of facility to' better explain.situationsi (useadditional pages as necessary):
N. One storage pit did not have adequate freeboard, but will be pumped down.
ReviewerAnspector Name Jenny Rankin
ReviewerAnspector Signature: � M Date: ll q jgg

19 Routine p Complaint p hollow -up of VWV inspection p ho
Facility Number
Registered p Certified p Applied for Permit p Permitted
Farm Name: Glade.CrerKi J)airy...Farw.............
UP or uaWk- review p urner
Bale of Inspection
'rime of Inspection 24 lir. (hh:mnt)
in Not Operational I Date Last Operated:
........ County: Alleghany WSRO
Owner Name: Rlan......................................... Batlo wey.................................................. Phone No: 65.7-.1499...... ..........................................
......
Facility Contact: B.lan..Qoltomly............................ .................... Title: ............................................................... Phone No: 918-.65.Z-855.5.......................
MailingAddress: Rt.l............................................................................................................. Eajaice..NC ............................................................. 280a ..............
Onsite Representative: Marl;b.a..aad..Blaa.BQUamlkV.............................................. Integrator:.......................................................................................
Certified Operator:March,a.................................. fkattumley ....................................... Operator Certification Number:2.1.384.............................
Location of Farm:
Latitude ®• ®4 ®44 Longitude ®• �= ®4.
Swine Capacity Population
❑ Wean to Feeder
p Feeder to FinisH
E3 Farrow to can
❑ Farrow to Feeder
p Farrow to Finis
p Gilts
❑ Boars
esign Curmilt Design Curren
Poultry Capacity Population Cattle Capacity Population
❑ ayer H airy
p Non -Layer I JE3 Non -Dairy
0 ter
Total Design Capacity 200
Total SSLW I 280.OMT
Number of Lagoons / Holding Ponds
0
©
ti
stir ace
rains
resent p
agoon rea ❑ pray se rea
p
No
liquiJVaste
Management
System
General
1. Are there any buffers that need maintenance/improvement?
2. Is any discharge observed from any part of the operation?
Discharge originated at: p Lagoon p Spray Field ❑ Other
a. Ifdischar-,e is observed, was the conveyance man-made?
b. If discharge is observed. did it reach Surface: Water? (Ii'yes, notify DWQ)
c. II'discharee is observed, what is the estimated flow in gal/min?
d. Docs discharge bypass a lagoon system'? (It'yes. notify DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4. Were there any adverse impacts to the waters of the State other than from a discharge?
5. Does any part of the waste management system (other than lagoons/holding ponds) require
maintenance/improvement?
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable setback criteria in effect at the time of design?
p Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
p Yes ❑ No
[]Yes p No
p Yes
❑ No
p Yes
® No
p Yes
® No
[]Yes
® No
p Yes ® No
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
7/25/97
p Yes N No

0,1
j�ac'I�ty um er: 03_2
i8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on sitee which need to be properly closed? ❑ Yes H No
Structures (Lagoons,Holdina Ponds Flush Pits. etc.
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate? ❑ Yes N No
Structure I Structure 2 Structure 3 Structure 4 Structure 5 Structure b
Identifier: 1 2
Freeboard(ft):........... .2.1r-et............ ............ 4..feet............ .................................... ................................... ......................................................................
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? [3 Yes ® No
12. Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement? p Yes ® No
(if any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses an
immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13. Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum or maximum liquid level markers? ® Yes ❑ No
Waste Apl2lication
14. Is there physical evidence of over application? p Yes ® No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
15. Crop type ....... Care.4Sijagc.&.fxrain.)....... ....TimatbX..Oxcktard,.&.Rye..........................................................................................................................
G ra s
lb. Do the receiving crops differ with those designated in the ASnimal Waste Management Plan (AWMP)? ❑ Yes []No
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 ReviewerlInspector fail to discuss review/inspection with on -site representative?
22. Does record keeping need improvement?
For Certified or Permitted Facilities Only
23. Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
24. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
25. Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Permit?
Q . . o.vio ttons.or acren.cies•were.note Lr unnt is visit. - on. will.reeetve no urt er .. .
.�.poi'ze's�io'ndene��bv>S•YiSi>t:.�.. �.•.:.......•.�.•.•.•.::�.�.�..•.•.•.•.•.�.•.�.�.�.� •.•.•.•.
[]Yes ® No
p Yes ®No
❑ Yes H No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
❑ Yes ® No
[]Yes []No
❑ Yes p No
[]Yes p No
Comments estion l/ar any recommendations or any other comments
_.
� cause
U c drawin seof facil t to uet#er:e.r lain: �tu:at o addifiswers
g y< p (_ onal pFages.as necessary)
13) Pumpout marker will'be installed.
16,,23-25= CAWMP is in the works
7/25/97
Reviewer/Inspector Name Jenny'Rankin: - f5 —
Reviewer/Inspector Signature: Date:

9722-1997 2:02PM FROM SPARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 464S
AEk
P- 4
DSWC Aninial Feedlot Operation Review
DWQ Animal Feedlot Operation Site Inspection
10 Routine 0 Complaint 0 Follow-up of J)WQ inspection
Facility Number
Farm Status- I@ Registered [] Applied for Permit
[3 Certified C3 Permitted
-uDofDS%V-Cre,%-ie%v 00ther
Date of Inspection I C7 -*-12-,27j
Time of laqpection ! oD ar 24 hr. (hh:mm)
Total Time ( in fraction (if hours
(ex.1.25 for 1. hr IS min)) Spent onkeview
or Inspection (include; travel and processing.)
10 Not Operational Date Last Operated . ................... . ............................... .. . ..... . ............................ ......... .........................................
Farm ...... Eq,c-rn .................. County: _PJ.1 ... e,.�.-k-CLAy ......................................
j-
Owner Name: .... 11. 9"... a ......................... ..... Z'o.t. n I .......... ...... I ... Phone ..........
Facility Contact: .... ............. .... Title: k,1%.- - ---
...... — ........ ....... Phone
.Nlaiiin,- Address: .................... .............. .....................................
V,
.4J�R.a ?M15� Integrator: Rep .............hf,........... ... ......................................... ............................
Cerilfied 0ptr.ktorJh.(2.C+k.CA . .... ...... ......... ()Perator Certification NUMbLr: ...... %.:,R ...........
LocatiOTI of Farm:
................ , ----------------------
................... -- ....... ................................... ......
.............. * ............................................................... ** ---------------------------- * ...... .......- ............... I .
. .......... .... ..... .................
Latitudc.
Longitude
Type of Operation
.Swine.'
T3 Wean to Feeder
Design Current Design Current
Capacity., Population'.,: Poultry Capacity Population
1 EJ Laver
0 -Non-Layer
Feeder to Finish
Farrow to Wean
❑ Farrow to F.,:Cder!
❑ Farrow to Finish
El Ocher
Total Design Capacity
Total SSLW
7--
Des , ign ---,-CurreT!t-,
Cattle Capa--Ciiy "Population
JONon-Dairyj
I
—Nuifilier-6fLag66691H61dln—z Fubsurface Drains Present 0,1.aooArea 0 Spray- Field Area .- I
General
1. Are there urz%, buffers drat need
2, 1,; any discharge observed from any part of the operation''
Discharge orizinazed ar 0 Laution 0 Spray Field El Other
a, If di:;clnknp-, is obs;rved, wLs the convtvance inarl-niadc-.'
b. It'dischar-L: is did irreach (If yes, notify DlVQ)
c, If d; 5,:hai-e is observed, w hzi c is the esth fn aced flox in galirrd n?
d. dischar-c bypass a ki-oon s),steill? (lf ye,', 11offy DWQ)
3. Is there evidence of past discharge from any part of the operation?
4, Wert 01,�rcany adverse irnpucts to thy. waters of the Stare other than from a dkchar�,c?
5. Does any part Qf the waste. maz)agelnentsystem (other than b.gootis/holding pond;) require
0 ye-q Na
0 ycs N-o
0 Yes CINO
0 Yes CD No
0 Yes 0 No
CD Yes 0 No
0 Yes 9 No
El yes ,q No

r'
9-22-1997 2:03PM FROH SPARTA FIELD OFFICE 1 910 372 464S
Facility Number: D —
6. Is facility not in compliance with any applicable serback criteria in effect at the time of design"
7. Did the facility fail to have a certified operator in responsible charge?
8. Are there lagoons or storage ponds on site which need to be properly closed?
Structures (Lagoom; andlor holding Ponds)
9. Is storage capacity (freeboard plus storm storage) less than adequate?
Freeboard (ft): Structure i Structure 2 Smicture 3 Structtre 4
�
.......... ............... ....... ....------ __-.-.--.._.................. .......... ............................ --
I0. Is seepage observed from any of the structures?
P. 5
©Yes N No
❑ Yes N No
❑ Yes ;ANo
❑ Yes CR No
Strucrure j Structure G
❑ Yes 0 No
.11.
Is erosion, or any other threats to the integrity of any of the structures observed?
❑Yes
No
12.
Do any of the structures need maintenance/improvement?
❑ Yes
No
(If any of questions 9-12 was answered yes, and the situation poses
an immediate public health or environmental threat, notify DWQ)
13.
Do any of the structures lack adequate minimum Ur maximum liquid level markers?
[A Yes
❑ \o
Waste_ Application
14.
Is there physical evidence of over application?
❑ Yes
No
(If in excess of WMP, or runoff entering waters of the State, notify DWQ)
JR
15,
Crop type TL .0 ...... ........
16.
Do the receiving crops differ with those designated fit the Animal Waste Management Plan (AW-,MP)?
© Yes
® No
17.
Doc% the facility have a lack of adequate acreage for land application?
❑ Yes
No
18.
Docs the receiving crop need improvement?
❑ Yes
No
19.
Is there a lack of available waste application equipment?
❑ Yes
No
20,
Does facility require a follow-up visit by same agency?
❑ Yes
No
21.
Did Reviewer/Inspector fail to discuss review inspection with on -site representative?
❑ Yes
INO
For Certified Facilities Only
22.
Does the facility fail to have a copy of the Animal Waste Management Plan readily available?
❑ Yes
❑ No
23.
Were any additional problems noted which cause noncompliance of the Certified AWMP?
❑ Yes
❑ No
24.
Does record keeping need improvement?
0 Yes
❑ No
131 Purnjo o4J f' o rke.r w', 1it b-,Q - 0; 4," A �O days , 1-
wo r k iy'\On PG A 3 Co.s.� '5jhnr'-"' p lq n- r�
l m f foot ky, E rl
J
Reviewer/lnspectorName
j ylT-'t`�� p �teal�Q la� p �0:aoac_�sxisa _t i
C$%
Review-er/Tnsnector Siznatuer:, .67,- 4k, - Date. rt — 14 _C/'7